Amazon AWS Reviews

We use Amazon AWS to store and run cloud-based applications in the cloud, such as databases, virtual machines, and dockers.

The price could be reduced.

It is difficult to hand over legacy applications when migrating them to the cloud. It's a challenge.

I have been working with Amazon AWS for approximately eight years. It's been a long time.

We are working with the latest version.

We have no issues with the stability of Amazon AWS.

Amazon AWS is a scalable solution.

We are providing applications at a global level. This solution is used by 1,000 users.

The technical support is good.

The installation can be challenging when migrating legacy applications to the cloud.

Most of the time, I require the assistance of some technicians.

It is very expensive, you have to be very cautious.

Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.

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

I would rate Amazon AWS an eight out of ten.

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.

Amazon AWS has a better portfolio. They have an impressive technology and service portfolio.

The invoicing procedure of Amazon AWS needs to be improved. It can be difficult to manage.

I have used Amazon AWS within the last 12 months.

The technical support of Amazon AWS is good.

I have used Oracle previously, and I don't see any difference between Amazon AWS and Oracle from the stability and availability point of view.

Amazon AWS is a bit more expensive than Oracle.

I rate Amazon AWS an eight out of ten.

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. 

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.

We use the solution for many use cases, such as application hosting, virtual desktops, and disaster recovery.

Customers don't need to calculate what their future requirements need to be. They can start using Amazon AWS no matter what the requirements are and if they increase size it can support them. By using the solution they can reduce their infrastructure, which helps them reduce the cost and of their infrastructure.

This solution is used as the basic requirement for any virtual machines use cases, the storage is used for each use case.

I have been using Amazon AWS for a year and a half.

The solution is stable. We have global customers on this platform. If you see the past records of Amazon AWS, there has been rarely any downtime or something happening.

Amazon AWS is scalable., there are different tools that help to maintain the scalability of the solution. Many of the tools are free of cost. There is no restriction on how many people can use this solution.

We have 500 customers in the Mumbai region and we plan to increase usage.

There is vendor technical support but it is not required if they are taking our support. The customers can directly purchase their support. Our small customers, are purchasing AWS support and they are pleased with the support.

The initial setup difficulty depends on the customer's environment. If it's a simple single virtual machine, then it's a simple setup. If it's an SAP-type workload on AWS, then it is somewhat complicated.

If it is a small single-server implementation, it will take one day to deploy. Otherwise, from an application perspective, your team needs to handle everything and it could take beyond 15 days to one month.

We have our own team that does the deployment.

The price of the Virtual Desktop service from Amazon AWS could improve, it is more expensive than competitors. The pricing model we are using is pay-as-you-go. You only pay for what you use.

The technical support from Amazon is extra and there are more than 200 services you can use that has a cost.

My advice for those thinking about the implementation of Amazon AWS is to start using it, do not have fear to use these services. If you know how it works and you receive the right support, it always helps to reduce the cost and headache of IT.

I rate Amazon AWS an eight out of ten.

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 use this solution to run some of our workloads.

We like the on-demand pricing.

The ease of use is the biggest benefit.

They deliver in terms of features.

In the next release, I would like to see better pricing.

I have been using Amazon AWS for almost a year.

I am using the latest version.

It's a stable solution.

This is a scalable product. In my organization, I have 15 to 20 people who are using it.

I don't see any reason why they would not continue using this solution.

I don't have any experience with technical support.

We did not use another solution previously. We started using AWS.

It's all in the cloud, so there is really no installation.

What attracted us was the on-demand pricing. It's a pay-per-use model.

It is costly, but when you use the pay-per-use model, it is cheaper.

The price could be cheaper, but it's better than what is available.

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

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.