Amazon AWS Reviews

While I cannot say for certain, I believe that we are using the latest version. 

We primarily use the solution to rent servers for storing certain commercial applications.

I especially like the flexibility and scalability of the solution. It is totally scalable. 

While feasible, custom configuration will be more time consuming than standard, although we have not encountered many instances which required us to seek support or advice.

I believe we have been using Amazon AWS for more than 10 years.

The solution is absolutely stable. This is one of its best features. 

The solution is absolutely scalable. 

Amazon allows us to scale up and then down, something important to one of our customers who was in need of temporary increases in the throughput provided to the servers. This allowed us to meet the client's needs for the days or weeks that they required more dynamically located servers, after which we were able to scale down. This we were able to do through Amazon. This was difficult to accomplish beforehand, as the client had private servers for which he was forced to buy machines which he would subsequently keep. 

I cannot comment on Amazon's technical support, as we have not made use of it. 

We did use other solutions prior to Amazon AWS. We made use of local service and dealt with projects involving Google and Microsoft. We also used Microsoft Azure. 

Not long ago  we used Microsoft Azure, though this is necessary with some of our projects. We have different projects which vary with the customer's specifications. Some utilize Azure, although most require the use of Amazon. 

When comparing Microsoft Azure with Amazon AWS, I do not see much disparity. It really comes down to a business choice. If the customer is familiar with Microsoft, then the testing team maintaining the product will need to be acquainted with it as well and its ongoing use is required. Similarly, Amazon will continue to be employed if this is already the case. As such, the difference betwen the solutions does not come down to considerations of a technical nature as they are largely similar. The primary consideration is one of business, the use of one solution and provider over another. 

When it comes to standard configuration, the installation is quick, usually taking one or two days to complete. Custom configuration, while feasible, takes somewhat longer. So far, we have not had many instances in which we required support or advice concerning custom configurations. 

The technical team would be in a better position than I to address any technical issues involved in the setup. From my perspective as a project manager, I feel what we have to be sufficiently good. There is much advertising, information on the advantages of the product and guides available. 

Installation was carried out by our own internal integration team, not externally outsourced. I did not handle it myself. It was done by a team specialist. 

The technical team responsible for the deployment consists primarily of engineers. 

I cannot comment on whether we have seen an ROI, return on investment, as I do not possess this information.

The licensing cost varies with the project involved. Certain projects run around $6,000 per month, some less and others more. We handled many projects, each with its own complexities and specifications. The price ranges of the licenses varies with the complexity of the project. 

Broadly speaking, there is a need to rely on specialists for properly setting up one's accounts and addressing his needs. This is not specific to Amazon, however, but is something prevalent with all providers.

I have assumed the role of both customer and integrator. In the past, I worked as a project manager with different projects employing Amazon products, services and software. 

For the most part, the solutions I used have been public, not private, such as AWS cloud. 

The number of users of the solution varies with the individual project. This can range from 20 to 200 to 500 users. 

Our teams have undertaken every role, be them architecture, development, design or testing. They are all internally integrated. 

I am a fan of Amazon products and generally recommend them to others. Of course, we employ Azure and Google products when the customer specifically requests these. 

Since all products have room for improvement, even when this is not apparent to me, I rate Amazon AWS as a nine out of ten.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Amazon AWS is good in terms of deployment and user experience. Their certificate management and load balancer are also good features.

The sorting model in AWS is a little bit complicated. When you are going through any component, you can get some surprising results.

I've been using AWS for more than two years.

Scalability is something that people are looking for when they choose Amazon AWS. I like that it integrates well with IBM Resilient, which is like a serverless map. We have more than 5,000 employees in our organization. 

Amazon support is good.

Setting up AWS was straightforward. It only took around 20 minutes. We used about five to 10 team members for deployment. For maintenance, we have an architect and some RDS specialists. 

Amazon AWS could have more options and transparency in its pricing model. You need in-depth knowledge to adopt AWS. So someone without that knowledge base might not understand all of the costs associated with AWS.

I rate Amazon AWS nine out of 10. I would definitely recommend it to others.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

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.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

We use this solution to deploy our products.

Within our company, there are at least five people using this solution. Usually, they are technical people — some software developers and a couple of infrastructure managers.

Whether we decide to increase our usage with this solution depends on our business development.

It allows us to deploy a production environment using Oracle Database, an API integrator, or by using our development tools. 

It's easy to manage. We can use a wide range of technologies with AWS.

It's very easy to configure and to use the platform, but we would like to be notified about our consumption. The consumption is a critical point for us because we are not always using the platform, but sometimes we receive high charges — high amounts of money for services that we didn't even use during that month, for instance.

I would like to receive some alerts when my consumption is getting out of the normal range.

I have been using Amazon AWS for roughly two years.

It's pretty stable. We haven't had any problems with the platform. Overall, I think it's quite optimized.

Scalability-wise, haven't had any issues. We work with small to medium-sized solutions so we haven't really needed to test the limits.

We haven't really had to contact technical support. The documentation is very complete and easy to understand. 

We tried using a Google cloud platform, but we had some configuration problems with some programs like WordPress. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. I wasn't involved in the deployment, but I believe it took less than four hours.

The price could be lower. Currently, we spend between $300 to $1,000 dollars a month to use this solution. We try to avoid using a license if we can.

I would recommend AWS to other interested companies. It's a very stable platform. It's easy to use and you don't have to be an expert to deploy your first project. Obviously, you'll need to make use of some advanced features, but in that case, support is always available. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. 

Public Cloud

Accelerates innovation through fast experimentation cycles in an agile, flexible, and scalable platform.

Enables fast prototyping, simulation, and rapid deployment of infrastructure configurations. Has low risk exploration of new architectural paradigms and technologies (FaaS, Containers, IoT, and Machine Learning) and is easy to integrate with current solutions.

Considering the rate of innovation of AWS and the vast range of services offered (over 15+ categories, 50+ services in 2017) the learning path of customers on the platform is something that can always be improved. Usability through simplification of the interface for the use cases chosen by the customer can be a possible improvement.

The current interface offers several options to select services, solutions, or learning paths. However, the ability to simplify the interface to focus on customer use cases could have an impact on productivity and ease of use.

This is a challenge that I’ve seen all cloud vendor share: Usability and different user experience on their platform is difficult when the span of services is so vast. However, some design thinking “persona” kind of approach could help offer alternative perspectives.

• Since 2012, in prototypes and proof of concepts
• Since 2015, in production applications, advise, and support to some clients.

I’ve never experiences issues with stability related to the AWS infrastructure. The services are very resilient and there are constant reporting and monitoring tools available, a open status dashboard, and a personal health dashboard to receive news on any issues being investigated or sorted out. Even if there have been outages reported in AWS history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... their technical response capabilities have proven outstanding.

I’ve never experience issues with scalability. AWS services offer very flexible set of tools to architect solutions that give the best performance and economic advantages. Combined solutions using elastic computing capabilities, containers, APIs, and even more innovative server-less capabilities (FaaS) can be leveraged to tackle the most challenging use cases.

I previously favored RackSpace and Digital Ocean for simplicity and focus for certain use cases (development prototypes, proof-of-concepts, etc.). I prefer to concentrate investment and training on the same platform when solutions scale and require more complex setups. Leveraging the learning curve on the service offering is increasingly specialized.

The setup is easy and greatly supported by the learning paths offered through the platform. Expertise is required to take full advantage of AWS tools and continuous innovations.

Some customers can become overwhelmed by the range of services, so training and assistance from specialized third-parties is strongly recommended. Even experimented managed service providers can complement internal capabilities and help in the training of internal teams.

One of the advantages of AWS is their high rate of innovation. However, in order to leverage this, internal or external expertise is required. A good partnership is recommended.

On demand, pay-as-you-go pricing is powerful to optimize expenses, but it’s important to keep a technical cost controlling function aware of usage and scale patterns to choose the best pricing mix.

Massive migration to cloud without analyzing the right service for the right usage can lead to higher cost than expected. It is important to get the right advice to match each use case needed to the optimum cloud economics.

Even if a lot of decisions to go to the cloud are based in the promise of lower costs, the true power of cloud services is their flexibility, rate of innovation, and avoiding vendor lock-in if architected consciously.

Even if a lift and shift approach with short schedules can lead to mistakes in choosing services and paying more than optimum, the speed in which you can correct the mistake is not comparable to any other infrastructure option.

This is forcing even the traditional hardware vendors to reinvent their business models and develop financial offerings that include operating expense based financing (pay-as-you-grow) or services based agreements (pay-as-you-go) to make their private cloud offerings competitive.

The other aspect to consider is the managed service required to get the most of this platform. Don’t underestimate the quality of the advice and support required. But at the same time, consider your core business management time released by adopting a platform instead of managing the components internally.

The internal expertise should evolve to understand how to use it best for the business outcomes pursued instead of the technicalities of how to make it. That’s where the right partnerships can be leveraged.

We evaluated Azure, RackSpace, Google Cloud, SoftLayer, DigitalOcean, and Linode.

Test drive it with prototype applications, reproduce development and testing environments, and standardize your stacks to be able to move them easily, if needed. The deeper that the infrastructure-as-code approach is part of your culture, the easier it will be to leverage hybrid opportunities and gain agility.

This solution has been consistently in the top of the IaaS market for the last 10 years.

The features which are most valuable are EC2, S3, and the networking functionality. EC2 allows me to provision new servers in minutes. S3 allows me infinite, redundant, easily accessible storage. The networking functionality (VPC, Security Groups, subnets, etc) allow me to create robust networks that make sense. Availability Zones allow me to design systems that are resistant to failure.

One example is our devops people can provision new products and systems almost immediately. They have set up an instance of GitHub Enterprise which has become our "source of truth." We have created proofs-of-concept in hours to days to test and evaluate new products across the enterprise. We have been able to leverage the agility of AWS to work faster and, in some cases, "fail fast" so we can get on to the next thing, which works.

Probably customer education and awareness, especially in the Cyber Security area. Many people are mistrustful of public cloud offerings or misunderstand how things work. We'd like to use AWS a lot more for various workloads, but gaining approval to do the things we want to do is currently our biggest roadblock. This isn't necessarily AWS's fault, but hopefully they have the capacity to gain acceptance in the broader Cyber Security community.

I have been using the product for two years.

Our main issues are learning how to deploy the most efficiently. We use Puppet and Jenkins to deploy. Other issues are employee awareness and training (which instance type to use, where to put things, which keys or security groups to use, etc).

No more than expected number of stability issues. We have the occasional EBS volume go down but we expect that.

None at all. AWS is infinitely scalable. Though on one occasion, our preferred instance type was not available in the Availability Zone we wanted it in.

Customer Service: AWS's customer service is ridiculously good. Back when I was admin of an account that only used a few hundred dollars a month, I got top-notch support from my account manager. He set up a couple of conference calls with Solution Architects with no hesitation. Now I preside over an account with significantly more usage, and the customer service remains great.Technical Support: AWS has some really smart people who can analyse my technical questions and give me a cogent, useful answer in short order. Their tech support is top-notch.

We have also use Terremark e-Cloud, but their cost and lack of features turned us off. I don't believe it was an either-or situation, though. We used both but are moving out of e-Cloud and are staying in AWS.

I was not with my current agency during the initial set-up phase.

The agency used a vendor team. I'm with that vendor team and I think we're pretty good, but I'm biased.

We don't calculate ROI, but AWS definitely helps us fulfull the agency's mission, which is how we measure things here.

I personally have evaluated Azure and Google Cloud Platform. Neither seemed as robust or mature as AWS.

Jump right in and make liberal use of AWS' technical support. Even now, I see people hesitating to ask and trying to figure it out for themselves. AWS is always ready to help. It's both complicated and useful enough that it's very easy to build things in a suboptimal way if you don't think things through and follow their guidance. So get all your hands-on staff to take the training they offer and don't be shy about asking for help. The training is big.

We use it to run workload applications, ERP systems, LISAP systems, etc. Everything is on the cloud, including our technical infrastructure for computing, storage, and networking. You can deploy applications like SAP or Oracle or run any website with applications on it.

You can build and release applications quickly with AWS instead of waiting for months to get the necessary hardware. That's the real benefit. The time-to-market for developing applications is much shorter. 

The most valuable thing about AWS is its ease of use and agility. You can quickly deploy it, and there are no upfront costs.

One problem is that the AWS public cloud doesn't have shared storage capabilities. The second thing is the cloud performance versus on-prem. I also have one suggestion that's solution-based. For example, if I want to deploy a medical solution, I would like to have a medical template, so I don't have to set up the infrastructure from scratch. They should provide everything in a pre-defined custom solution blueprint. 

We've been using AWS for four years.

AWS is generally reliable, but we've seen a lot of issues lately, so I would say they have some room for improvement. For example, if the user doesn't configure something correctly, it might fail. Even if AWS is reliable, that doesn't guarantee that all the users will be reliable. They need to make the design foolproof. 

AWS is a cloud provider, so the scalability is almost infinite. Our company currently has around 500 users on AWS. 

We have enterprise support, so they have different levels. If you have enterprise support, they have obligations they must meet. In our experience, Amazon support is above average. Sometimes we get good support. Sometimes we don't. I would rate it six out of 10. 

The AWS initial setup is seamless and straightforward. We set it up ourselves, and we have a 10-person team to manage and maintain the solution. Including design and planning, it took us about three months. 

I rate AWS seven out of 10. My advice is to watch out for the cost. A public cloud means you can use any resource, and there is no upfront cost. That means someone can use an expensive computing solution that might cost them tons of money. No one is holding your hand, so you can use it, but you need to be conscious of the cost before using the solution.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

We are primarily using the solution for evaluation purposes.

The functionality and the UI are both very straightforward.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The stability is good.

Technical support is quick to assist.

The pricing could be better. It's a bit expensive. 

The availability could be better.

I've been using the solution for about two years.

I haven't had any issues that would bring stability into question. there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I can't speak to the scaling. It's not something I've attempted. I just use it myself.

I can't say that there are plans to increase usage right now. 

Technical support has been great. They are helpful and responsive. They are very fast.

This is my first cloud product. I did not use something previously.

The initial implementation process is not difficult or complex. It's straightforward. It's basically having the computing power, the storage, S3, and the database.

The implementation was handled in-house. We did not use an external integrator, reseller, or consultant.

It's a costly product.

We pay a monthly licensing fee. It's below $100 a month.

I haven't done any evaluations or comparisons with other products.

We are customers.

We are using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)