We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Newly introduced features advance capabilities."
"The product's scalability is good."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"Amazon AWS has good performance and easy management."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"Setting up AWS was pretty easy. It was straightforward to set up, and it took us a year to develop and migrate our mobile banking solution to the AWS cloud. Our migration experience was quite positive."
"I like that is very easy to use and that it's flexible."
"The technical support is good."
"The technical support is good, they have been responsive and helpful."
"The most valuable features are the manageability and the user interface."
"It's a cloud, so it is easy to access anywhere."
"The simple infrastructure of the service is very useful."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"In terms of features, upgradeability to the latest version of Oracle suites has been a good feature. All we have to do is just patching or an upgrade, it's pretty easy. Then, it gets regularly updated. That's what I like about it."
"A good feature of the solution is the clear roadmap it provides specifically from Oracle to PC, there are good options to use OTP."
"This is a highly available and scalable solution that can host both modern and legacy on-premises applications."
"Some features may be better in Azure or some other portal. AWS could add some of those features."
"The interface could be improved."
"AWS support could be better."
"Their metadata management in AWS needs improvement."
"AWS could be more scalable."
"Many of our clients prefer in-house cloud rather than the application data sitting in the infrastructure owned and managed by Amazon."
"The use of this tool should be extended to Google and Apple operating systems."
"An easier way to determine estimated costs quickly would be helpful."
"The packaging part of the software needs improvement. It lacks customization abilities for users. Giving them VMs for machine learning or running their own programs like Azure and Amazon, for example. Things like scalability based on the requirement of the tools. Oracle still lacks these kinds of things. For example, if you need a VM from Oracle, you need to pay for a monthly fee. They started developing containership but it's still at the initial stage and it's still lacking. They also need to develop integration between packages."
"The main issue for the clients is that they need to understand the credit payments because if it's a currency that's not dollars or euros, Oracle will always convert it into credits and that's not easy for the customer to understand at the beginning."
"Oracle Cloud's price is very high."
"The solution could always be less expensive."
"Since our Oracle products are on premise we cannot get the premier Oracle products."
"The product features related to the manufacturing domain must be improved."
"With the Oracle Cloud Platform, they have to give first some proper documentation with a step-by-step process. Then the customer is able to use it properly. Nowadays, the Oracle Cloud Platform requires lots of floor work."
"I would like more technical expertise."
More Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 250 reviews while Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is ranked 3rd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 91 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Reliable with good security but is difficult to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) writes "Cost-effective and can be used to host OIC and APEX". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform and Pivotal Cloud Foundry, whereas Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, IBM Public Cloud, OpenShift and Alibaba Cloud. See our Amazon AWS vs. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) report.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) vendors and best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
There are many points for comparison between AWS and OCI that greatly affect cost and features: network egress (AWS recently reduced cost to compete with OCI), compute cost (OCI has flexible shapes while AWS uses fixed EC2 capacities), security (OCI compartments has no easy equivalent in AWS), HA within Availability domain (OCI has fault domains, AWS has no equivalent), VMWare capability (vendor managed only in AWS, customer managed in OCI) to name a few. In general, AWS has many features for building new apps on latest dev platforms (e.g. its developer oriented) while OCI may not have as many dev features (i.e. they are always catching up) but is geared more for production, enterprise apps (e.g. considerations for security, scalability and fault tolerance have been there from the start).
But since you are considering packaged Enterprise apps such as Ellucian Banner ERP and Peoplesoft, in general OCI has more to offer than AWS (which is more for developers for new, custom apps). There are docs to deploy Ellucian Banner ERP in OCI (there's a reference architecture) while Peoplesoft, being an Oracle product, has either a full-blown SaaS solution aside from a reference architecture for infra on OCI - these you cannot easily find in AWS. Also, I presume these apps are using an Oracle database backend and there are many benefits to moving an Oracle db to OCI (DB cloud service, autonomous DB, scalability using RAC on fault domains, BYOL credits twice CPUs vs divide by 2 for AWS, varied Data Guard possibilities).