Amazon CloudFront Reviews

I utilize Amazon CloudFront for hosting and deploying customer web applications, which are connected to a database. It is used for website content delivery, video streaming, and API acceleration for dynamic content delivery.

Amazon CloudFront optimizes performance and reduces travel time for data requests, improving our system's efficiency. It has also helped us achieve a ten to fifteen percent reduction in data transfer cost.

The solution improves performance by reducing latency and cost. It also has automatic scaling, global reach, lower data transfer costs, and easy setup and configuration, which I find extremely valuable. 

Additionally, integrating CloudFront with other AWS security services provides robust protection against DDoS attacks.

Amazon CloudFront could improve by making it easier to integrate with components from different cloud providers. There are no specific features missing that come to mind right now.

I have been working with Amazon CloudFront for around two to three years.

I have not experienced any performance or stability issues with Amazon CloudFront thus far.

Scalability is handled within the AWS network, allowing automatic scaling to manage increased traffic and ensure consistent performance during spikes in demand.

The technical support service aligns with agreed timelines. Responses are timely and come with actionable solutions. I would rate the support around eight out of ten.

Positive

I have worked with CloudFlare and the Azure content delivery network before using Amazon CloudFront.

The initial setup is straightforward, with steps like selecting the origin, applying encryption, and selecting edge locations. Deployment depends on data volume.

Amazon CloudFront has shown measurable benefits, such as a thirty percent increase in website requests compared to the previous year, and a reduction in data transfer costs for clients.

I find the pricing for Amazon CloudFront to be reasonable. It reduces costs for request handling.

I have evaluated CloudFlare and Azure content delivery networks before choosing Amazon CloudFront.

I would recommend Amazon CloudFront to organizations that host their applications and resources on AWS, particularly for industries like e-commerce, online shopping, and gaming.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the product to deliver our content. We can use it in end-to-end projects.

The solution has good security features. It has all the features we need. The solution provides more security to our applications. We can integrate the tool easily with other solutions if we follow the documentation properly.

Sometimes, the server goes down automatically. We do not know the reason yet.

I have been using the solution for the past two years.

The product is stable. It gives access to all customers.

I rate the product’s scalability an eight out of ten.

Whenever we contact the support team, the team solves the issue within a day. They respond on time. They put a lot of effort into solving our problems.

Positive

If we do not know anything about AWS, the setup is difficult. If we try to learn the tool, everything will be easier than on other cloud platforms like Azure, IBM, and GCP. AWS is easy to learn. The documentation is very clear. It provides step-by-step information for everything.

Kibana is a tool that is used for open-source data visualization. It is difficult to find information on Azure and GCP’s documentation. Everything is interlinked on AWS on the same page. AWS is one of the best platforms.

We monitor our environment using AWS. I like the EC2 instance. We also use Amazon GuardDuty. I do not have access to the production environment. GuardDuty and AWS Security Hub provide CSPM services to streamline security with automated and continuous security best practices. It provides NACLs and load-balancing features. I will recommend the product to others because it provides high security and high availability worldwide. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

The front end of most of our websites is by CloudFront. It works as a CDN. More than the CDN and the performance, we use Amazon CloudFront for its security. It frontends most of our sites, so we don't have to expose it directly.

Amazon CloudFront is a robust solution. We can use the solution to block certain countries. Since it frontends our S3, we don't directly expose or make public all the media files. We route it through Amazon CloudFront. The tool integrates with AWS's WAF (Web Application Firewall), which adds a lot of L7 security for us.

Those are the primary things that we look at. We can use the solution to host things on EC2 instances or S3 buckets. You can choose what to cache and what not to cache. That feature allows you to work with policies, and we use it heavily. It's very easy to integrate Amazon CloudFront with other AWS services. The solution is very easy to use.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for more than five years.

We haven’t faced any issues with the solution’s stability.

The solution’s initial setup is very easy.

The solution has improved the performance of our applications. Since we run websites, we usually block certain countries because we get a lot of DDoS attacks and hits from them. Although it's a CDN service, we look at Amazon CloudFront more from a security standpoint than the CDN. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for content delivery and website acceleration. We use it because AWS and CloudFront are under one environment. It requires AWS configuration.

We didn't face any issues. The AWS environment was very helpful in terms of integration.

The solution could be more simplified for new users. It could be more user-friendly. Also, support needs to be improved.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for more than a month.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is pretty scalable. It works as we expected. We are setting up this solution for a bank with 200 staff employees and more than 5000 users.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven to eight out of ten.

It is hard to get technical support from Amazon. They have launched in the Philippines around June, but it's very limited.

Neutral

We have DigitalOcean but we use AWS because it is cheap.

The initial setup is moderate in AWS but difficult in Azure.

I rate the product’s pricing a six to seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

My primary use case for Amazon CloudFront involves utilizing it as a CDN service from AWS. It is used mainly for e-commerce websites and for clients who have critical applications that require faster loading of their mobile applications and websites. 

I've worked with clients in the e-commerce industry who seek to load pages and products faster and in an efficient manner. 

Additionally, I've supported EdTech clients who use videos on their site and conduct live classes; CloudFront aids in delivering content quickly.

CloudFront has allowed organizations to enhance their applications and websites' overall performance, significantly impacting user experience and customer retention. 

It helps regain customers by ensuring that websites load quickly, preventing potential users from switching to competitors' sites. This enhanced user experience translates to higher customer trust and retention, assisting in achieving business goals.

One of the most valuable features of CloudFront is the reduced latency due to its edge locations, which results in a very fast delivery of data. It also offers encryption capabilities and DDoS attack protection, which can be monitored and managed efficiently. 

Another highlight is its user-friendly nature, particularly for developers and DevOps teams, due to complete APIs and arrangements, which simplify integration within applications and websites.

CloudFront could improve in the areas of auto-scaling, reports, and insights. End clients desire more detailed reports to understand usage patterns better. 

There's an opportunity to modernize modules to support organizations completely on cloud with AI and ML solutions, making it more robust and flexible for contemporary technological demands.

I have been working with CloudFront for approximately one or two years.

During my experience with CloudFront, I encountered only a few instances of downtime, not exceeding one or two minutes per occurrence, and it has not been a major issue overall.

CloudFront supports scalability through its auto-scaling feature, using container services like Kubernetes, crucial for handling unpredictable traffic spikes. It is highly beneficial for content delivery and offers significant support during major events.

While there are occasional technical queries regarding latency from multiple data sources, interactions with AWS technical support have been rare due to the minimal technical issues faced.

Positive

I have experience with Azure CDN, which offers a more flexible pricing model for end clients. However, CloudFront is slightly faster than Azure CDN.

I am not involved in the initial setup or deployment directly. That said, I understand CloudFront is user-friendly.

I am not part of the deployment or implementation team. I am more involved in sales, account management, and consulting.

Clients who have used CloudFront, particularly in the e-commerce sector, have seen an increase in profitability. They have acquired new customers and experienced approximately ten to fifteen percent improvements in their ROI.

The pricing of CloudFront is generally reasonable, offering a pay-as-you-go model with a twelve-month free trial for smaller websites. There is room for improvement, especially considering competition from other providers.

I have considered Microsoft Azure CDN.

I recommend CloudFront for any business, application, or website that aims to enhance end-user experience by providing fast content delivery. It is particularly beneficial for e-commerce but can also assist any content-focused endeavor.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Amazon CloudFront for various purposes based on our needs and budget considerations. For instance, if we have live content like static images or videos that should be quickly accessible on our website, the tool is handy. It enables us to deliver content swiftly to end users. The cache features also reduce the need to access the origin server, optimizing our website speed.

Previously, we were directly fetching videos from our Amazon S3 URL, resulting in slow image loading and high latency on our landing page. To address this, we explored Amazon CloudFront features with edge locations to improve content delivery speed. We integrated Amazon S3 with Amazon CloudFront, and now all content is served through the product, leading to better optimization than our previous setup.

The beneficial feature for the entire AWS community is the presence of edge location servers. These servers are strategically located in multiple locations, allowing efficient content delivery from the nearest server. 

We opted for the tool because we already used the Amazon S3 bucket. Since Amazon CloudFront is an AWS feature, integrating it with our S3 bucket was easy. Transferring data from one source to another within AWS is straightforward. The process might have been more time-consuming if we had chosen a different CDN provider. Amazon CloudFront, a managed service by AWS, offers an easy integration solution.

The solution can benefit from expanding its data center and server locations to multiple places for smoother content delivery with even lower latency. The latency we experience is sufficient for our needs, and we are doing well. However, if they expand their locations in the future, it could be a positive factor. Its competitors have multiple data and server locations. 

I have been working with the product for five years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. Customization is easy with the product. 

I rate Amazon CloudFront's scalability a ten out of ten. I use it 24/7. 

AWS technical support can't be fully assessed at the moment. In the basic support plan, users have the option to open basic support tickets, and AWS provides choices for responses through calls or live chat. To access advanced technical support, users need to subscribe to premium plans. Its response time is quick. Though they give a timeframe of 24 hours, support is immediately initiated.  

Positive

I have used Akamai CDN before. I chose the product since it integrates easily with my internal system. It is widely used and comes with rich documentation and resources. 

The tool's deployment is easy. For inexperienced resources, I rate deployment difficulty an eight out of ten. For me, it's nine point five out of ten. The product comes with a vast amount of resources and documentation. 

We had a deadline of one and a half months. However, we could go into production within four weeks, i.e., 25 days. Deployment includes quality assurance and staging processes. One resource is enough to handle the deployment process. The person responsible for deploying the solution should know CI/CD processes. They should understand security compliance, gate methodologies, and the functioning of code push and pull. Familiarity with Webhooks and the dashboard of AWS CodePipeline or check kits is necessary.

Once the setup is done, the tool doesn't require frequent changes. Two resources are needed for maintenance, and one would be enough later. 

We have seen an ROI of 45 percent with the tool's use. 

I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. The licensing follows a pay-as-you-go model. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I primarily use it to serve static content and to provide an additional call drive to the API Gateway.

It is very effective in enhancing our application's global reach with its distributed network across geographical locations. It has improved both the performance and reach of our applications.

The most beneficial feature is capturing the static data, which is crucial for our operations.

There is a bit of a workaround required for custom domain management on CloudFront. Mapping the domain involves some complexity with the domain provider, and it's tricky when doing it for the first time.

I have been using CloudFront for five years.

Stability is good. It does not face significant issues or break down.

Scalability is good, there are no issues observed.

Customer support is rated six out of ten due to knowledge-related aspects.

Neutral

The initial setup is not straightforward and requires some prior knowledge and experience.

CloudFront is relatively cheap and worth the money.

One needs to be aware of how data caching works, especially when trying to refresh data, as it involves cache invalidation, which requires some management.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I use the solution to expose fact files to have more latency. We expose the front end of applications using the product.

We can personalize a lot of things inside CDN.

The product should be more intuitive. It should provide better descriptions of the fields. It can improve the cache and have some customization inside cache configurations. While the product is easy to understand for a developer, it is not so easy for a DevOps engineer like me.

Support is good. Once, I wanted to increase the response time and did not understand which feature to use. So I requested support to increase the timeout. At that moment, it was intuitive because I searched the Internet and understood the use case.

Positive

The ease of setup depends upon the use cases. If you are using the most common use case, it's not difficult to set up. We can put our application in origin. We can put an S3 bucket as the origin and research and request from there. You can limit the request to be private inside the product and S3. When we need to go a little bit deep, like when we need to customize some things related to cache, the setup is not intuitive.

We do not need to maintain the product after deployment and calibration. We customize the information from our application in the product and choose the use case. We do not need to worry about maintaining the solution after that.

Cloudflare is more simple, but it is more focused on other use cases. Most companies I work with use 90% CloudFront and 10% Cloudflare.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.