Amazon Elastic Container Service Reviews

The solution is to compute instances. Basically, it's a debit. It's a host. For example, if you need a computer that you want to install your enterprise application, instead of buying a server on-premise, you can spin up an instance online.

I like the per-second billing. Every second I use is billed. Any other time I am not using it, it's not billed, so it's better. It’s cheaper. It's good.

It’s easy to set up.

The solution is stable.

The solution can still be expensive, even with per-second billing.

We’ve used the solution for the last year.

The solution is extremely stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn’t crash or freeze.

It is very scalable.

We started with AWS this year. We have one client so far.

Technical support is perfect.

The solution is very straightforward. The initial setup is very cheap also.

It's very easy to replace. You don't need a lot of teams to do it. One person can do everything.

We are integrators and can handle the initial setup.

You pay for only the time you have used the on-demand service. For example, if you are using software that does a lot of computation or analyzing your data for your company, you only pay for that time spent analyzing that data. The rest of the time, you don't pay for it.

Although I like the per second billing, the cost of it, even if you are being billed per second, it is still higher than competitor products.

We are integrators. We use a lot of Amazon products.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

I would recommend a competitor's product. I would recommend, for example, Oracle Compute Instances or Oracle Cloud. I wouldn't recommend AWS EC2 due to the cost. It can get out of control. For example, once I left my EC2 on for a few days with some services running, and in three days I lost a thousand dollars. It's quite costly if you are not very careful.

It lets us manage a cluster of containers in the cloud without really having to worry about managing the platform. We're currently serving around 50 customers.

Amazon ECS reduces the overhead required to manage a Kubernetes cluster relative to on-premise deployment.

The Kubernetes platform is managed by AWS, so we only have to use those containers that we need to run our applications. What I really like about Amazon ECS is its simplicity and ease of use. Amazon also has really good security. They have certifications from all the security standards and governing agencies.

In the next release, they could add some customization options for high computer workloads.

We've been using Amazon ECS since 2017, so about four years now.

Amazon ECS is absolutely stable. Very, very stable.

Amazon ECS has great scalability and performance.

Amazon support is awesome. We've had no issues.

Setup was simple and very easy. There's nothing complex about the ECS itself. It may take longer to set up if the applications you are using are more complex and require more customization. We use a team of around 50 engineers for deployment and support.

All of our contractors are on a yearly license.

I would rate Amazon ECS nine out of 10. Amazon is amazing. I give them full marks all around.

We are using Amazon Elastic Container Service for Docker-based configuration. Previously, we had to manually go into an instance and then issue all Docker agents and instances. Now, we are using Amazon ECS to automate all of our Docker containers.

We are deploying our microservices architecture in the ECS container install. We are using ECS as a service.

It has an Auto Scaling group feature. We can use this feature to have an Auto Scaling group to specify a minimum and maximum count for all types of configurations. Based on the specified values, Amazon Elastic Container Service scales the required CPU environmental metrics.

Sometimes, the instances fail under the ECS container cluster, and we have to manually go and find out the black sheep in the ECS container instance. 

We had an issue earlier where one of the instances under the ECS container cluster went down, and we were not able to identify that instance. The instance got terminated, but a new instance did not come up. Therefore, I had to manually get that instance up. It could be optimized better. In production, we normally cannot sustain such things. It can be optimized in terms of instances, durability, and serving the requests of customers.

We have been dealing with Amazon Elastic Container Service for three to four years. 

It's good. Our platform stability has rated from 97%, 98% to 99.99%. We are pretty much happy with the stability of Amazon Elastic Container Service. We have been allocated a relationship manager, and he will be more than happy to offer all the technical specs and the building details. We didn't find any issues as of now.

It's scalable. We haven't found any issues as of now in our organization. It's good. 

It's very good. We'll be getting timely updates about the new features and objects available. They will know how we are deploying and whether we want any technical support. If you're going for a long, big bang approach of releasing the product as a whole, they'll be warming out ELBs. We don't know how ELB warming works out. They'll provide some extra help. So, technical support is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward. We'll be using AWS CLI commands for initializing the cluster. It is not hard to set up. It is pretty straightforward. 

We deployed it ourselves. We have four DevOps engineers and four AWS engineers for a team of 150 developers. We have enough for the complete platform.

I don't exactly deal with the pricing. We have a separate Infra team that deals with the pricing. They are more into the scalability part. 

Based on our requirements, the pricing will increase. The automation teams will test some of the benefits to see how can we can optimize the cost. They'll have a security manager connection and some alerts based upon the usage to see how to reduce the building cost based upon the installations. 

I would recommend Amazon Elastic Container Service. They have a big R&D team, and they'll be providing good features for customers. I think AWS has been pretty good on this R&D thing. I would like to appreciate their team, which continuously looks into customer satisfaction and comes up with a new bunch of services every time. They're moving to a customer-centric approach. 

We aren't looking into specific new features. We are in the testing phase currently. If they are releasing some new features, we should definitely use them based on our requirements.

I would rate Amazon Elastic Container Service an eight out of ten.

The tool is good for small and self-container execution. 

We test POCs with Amazon Elastic Container Service to understand the behavior of a feature in a containerizing environment. 

The tool's most valuable feature is the ability to create revisions on the configurations. 

Amazon Elastic Container Service should simplify its management. It can be difficult for someone who doesn't have much experience with the tool. Also, the tool needs to add the ability to manage networks.  

I have been working with the solution for six years. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate Amazon Elastic Container Service's scalability a seven out of ten. 

Amazon Elastic Container Service's deployment was straightforward. 

We have seen good ROI. 

Amazon Elastic Container Service's price is good. 

I rate the product a seven out of ten. 

We use the product for website and email database hosting. 

The solution is expensive compared to other alternatives like Azure. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

The tool is straightforward. 

The product is scalable. My company has five to ten users for the tool. 

The tool's setup is straightforward. We have around three to four people to manage the tool's deployment and maintenance. 

The tool's licensing is monthly. 

I would rate the overall product a nine out of ten. 

I've primarily used the solution for web hosting. It can also be used for development purposes. 

It's very easy to deploy.

The solution is simple to access.

The stability has been very good.

It's a product that can scale as needed. 

There is nothing I would like to change about the solution at this time. 

The pricing could be a bit better. The Amazon Cloud expense can get high.

I've been using the solution for one month.

The stability has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale. It's not a problem.

Right now, I'm the only person who uses the solution. 

I've never used technical support. I can't speak to how their services are. 

We did use a different solution. It was an on-premises product.

We have found the product easy to deploy. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

In terms of the implementation, for the object storage, the installation is mostly configuration. Once you buy the Amazon Cloud, this feature is available, so the only thing you'll do is you'll need to choose which type of E-service you're going to use.

The solution can be handled internally, or a company can install it with the help of an integrator.

The pricing depends on the region in which you're using it. Most probably if you're using it in the UAE or South Africa, the price may get lower.

I'd recommend the solution to others.

I'd rate it an eight out of ten. We have been happy with it. 

We have used various Amazon services including EC2 buckets for storage and the container services for deployment of the application. I'm an integrator and we are customers of Amazon EC2 Container Service. 

I think this is a good solution with good documentation and is very straightforward to use. 

We faced challenges with AWS and I feel the support could have been better - more timely with their response, more knowledgeable staff and more customer friendly. As a partner, I'd like to see a response from the appropriate team and know that they'd help us throughout. AWS is in partnership with other product vendors in developing the connectors and could have given a direction to another vendor, Tableau, for example, because when we try to use those connectors to hook up the data into cloud, it was challenging and a very difficult exercise to go through with AWS in order to resolve the problem. Both sides tell us it's not their problem.

We have used this solution for over a year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

The support could be more straightforward and faster, and should provide an insight into what could be causing the issue we are having and how to solve it. At the end of the day there are boundaries here. As a system integrator, I definitely need help from the core platform to extend my services to the customer, so that both the platform customer and myself get the benefit, otherwise one of the pieces of the puzzle gets lost.

The initial setup is quite simple and doesn't take much time, I was able to do it myself. I installed it for one of my customers and they have around 200 users. There is no plan to increase use at this stage but we have credits from AWS, and we're using them. Once they've expired, we have to extend to continue to use AWS.

I would recommend this solution. 

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We use this product for our workflows. We launch an ECS cluster on-demand to run a job and shut down the cluster after the job is completed.

The containerization is a valuable feature for us. You pay only for your use. For example, a job takes one hour, you only pay for one hour of the container. It's really scalable for the cost.

This is a really good tool, but it's complex because you need to understand how it works to get the best of this tool. It would help if things were simplified so it could be more user friendly.

I've been using this solution for six months. We are Amazon customers.  

We haven't had any problems with stability. 

The solution is definitely scalable. 

The technical support is very expensive and we don't have an agreement for that. We just use them when necessary. 

The initial setup is somewhat complicated, but that may have been more about the skills we had internally. We needed to improve our skill set before using this tool, and that's why we took some time to implement it. Deployment was carried out internally and I'm the only person in the company using this solution. 

There's no license fee, it's pay as you go and the fee is reasonable.

I would recommend this solution for anyone thinking to implement it. 

I rate this product an eight out of 10.