Amazon AWS Reviews

We use several features of this solution for many purposes. For example, we use CloudFormation for infrastructure as a service, Kinesis for the message queue, Lambda for integration services, and ATC for hosting. 

We also use S3 for storing the data, clustering, Multizone security, AVS to attach hard disk, and assistant.

It is easy to use.

It has many features that we use.

It integrates well.

They upgrade a lot of applications.

If you are familiar with other cloud infrastructures, you can see that it is in need of some enhancements.

It is easy to enhance it to make the clustering easier.

At times, when you use CloudFormation to create five machines with a sequence name, it is difficult but can be done with Terraform easily. 

I would like to see CloudFormation made more in the programming way of thinking. You have some variables, LOB, IF statements, and inheritance, where it's not just the functionality that we have, but gives you the output. They could make it close to the programming language, even if it's a scripting language. They need more control over it such as an If-Then-Else statement and a sub-loop if possible. It will make it easier to create the infrastructure.

I have been working with Amazon AWS for more than seven or eight years.

We are using the latest version.

It is a stable solution.

Amazon AWS is a scalable solution.

I work as a consultant and have a couple of customers. Each customer is of a different size company but they are all over 1,000.

AWS has very good technical support. They react immediately when you need help.

When you speak of installation, you refer to applications already built or software in ATC to be installed. AWS doesn't sell applications, they give you an infrastructure as a service, application as a service, and a platform as a service but they don't give you applications to be installed.

There is no installation required in AWS.

The maintenance required depends on the size of the company. Some larger companies require a larger IT department while others don't require it at all.

A license is required. Some customers will provide their own license and others will purchase it directly from AWS.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in it.

I would rate Amazon AWS a nine out of ten.

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. 

Customers can use it for the web-based management of the product. We also store and retrieve data for their network connections. Also, we use the AI/ML portion called SageMaker to calibrate the algorithms and basically drive automation into the customer's use case. Typically our use cases are in hotels, public transportation, convention centers - anywhere where you are sharing internet connections. For example, hotels, conventions centers - anything where you might have people jockeying for a shared internet connection with possible oversubscription or network congestion. We also have enterprise Work-From-Home users due to the pandemic and they need to continue to provide access to those remotely into their own data center, corporate network, and public cloud.

Flexible fast way to bring up servers and network infrastructure with variable costs.

We use the AI/ML Sagemaker to help us build models. 

We use several feature services on AWS, including Lambda, S3 database, RDS database, Alexa Voice Services and Cognito Gateway. They are all excellent in terms of offering great functionality.

They're pretty good about taking customer feedback and are generally able to productize the requested feature.

The initial setup is straightforward, especially if using Lightsail to start.

The solution scales very nicely.

The stability is good with a large number of Availability Zones WW.

Technical support is helpful and responsive but you must pay for a tiered support plan to ensure response.

The pricing is something you have to watch. You really have to constantly optimize your costs for instance, storage, IP's and things like that. That can become a job in itself to manage just from a budgeting standpoint if you are a moderate to heavy user. However, that's true for Azure or GCP as well. 

If they did more automation on alerting you to cheaper pricing or automated volume pricing based on time/use or even porting you on to on-demand instances automatically, that would be kind of cool. That's something that I haven't seen yet. They could just automatically optimize for your workflow and put you onto a lower-priced instance to save you money.  you Maybe allow you to pick an economy setting, or a performance setting, by time of day etc. something like that. That would be great. Then you don't have to think about it as much as you do in the current iteration.

It would be interesting to have a cost optimized accounting service so that they would come in and help remediate and give suggestions on how to cut costs. I know it's probably antithetical to their bottom line, but that said, obviously, if you take the high road there, you're going to probably keep people, and keep people from switching for lower costs. A lot of times, they can architect a better solution or a similar solution for lower cost and that would lead to customer retention--or maybe a longer term retention discount if youve stayed with them for awhile. That would be helpful if they had that. They have solutions architects, to consult however, they're usually just trying to design the best technical solution as opposed to the most cost-optimized solution. 

We've been using the solution for about four years at this point.

Services are pretty good stability-wise. They've got great redundancy. The one thing I would tweak them is when you're within the region or zone, they make it more difficult for you to do redundant zones, without carrying the IP addresses over seamlessly. That is a little bit of a sticking point, so you could have remote redundancy with the addressing there with it even outside of the AZ's. That would be a lot easier than having to go through the programming of it. 

The scalability is great. You can go from one small instance to GPU, very powerful instances, clusters. There is not any problem with scaling if you can afford it. If you've got the volume, you certainly can scale.

We have maybe a dozen or so customers that will use the product and then access the UI and the management system through the cloud. Then, of course, as developers, we have about 10 to 25 employees that have to use it to varying degrees to support the customers and do development.

I like the tech support. It varies by level in that you've got to pay more to get the immediate response time. Generally, I'd say it's pretty good. Literally phone rings minutes after you log a trouble ticket. They're usually pretty good about escalations and helping. Out of AWS, Azure, and GCP, I'd give them the number two ranking. Azure has good support, however, it's expensive. GCP probably is number three I'd say, of the top three.

We also occasionally use the Google Cloud Platform and Azure, although we tend to use AWS the most. GCP is a little bit cheaper overall, however, then you've got the cost of management that is typically a person so you do need to invest in that. 

We started with Amazon and we've pretty much stayed with them. We've switched to Google and done some work on Azure that was customer driven, however, pretty much our prime public cloud has been AWS.

The initial setup is not overly complex. It's pretty straightforward. 

It's pretty easy to get started. However, you do have to make an investment and learn the different cloud platform's nomenclature. Most of our guys now are cloud practitioners and architects now that they've taken the training. We had to bite the bullet even though we've been users for four years. There is an investment that you have to make on the OPEX side. That's the case for any of the public clouds. Although once you know one, you can pretty much pick up the other ones pretty quickly.

In-house

Have to watch price/billing creep, but there are tools to watch and monitor your usage and billing.  

Azure. GCP

We're a software development group building specialty LAN/WAN optimization solutions, so we don't use a lot of canned products per se.

We do tend to sue reasonably new software versions of the OS...whatever is the latest LTS selections.

If you already have your workload ready, that's helpful, as you can actually trial it under a free tier and then see what the cost is, and extrapolate what the ongoing cost is. In the end, that's what gets you. Being able to do some benchmark testing on how much it's going to cost for your particular workflow across the three public clouds is definitely something you probably want to do. Especially if you're going to scale, as, obviously, it can suddenly creep up to not just tens or hundreds of dollars a month, but thousands a month, depending upon what you're doing. I definitely would recommend doing some reference testing of your workflows before deciding on a solution.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. They're pretty solid. You've got all the services that you can imagine, and then some. There's a very broad breadth of products and services. We haven't had too many SLA issues for recovery or downtime. Maybe we've just been lucky or good so far...

There are different services, approximately 150 of them, this solution can provide. There are a few services I most commonly use. I am using it for the virtual servers, Lightsail which are lightweight virtual servers, and a simple storage service which is called S3.

Some of the valuable features I have found to be the virtual server is easy to understand, a secure environment, and AWS has a fast community for finding solutions to problems you might be facing.

I have been using the solution for three years.

We have approximately 15 users using the solution in my organization.

The scalability of the solution all depends on the services that you are using. It is very easy to scale in the cloud if you want to launch multiple servers and if you want to vertically or horizontally scale up the servers. It can support many environments such as Windows and Linux.

The support is fast at responding and resolving issues.

I have used Microsoft Azure and DigitalOcean previously.

The solution is an on-demand service. There is a monthly billing requirement which is for the virtual machines we currently use.

The solution is expensive compared to other providers because you need many of the services and it can add up fast.

I recommend this solution to others and I plan to use the solution in the future.

I rate Amazon AWS a ten out of ten. 

We mainly use AWS for migrating onto the cloud or for analytic services and machine learning. 

I like many features, like the recently released useful analytics features. There are many from the data analytics or database side.

The price could be better. Support for data analytics could be better. I don't see much support for data analytics. They have a lot of support in Azure, but I don't see a lot of innovation on the data analytics side in AWS.

I have been dealing with Amazon AWS for the last two years.

AWS is a stable and flexible solution.

AWS is a scalable product.

Technical support is customer-friendly and knowledgeable.

The initial setup and installation are straightforward. They have very good documentation, and if you can follow the script, you can do it. I was trying to do it with the Datacom script, and I was able to make services like VPC and EC2 in the database cloud seamlessly.

The prices are somewhat on the higher side. It would help if they can bring it down, especially for the sporting segment and for on-demand instances.

I would recommend Amazon AWS to potential customers.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Amazon AWS a nine.

With AWS services, we can focus on our products, and that makes our customers happier! Also we can provide higher SLAs for our customers.

I have been using almost every service on AWS for years. I'm trying to test every new service as soon as possible.

The main idea of using AWS is its ability to act so fast! We used to have servers on-prem data-centers. When you needed a new server/device/configuration, it could take hours/days/weeks based on the demand. Now I can have what I need in couple of minutes. That is amazing!

Of course there are other cloud providers, but AWS is far the best on both technology and stability. You can find cheaper providers, but you shouldn't risk your business just for saving some dollars.

AWS gives you chance to concentrate on your business and products which I believe is the most important thing, especially for start-ups.

Here are the services that I'm currently using on AWS:
EC2, ECS, Elastic Beanstalk, Lambda, S3, EFS, Glacier, RDS, DynamoDB, ElastiCache, Redshift, CloudWatch, CloudFormation,OpsWorks, VPC, CloudFront, Route53, IAM, Certificate Manager, ElasticSearch Service, WorkDocs, WorkMail, SQS, SES, SNS, and API Gateway.

These days, technology is changing every day and AWS is one of the leaders of this change. They are at least one step ahead of you, which is great. You can have new technology as soon as possible. I think in general there is no need for improvement. All I can suggest would be a cleaner designed console. I generally don't like the user experience of Amazon. It's not the best. You can see the same at AWS Console. I'd be happier If the design and the user experience would more simple. Sometimes I feel that there are lots of texts on the page which makes harder to find what you are looking for.

We have nearly 100% uptime using AWS resources which makes us provide higher SLA's for our customers.

I have never faced any issues with the stability. This is one of the reasons why I chose AWS. They are more stable than any other cloud provider.

The best feature for most of the users is scalability. You don't need to reserve lots of servers just for peak times! AWS is doing this perfectly.

AWS has great support engineers. There are several types of support packages. Based on your package, they support you in their SLAs. Until now, they helped me well with every single ticket that I've issued.

I've never switched to any other cloud provider, but I've tested nearly all of them. Testing all providers gives you a great chance to compare services. To be honest, most of the time AWS was better.

Creating an account from AWS web-page is straightforward. Everyone can easily complete the registration process. Some people are thinking twice when they've asked for their credit card, but this is the nature of cloud systems. You'll pay as much as you use. It's one of the aspects of having everything easy and fast.

If you can plan capacity for one or three years, you can use the upfront payment option which allows you to save up to 50%.

I'm testing every major cloud provider regularly. Other than AWS, I've used Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform, and Digital Ocean.

AWS has great how-to documents and videos. You can use these materials. We are here to help them whatever they need on their cloud migration/usage. They can find detailed information from http://calico-technologies.co.... or they can send an email to info@calico-technologies.co.uk or to me.

The price point and ease of use are the most valuable features. The cost per GB per month has always been reasonable. 

It is easy to set up buckets and upload files using the AWS Console.

The ease with which you can move files from short-term (S3) to long-term storage (i.e., Glacier) via a dashboard. With the introduction of Glacier as a long-term storage option, having some type of function key to simplify the transfer of files between the S3 and Glacier environments would be beneficial and increase efficiency. Perhaps it could be incorporated as an option when using the S3 Service or Glacier service; i.e., a "Transfer to Glacier" and "Transfer to S3."

I have been using AWS S3 since 2007 or 2008.

We have not had any stability issues.

We have not had any scalability issues.

We previously used in-house data storage (HD and NAS).

The initial setup was easy and straightforward, as opposed to some other solutions.

I cannot speak to the licensing questions, but the pricing per GB/month is reasonable and competitive.

We didn’t look at alternatives, as it was the first cloud platform solution on the market at the time, at least that I was aware of.

There are a plethora of options, but it certainly should be given primary consideration.

We are doing our own custom development, which is run on AWS.

We have done a lot of work using Amazon AWS.

All of our deployments are hosted on the Amazon AWS Cloud. Because many of our client requirements are on AWS, we have our own AWS development environment, and then we use GitLab to migrate it to the client environment.

We write a lot of Lambda functions for various services, as well as serverless functions.

We use Amazon S3 to store a large amount of data and images.

We also use Amazon DynamoDB Database for many of our developments.

Many of these features are already available on AWS. We're just getting started, and we're still learning a lot.

The performance is good.

We would like to see if AWS includes any inbuilt automation. Also, we are very interested in AWS's AI/ML features, as well as IoT, AR, and VR.

We have been using Amazon AWS for the last couple of years.

The stability of Amazon AWS is good. We have not had any issues.

It is easy to scale.

In our company, we have approximately 20 people who are using Amazon AWS, on a daily basis.

We have a few issues in the beginning during the setup, but we were able to resolve them ourselves.

We are satisfied with the technical support.

The development is primarily on Python, Node.JS, and Java technologies.

The initial setup was quite complex at first, but once we got the hang of it, it was simple.

It took a week to complete the installation from scratch.

Because it is a cloud product, it does not require a lot of maintenance. We have CloudWatch and some alerts set up, which is how we manage everything, including utilization.

We completed the installation internally.

The pricing is fair. We don't have any issues with the pricing.

I was evaluating different ways to incorporate RPA.

I would recommend this solution to others who are considering using it. 

It's very scalable and serverless. We are only charged for the functions that we use. This includes Lambda, which is a nice feature, in my opinion.

I would rate Amazon AWS an eight out of ten.