| --- |
| page_title: 'Terraform vs. Boto, Fog, etc.' |
| description: 'How Terraform compares to cloud provider client libraries like Boto and Fog. ' |
| --- |
| |
| # Terraform vs. Boto, Fog, etc. |
| |
| Libraries like Boto, Fog, etc. are used to provide native access |
| to cloud providers and services by using their APIs. Some |
| libraries are focused on specific clouds, while others attempt |
| to bridge them all and mask the semantic differences. Using a client |
| library only provides low-level access to APIs, requiring application |
| developers to create their own tooling to build and manage their infrastructure. |
| |
| Terraform is not intended to give low-level programmatic access to |
| providers, but instead provides a high level syntax for describing |
| how cloud resources and services should be created, provisioned, and |
| combined. Terraform is very flexible, using a plugin-based model to |
| support providers and provisioners, giving it the ability to support |
| almost any service that exposes APIs. |
