AWS Systems Manager Reviews

My company just manages and deploys resources on AWS for our clients. All the resources on AWS are as per our company's client requirements.

With AWS Systems Manager, our company can patch our systems directly from it, so we don't need to patch our systems manually. If there are a lot of servers, like 100 servers, we can patch directly with AWS Systems Manager. Also, if any key or password is lost, our company can manage that from AWS Systems Manager.

The fact that AWS Systems Manager takes time to complete the patching process, makes it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using AWS Systems Manager for a year. My company has a partnership with Amazon.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight to nine out of ten. Sometimes, it fails to patch the systems, and it takes a longer time to provide stability, owing to which I have to do the activities multiple times for the same thing.

Considering that AWS Systems Manager takes time to complete the patching process, I rate the tool's scalability as seven to eight out of ten.

The technical support my company receives from AWS is based on the tickets that we have open with them. Compared to the other support services I have received, the help from the technical team at AWS is really good. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

Sometimes, I try to patch manually, so I have not used other services. I use AWS System Manager.

The product's initial setup phase is neither hard nor easy, making it a process of medium intensity. You need to have some knowledge and experience to complete the product's initial setup phase.

For the product's deployment phase, you need to manage the policies, so it takes around 20 to 30 minutes to complete, especially since it is a one-time process.

I recommend the product to others who plan to use it since it is a really good solution. If there are many servers that a person has to patch and servers to manage, then such a person needs something that can be helpful.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We are running production workloads in multiple AWS accounts.

It is native AWS. We use Fleet Manager to access our EC2s and things like that.

The AWS UIs are not the most intuitive. Also, the usability needs room for improvement.

As for a feature, maybe alert the inventory manager to see when an inventory scan you can do by the Systems Manager identifies new things.

I have been working with this solution for two years.

We sometimes have trouble with clipboard sharing, battery drain, and other issues when we try to remote into a desktop using AWS Systems Manager Fleet Manager.

I would rate the stability of this solution a seven out of ten.

Its ability to scale is good. In our company, 20 users use the solution.

I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is pretty simple. We did it in-house.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The pricing is good.

I would rate the pricing a ten out of ten.

We prefer to use the native tooling of AWS rather than deploy other things inside the environment, which is why we stick with it.

I would surely recommend this solution.

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

AWS Services Manager is used to upload the image. And if there's something wrong, we use it to look at the logs and diagnose problems. We sometimes use Services Manager to redeploy and deal with scaling issues and configuration—like for example, what kind of memory needs to be allocated. Things like that.

We need this service to publish our API. Different partners of the company use the API to get information. My company is a publisher, and they just had all their books in a hard copy. Then they went digital to compete with the rest of the world. Once they digitized everything, my company had to provide that information to the partners so they could consume that information and use it in different ways. So this solution does put the rest of the API on the cloud so the partners can access it.

Systems Manager has a feature where it analyzes the logs and gives us a performance overview in the form of a graph. We know when it's taking up more resources and when there are spikes, so we can predict the usability. If there are unexpected spikes, then we can do a root cause analysis to see what's going wrong at this bottleneck.

The automation functions of Systems Manager need improvement. For example, we formerly used third-party products to analyze the log, give us information, and find bottlenecks. Systems Manager could provide more tools that conduct this analysis, so we don't have to do it ourselves. The other thing it needs is better integration with different solutions to make the whole deployment process a little easier.

I've used AWS Systems Manager for around three years or so. Before that, I'd used it a few years on and off. When I was at my previous job, I used it for around three years. For the past six months, I've been working for Target. 

Services Manager is quite reliable. 

Scalability is one of Services Manager's most valuable aspects. It scales up along with demand.  

Support is one of the weak areas. Sometimes, they weren't as responsive as I would like. This only happened occasionally, not all of the time.

As far as the basic setup goes, it's relatively simple. We read the documents, and then everything was straightforward. The documentation is good.

Price is one of the biggest pain points with Services Manager. The pricing shoots up if there's a surge in demand. There needs to be a better alert system for the pricing that sends notifications with suggestions about what we should do to avoid these surges

I would rate AWS Services Manager an eight. I say eight because I'm not sure if there's anything better now that there are so many solutions. If you're considering adopting AWS Services Manager, you should consider all the alternatives before deciding on one. Deploy a simple application on all the leading solutions and see which works the best. In addition to looking at performance, you have to evaluate all solutions based on essential features like log analysis and notifications. It would help if you had a table rating every provider according to these criteria and then made that call.