Amazon AWS Reviews

AWS is part of our network, we provide services to our internal customers and we have 2,000 plus applications which sit on the VMs and different blade servers. It's a mix, we're using a hybrid environment. I manage the company network and security; we are partners with Amazon AWS.

I value the automation and the stability of this product. Whether it is S3, EC2, the LSG, ASG, for us it's all good to implement.

AWS cloud has an issue with accessibility to the customer, it's very limited and if there's an internal issue, we won't know about it because they don't expose their APIs to many things. This is a generic cloud problem for all cloud products. It's not just AWS. It's Azure, Google, all of them have the same problem. They will never give you any information, and you can't even check their logs properly. That kind of transparency issue is critical because whether I'm using their infrastructure or not, I should have visibility with regard to what is happening in my network.

I'd like to see compatibility extended to include additional applications which are widely used but not compatible on the public cloud. Without them, you can't build the ecosystems for each and every thing. I realize there are so many applications around and you can't source everything but I'd like to see additional compatibility.

The solution has some limitations because you won't have the space for some of the applications. For example, Google is the only provider with a VMware product line. Some of the applications still need a physical server.

I've been using this solution for six years. 

The support is average, just like other cloud providers. It's not so great but it's average. You can't always blame someone, but cloud architecture is like that. Visibility is an issue. They don't offer the latest services and if you don't know, you can just track back to your VMs or the services which you have deployed. 

The initial setup was quite complex. You're designing something and have downloaded the infrastructure of cloud providers which is always complex. Once you start using the solution it becomes easy. 

It is most cost-effective to go for a long-term license option, that way you get a better deal for the cloud. 

I think at the cloud maturity level, I would rate AWS first, Azure second and GCP has just started. In 2015/16, AWS had a lot of issues, but now they are coming up with better solutions and better flexibility. That said, the transparency issue is still there. 

Azure is good for the Microsoft product line and if you are using that you should go with Azure - they will give you better service. But for third parties, it's the same transparency issue, just like any other cloud provider.

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution to host our control panel for our IoT devices.

The solution has very good documentation.

The initial setup is simple and straightforward.

The solution is scalable.

The stability has been good.

We have found the technical support to be helpful and responsive. 

I cannot recall feeling there were any features missing.

There is a bit of a learning curve. That said, it's likely no different than learning any other cloud.

The pricing could be a bit lower, even though its costs are in the middle of the road.

I've used the solution for about half a year. It hasn't been 12 months yet.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite reliable. 

I would imagine the scaling is very good. It's advertised as quite scalable and everything points to that being the case. However, I have not personally attempted to scale. We're still building the application, and therefore we aren't at the point of scaling.

We have three people using the solution currently.

Technical support is very helpful and responsive. They have been good so far. We have no complaints and are quite satisfied with the support we receive.

We did not use a different solution. We chose Amazon due to its good documentation and middle-of-the-road costs.

While I wasn't a part of the initial implementation, it's my understanding that the process is very simple and straightforward. It's not an overly complex process. 

The cost is moderate. It's not overly expensive.

We are just customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Amazon.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. 

I'd recommend the solution. It's a good choice and one we stand behind.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We are very satisfied with the product so far. Likely, if the price was lower, we would rate it higher.

We primarily use the solution as a cloud computing platform. We use it for database storage. 

Application development and migration form On-Premise to Cloud

The solution is very stable. Its reliability is great.

We've found the product to be very easy to use. 

The solution is scalable. 

The installation process is very simple.

Technical support is very good. 

The product would be better if it was more secure. 

The stability could always be improved upon.

I've been using the solution for a few years at this point. It's been a while. I've had a good amount of time to work with it. 

The solution is very stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. there are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable and the performance is good.

The product is scalable. If a company needs to expand, it can do so with ease. 

We have about 50 people using the solution within our organization.

The technical support on offer from Amazon is very helpful and responsive. I'm happy with the level of service they provide. They are very good. 

We did not previously use a different product. We've always used AWS.

The solution is very simple and straightforward. It's not complex or difficult. A company shouldn't have any issue with the process. The deployment is quick.

Middle level

Calculate form  Physical Server , CAPEX,OPEX

You do need to pay for a license. We pay a monthly fee in order to use the product.

Yes,I study form this ,https://comparecloud.in/

We are using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure of the version number off-hand. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We're very happy with its capabilities. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

We use mainly use the product for the infrastructure, the service components, and the storage. 

The maturity that the solution offers is its most valuable aspect. It was one of the first solutions to market and has a long track record. It's very mature in terms of product delivery. 

It is very stable.

The scalability is great.

In terms of features, it's very feature-rich and it's got a good ecosystem from third-party vendors as well in terms of those that partner up with them for offering their services on Amazon. 

The security is good. Due to the fact that it's on the cloud, you can build your own security to meet your needs. It's enriched with great security features and capabilities. You just need to know how to run them. 

Technical support is quite helpful. 

We would appreciate it if the product was cheaper. 

We've been using the solution since 2014. 

The solution is very stable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

Due to the fact that it is a cloud, users really do not have an issue with scalability. It can expand to meet anyone's needs. 

We have at least 200 users at this time. 

Technical support has been very good overall. they are helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of support.

Before Amazon, we did not use other products, however, we now also use Azure and Google. 

As a cloud service, there really isn't an installation process that's required. 

We use their subscription model.

The solution could always be cheaper. 

We have a monthly recurring cost based on usage.

As a cloud service, we are always on the latest version of the product.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten based on the feedback I've gotten from my team.

I'd recommend this service for particular use cases. However, it is important that users understand how it works. For example, it's not like you buy a server and running in a data center.

We use Amazon AWS for website hosting, application hosting, and serverless computing.

Everything is good. 

It is easy to use.

The performance is good.

It's also very economical.

The pricing is reasonable but there is always room to be better. 

If it was offered for free, it would be better.

I have been using Amazon AWS for three years.

We are using the latest version.

We have 20 people in our organization who are using Amazon AWS.

Technical support is okay.

I use Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud as well.

It's a cloud-based solution, there is no installation.

The price is quite reasonable.

With Amazon AWS, you pay as you go.

Definitely, I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate Amazon AWS a nine out of ten.

We are using it for hosting some of our workloads. We offer managed services for our customers, mostly in the space of security in managed IT services, and some of these workloads are hosted on AWS.

It is highly available and on-demand. So, you can scale up and scale down whenever required.

Another thing that really attracts us is the pricing, which is based on the actual consumption of resources, and that's what really helps us.

They're really good on the business computing side, but there are other services where they can do really well. They can improve the data analytics platform and the data warehousing platform.

Its pricing can be simplified a little bit more.

I have been using this solution for more than three years.

It is quite stable. We did not find any challenge in the reliability of the platform.

We do contact their tech support, and we get the help whenever it is required. We are pretty much satisfied with them.

It was not too complex. We are very straightforward and not too complex in terms of our infrastructure.

Its pricing can be simplified a little bit more. Even though they have been reducing it, I still believe they can do better as compared to GCP, Google Cloud.

We advise people to go on AWS. We also do a readiness assessment for our customers. We do a kind of a TCO analysis for our customers, and depending on the use case, workload, and pricing model, we advise our customers. We do it for AWS, Azure, and GCP. I would expect customers to do the same thing. They should do a proper analysis because it depends on what workloads they want to move to the cloud. Based on that, they should select a hyperscaler.

I would rate Amazon AWS an eight out of 10.

We are hosting some education servers and web servers.

We have used Amazon AWS for a very large scale of server deployment. Also, we have run some tests using resources from AWS EC2. We don't have to go out investing for that resource, we just use them for a short period of time and we pay only for that usage. It has helped us scale quickly, and save a lot of money instead of buying those services.

The features with Amazon AWS that I have found most valuable are its flexibility and high availability. These are the most important and attractive points for me.

In terms of what could be improved, I also use Google Cloud GCP and AWS cannot directly use the Azure EC2 consult. They could add that feature. Direct connection to the EC2 console server would be very useful.

I am certified on AWS from the cloud provider side. 

I use the RDS, Relational Database Solution, and the EC2 technology on AWS.

I have been using it for more than four years.

Amazon AWS is quite stable. I have read a lot of reports from third parties, and they also have a robust testing methodology. And from my own experience, I can say that it's really, really very stable.

In terms of scalability, the sky is the limit. There is no limit for scalability. If you have money to spend, you get whatever resource you want.

We had some issues and we had pretty good support. They even created a special attach for us to solve our problem and they responded very quickly. If you buy the additional support, the support is really good.

The initial setup is easier now. Four years ago it was harder, but nowadays it is a lot easier, because a lot of boiler plate set ups are done for you. So you can just start using it right away, even if you are not experienced. 

Four years ago, it was not like this, but it's better now.

In terms of price, it is more expensive than other cloud providers, but it is worth it. It is not that much more, so you can go with it. It's not too bad. It's more expensive than the others, but it's bearable.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate Amazon AWS a nine.

To bring that up a bit, as I mentioned, I would like to have a direct connection to the EC2 server console. That's why I'm just not giving a 10.

For anyone interested in using Amazon AWS, I would advise them to read the online documentation. It's very clear and shows you step by step how to use the system. If you need more advanced features, you can find a lot of resources on the internet and on their website. So if you want to use a public cloud, I strongly advise using AWS.

We use this solution in our company and for our clients' companies.

I like the IAM, the directory, and the storage.

They should implement the command shell by default. As it is now, to open the console, you have to download the command application. When you compare with GCP, they have the command shell inbuilt.

It would make it more seamless for the administrator to include this. There are times where the machine is not connecting and you can't wait for the RDP because you have to create them quickly.

Building a shell directly from the console is a good solution. This is missing by default. there are ways that it can be done and integrated.

I have been working with Amazon AWS for six years.

Amazon AWS is very stable.

It is a scalable solution, but you can only scale-out. You can't scale up.

We have approximately 200 users in our company who are using it.

Technical support could be improved, they could be better. We don't get SLA with AWS.

They give us a specific time for a solution but they don't advise further. We have to check to see if the issue has been resolved. There should be an automatic email to notify us that the issue has been resolved, by default.

The need to work on proactiveness.

I also work with GCP and with Azure.

The initial setup is easy. It is not complex.

We have a team of 50 people who maintain all of our solutions. It's spread across the team to run 24/7.

The pricing is one of the best in the segment.

They have actually reduced their prices, with the exception of the MLD which has increased.

It's by design itself.

They have placed the pricing well for a reduced market.

I would rate Amazon AWS a seven out of ten.