Amazon AWS Reviews

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...

We are running everything on the cloud. That's our primary use case. All the servers we are using are on AWS. The only thing we have on SAP's cloud is the analytics part. Everything else is running on AWS.

The scalability of the product is the solution's most valuable feature. It expands very, very easily.

I don't have any complaints about the configuration capabilities or the interface.

The pricing seems to be good.

The technical support should be better than what is on offer right now.

I've used the solution for a while now. It's been about four years in total, from what I recall.

The solution scales very well. If a company needs to expand it, it's very easy to do. It's one of the solution's most striking features.

The support could be better. It's an aspect of the solution that isn't as good as everything else. We aren't satisfied. They need to be more helpful and responsive.

We also use SAP. In terms of SAP, I'm running all my servers on this IP at this moment. We have our development, our quality, and also production sites on it.

We can't complain about the pricing. So far, it doesn't seem to be too expensive.

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Amazon.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten overall. We've been very, very happy with the capabilities we've been able to experience so far.

I use Amazon AWS for backing up our data from the customer relationship management solution of SalesForce. For the moment, we have not made use of it for the restoration of any routes or data that is involved. 

The solution should me made friendlier to use. 

As far as the automation is concerned, the backups should be scaled. 

The pricing of Amazon is higher than that of SalesForce. We thought that things would be cheaper when it comes to Mexico and that a connection would be made between the facilities and SalesForce. 

I rate Amazon AWS as a nine out of ten.

We are customers of Amazon AWS. 

This solution is very easy to use and it has a professional interface. It's easy to access and is secure, two important features. 

The cost of the solution could be improved, it's quite expensive. I find the networking to be overly complex. 

I've been using this solution for four years. 

Amazon AWS is a stable product.

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup was complex because of the networking setup we needed to create. This could have been a problem with the networking site. 

We currently use Azure as well. AWS offers a very good platform mask and is easy to use. Azure is good for creating virtual machines and creating VLANs is very easy with the Azure site.

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

This solution can be used to set up a cloud infrastructure and DevOps practices, such as Agile. It can be on-premises or in the cloud.

AWS has many integrations and plenty of tools available for anyone to take advantage of. There are new features being added all the time.

The solution could have better security and more integration with other platforms.

I have been using this solution for approximately eight years.

I have found the stability very good.

This solution is scalable.

I have previously used Microsoft Azure DevOps and we prefer Amazon AWS.

We are currently paying for the solution on an annual basis.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Amazon AWS a nine out of ten.

We have just started to use this solution. We are using it for Amazon S3 Bucket.

The storage is most valuable. The gateway and documentation are also quite good.

Its price should be lower. The price for in-house usage should be different from production usage.

I have been using Amazon AWS for around a month.

I didn't use any other solution previously.

It was easy to install.

Its price should be lower. Currently, the price is the same if you are working in-house or in production. If you have to do internal testing or you are checking if things are working in-house, you need to pay for that, and the price is the same. The price for in-house usage should be different from production usage.

It is a good solution. I would rate Amazon AWS an eight out of ten.

We are a product cocktail service company, and we deliver identity-based solutions that customers can subscribe to. The back-end infrastructure is hosted in AWS.

It helps us by saving money. Having a physical server on our premises is, of course, quite expensive as compared to building an EC2 instance in the cloud.

We use AWS in-built services like EC2, ECS, Lambda services, CloudTrail, CloudWatch, etc. AWS is a very big platform that provides a lot of services.

The main reason why we use EC2 is because we are not dependent on maintaining the hardware inside our premises. Also, we have full control over the infrastructure, and we can modify it as per our own requirements.

It is stable and scalable as well.

Installation is quite easy.

Monitoring still needs to be improved.

Better support for Windows Operating Systems would be appreciated. It is good for Linux but needs to improve for Windows.

I've been dealing with Amazon AWS for more than four years now.

We are experiencing 99.9% uptime already, so we have had no issues with stability.

It is scalable. We have configured our Auto Scaling options there, which enables us to install as the requirements increase. It auto scales the server.

Technical support is okay. I will not rate it too high, but I think it might be because it is part of a basic plan. We do not have the enterprise support plan.

You don't require much technical expertise to have an instance, so the initial setup is quite easy.

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

We're using several Amazon products. We use Amazon AWS Compute Service, AWS Elastic Load Balancing, and a huge private VPN or a virtual private network are created out of it. We also use an API Gateway. There are several products and several services that AWS provides, and we're using them.

The compute and the elasticness of the compute is really great. Whenever there's a load, it automatically adds the servers and then reduces the servers based on the configuration. This is really wonderful, more cost-effective, and it's been really good for us.

AWS support could be better.

I have been using Amazon AWS for many years.

AWS support could be better. It could be faster and straightforward.

There's no initial setup or installation. It's all configuration.

A few of our customers pay for it yearly and monthly. Sometimes, when it's related to the data, the pricing seems to be high. It could be cheaper on a transactional basis.

We did evaluate a couple of other products like Google Cloud and  RTCloud, but our customers decided to go with AWS.

I would recommend this cloud solution to new customers.

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

I am using the solution to create my own virtual servers in the cloud. We use one of the servers to deploy the database for NoSQL database on MongoDB. MongoDB allows all types of databases. 

Here is a more detailed explanation. I needed to deploy a backup API that was not in the project I needed it for. To back up the API is essentially treating data from the MongoDB database. Initially, we implemented it locally and tested all the endpoints, and then we deployed it to the AWS services. We needed this to be online and to communicate with the front end, which is an angular app that says you receive the data from another database which is another NoSQL.

This solution offers a very detailed dashboard that has some metrics, such as performance and budget. You can find all the documentation on how to do almost anything. It supports multiple services where you can use Linux. Depending on your use case, you can also manage the allocations, for example, your hard drive and memory.

Additionally, the solution is user-friendly, has intuitive dashboards, and plenty of graphs and charts available.

We had some problems with bandwidth because of high usage. There were so many queries going to the API and since we were on a budget, we did not provide the needed requirements for our software. At those times the performance was really slow, I needed to log in using a remote session to check whether there is a problem and if there was I had to restart the server. If you have the required budget and you know how to customize it, I think it would be working fine.

In a future release, I would like to see more support for AI because it is the future. 

I have been using the solution for the past year.

The solution is really reliable even when we were using it as a demo to showcase to clients.

The cloud-based environment was secure for everything I used it for. It does not allow you to just log in for the remote sessions. You need to configure it to have a computer log into your accounts properly for user management.

The solution is scalable, whenever you want to scale up the solution and improve it, they really offer you that opportunity. For example, increase the hardware and resources.

The customer support is exceptional. I was having some problems with deploying the server and had to contact support. I began chatting with the chatbot and when it did not help me I was transferred to one of their support attendants. Once the ticket is submitted, they send you another email, in three days to check whether the problem was resolved or not. They are really helpful.

Additionally, at one of the AI summits, Amazon had a room that was filled with many technical professionals. They all had different technical backgrounds willing to give support to those who asked questions. It was really helpful.

The installation for me was straightforward since I have some technical background. However, I did still need to read some documentation. The installation documentation is good and informative. Those who are new to the solution can search the internet for information to guide them and there are courses online to follow too.

When I first started using the solution I used a free trial, and then we upgraded to a pay-as-you-go subscription. We have an allocated budget of $50. I am happy with the pricing because the free trial project helped me progress. In our country, there are limitations for what payment methods we can use, we do not support PayPal, and credit card transactions are delayed. Hopefully, this gets better in the future. However, in other countries, this is not a widespread problem.

The type of deployment of the solution depends on the need of the organization. There are some solutions that we deploy for the clients that we need in a more stable environment. In this case, we use the cloud. For testing purposes for internal projects, we use our own servers within the company. I think by the IP numbers, we can request to create a certain server and they created this for us. There are some clients that require a cloud-based solution, we have this capability but it is still in testing and it is not what we use our servers for.

I would recommend this solution for companies like small companies just starting out. It would be really helpful for them.

I rate Amazon AWS a nine out of ten.

We use the AWS Cloud service for storing company-related information.

The cloud-based infrastructure has several good products that people normally use.

We have had several issues with the products and services but as of now, there are no good alternatives.

I have been using Amazon AWS for the past seven years.

I use AWS several times each day, and we plan to continue using it.

We have 7,000 users on AWS.

The technical support and customer service are good.

I have also worked with Microsoft Azure and I find the initial setup of AWS to be easier.

The installation and initial setup are easy.

This is a subscription-based product.

This is not an expensive product but it would be an improvement if the price were cheaper. Google Cloud, for example, is cheaper.

This is definitely a product that I recommend.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.