Amazon AWS Reviews

Propension ML model implementation, so the tech stack involves ETL, storage and computation capabilities for model design, implemented solution also involves pipelines and events handler for automated runs

Development of the product has been consistent which is beneficial for data engineers unlike Azure which has changed a lot, causing them much confusion.

Amazon has a much better understanding of the workflow of data scientists and machine learning processes. This is seen by their SageMaker which offers different versions of the models to be used.

I think that the interface could be improved.

Additionally, they lack good connectors with services within other clouds. For example, it does not integrate well with Power BI which is a Microsoft service.

Sometimes, some of their services can be too complex/technical. It's almost like they tried taking a microservice approach meanwhile the users want a little more integration

In other words the multi-cloud approach is not robustly promoted as there is a noticeable difference in ease of use.

I have been using this solution for eight months.

just one event where the whole service was down, although im not sure if it was anticipated by the service due to not being the actual service administrator

very good, the tier we used is one of the most basic and still performed with no problems

never had experience with customer service or support

Neutral

pretty straight forward, although this project was 2nd one to be implemented on this cloud, so the customer company had already been up the adoption curve of the service

we provide the implementation as a consulting company soy neither in house or 3rd party as we are the 3rd party

If you are looking to implement Amazon AWS within your company, I would suggest finding someone that already knows some AWS as it has a harder adoption curve.

I would rate it a six out of ten. 

The scalability and security of Amazon AWS are the most valuable features.

There are multiple operational and administrative services on AWS, I am expecting to see an integrated single platform of all the services so that it will be easier for the administrators to monitor and manage.

We are resellers of the production services of AWS. I have been working with Amazon AWS for almost 8 years.

The AWS products are stable.

The environment is stable. Every time a new feature is introduced, it advances the capabilities. Once the product is deployed, you can scale up easily.

Technical support has been very good.

The initial set up of AWS is easy and not complex.

The pricing is reasonable and comparable to similar services when run on-premise.

All the services and features provided by AWS are good. They are always improving their features.

I recommend implementing the products on Amazon Web Services. It is a stable environment and mature cloud platform. I would rate the product an 8 out of 10.

We use the solution for managed hosting of the connection servers of some of our clients. 

The solution has a vast array of features and services. It offers many upgrades. 

The price of the solution is comparatively quite high in comparison with that of Azure. 

We have been using Amazon AWS for around two or three years.

The solution has good stability.

The solution has good scalability. 

I like the technical support.

The initial setup was quite easy. 

The solution could be more cost-effective. 

When it comes to cloud management, I have no complaints at present. 

I am a customer of Amazon. 

As we are, basically, only hosting cloud services, this is geared towards the end user. We manage two or three people.  

I would recommend the solution to others.

Owing to the pricing, I rate Amazon AWS as a nine out of ten. 

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 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 primarily use the solution for our partner.

We are using it for moving all the banking and insurance domains from on-premises systems to the cloud platform, which is managed by services. It is right from data integration, data inception to data processing, to advanced visualization and analytics. We are also using the AI and machine learning aspects as well.

We have been using the data ingestion. 

There are native tools which are AWS Glue, which we are using for data integration. 

We also use the Spark and Python-based integration which are both very good. 

The solution has very good Lambda functions within AWS.

We also use AWS Redshift for data modeling along with the integration with Snowflake.

The solution is very stable.

The scalability is excellent.

We've found the initial setup to be quite simple and straightforward.

Technical support is pretty good.

The pricing could be more competitive.

There need better integration tools whereby you could have widgets. It already technically has this, however, if they had widgets that could help with the journey from an on-premises legacy database management system, that would be ideal. There should be some accelerators that can convert and automate data pipelines into AWS so that users don't have to start from scratch. 

Basically, if we had accelerators and tools that can help fast track and leverage existing data schemas, models, and then also, data pipelines that are already set up, it would help items to be quickly migrated rather than doing everything from scratch on the cloud.

We've used the solution for a couple of years. It's been a while.

The stability of the solution is very good. The product does not have any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution is the number one cloud product. It is extremely salable. A company shouldn't have any trouble expanding it.

From a user perspective, I would say from accounts, we are primarily into banking and insurance. We have around four to five of our banking accounts using it. They are a mid-scale bank. 

We do plan to continue using the product.

Technical support is good. Overall, they are the number one cloud provider and they have an overall very high market capitalization. The support they have on offer is very good. We're satisfied with the level of service they offer.

We have also used the Azure platform as well.

The initial setup is easy. It's not overly complex. The deployment depends, however, it could take a few hours to maybe a day, as it is platform and software as a service. It is all managed by AWS. The installation and management require a bare minimum configuration.

The cost structure could be better. It needs to be more transparent. After COVID, it is competing directly with Azure - which is a bit more of a cost-effective option. It's also competing directly with Google. If they were cheaper, they would be much more competitive in the space.

From a licensing perspective, the cost of ownership is based on usage. 

We are consultants.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I cannot recall the exact version number at this time.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've enjoyed its capabilities so far.

I would recommend this solution to other companies and organizations.

There's a lot of due diligence which happens before organizations choose cloud solutions and then, of course, it needs to fit into the scenario. There is a cost-benefit analysis that has to be performed. It's a good idea to compare it to other platforms as well. Companies need to make sure it factors in the strategic landscape and the tools and technologies that the organization already has. If clients need assistance, we do participate in those strategic initiatives.

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.

We use AWS for product development, testing, and storage management.

AWS has improved our organization by driving efficiency in our product development cycles.

I like that it's easy to use.

They could lower the cost. The setup could also be easier.

I've been using Amazon AWS for about five years.

AWS is fairly stable. There are always some issues, but not much.

AWS scales fine most of the time. It's just expensive.

We've used Azure, we've used Google Cloud, we've used DigitalOcean, and we used SoftLayer. We're primarily using AWS because 75% or 80% of people use AWS, and we want our product to run optimized on AWS.

The initial setup is relative. It's easier than others, but it could always be easier.

It's expensive. It costs you an arm and a leg. It's just about your expertise to do it on-prem versus in the cloud. I think it's more cost-effective to do it on-prem, but not everybody has a lab or the capital equipment budget to staff a lab. So, they are defaulting to using a service.

That's the trade-off. If you're going to scale, most of the time, people are going to build it in-house. To get development started and to get things moving quickly, the cloud providers offer a valuable service. The biggest charge is for storage, moving data back and forth, and the ingress and egress charges.

I would tell potential users that there's a learning curve, but it definitely works.

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