We compared Microsoft Azure and Amazon AWS across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: When comparing Microsoft Azure and Amazon AWS, Azure is praised for its manageable setup, support, and documentation. It offers a wide range of features, an intuitive interface, and strong integration with other Microsoft solutions. However, it may be challenging for beginners and lacks user-friendliness in certain aspects. On the other hand, AWS provides quick deployment, extensive features, and strong integration capabilities. Users appreciate its scalability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness. However, some users find AWS pricing to be high and suggest improvements in areas like user interface, security, and billing.
"Amazon AWS has many merits, in terms of scalability, stability, and availability. I have loved using this tool."
"It integrates well."
"The technical support is good."
"There are many valuable features, I find the EMR in the platform easy to use and to learn."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The capacity to grow dynamically based on our needs is most valuable. We can increase resources dynamically. It is also very reliable and fast to implement."
"Some of the valuable features I have found to be the virtual server is easy to understand, a secure environment, and AWS has a fast community for finding solutions to problems you might be facing."
"I like that is very easy to use and that it's flexible."
"It's a reasonably priced solution."
"We have not had any issues with the performance, or the stability."
"The solution is very simple to set up."
"It was very user-friendly when setting up the virtual machines and console. It was an easy task for my team to create virtual servers and start replications."
"One of the best features is the last package security of upgrades to Microsoft Azure. Also, we like Azure's compatibility with other operating systems."
"I think the single sign-on functionality and the ease with which you can deposit things on the cloud have been valuable. Azure has very robust security functionalities and authentication features, which come with mobility, along with backup and credential checks."
"Azure offers broad compatibility with both structured and unstructured data. For example, we use PostgreSQL for storing Azure's official data and manage various types of data, including tabular and image data, accommodating the storage of all data types we handle. So, in many ways, Azure simplified the data storage and management needs."
"It comes with a lot of ready-made studies that we can connect with other existing Microsoft applications, for example, Office, Outlook, Chatline, and OneDrive. Everything is behind the scenes running with Azure. It's easy to build the connectors."
"Requires better integration with other cloud products."
"AWS should provide even more support and engagement to accelerate the adoption of new services and features."
"The solution could always be further improved on the commercial side of things. Amazon Web Services are not cheap. It would be ideal if it was less expensive for the customer."
"One thing that Azure offers that I think is good is Migrate appliance. So, Azure has a migrate appliance that allows you to run against workloads to determine the cost, preparedness, and scalability. I haven't found a similar feature in AWS. That kind of service would be great on AWS too if you could point it to the data center."
"Amazon AWS could be improved by lowering the general storage price."
"I think that the interface could be improved."
"While feasible, custom configuration will be more time consuming than standard."
"AWS could be improved with more integration, but I can see that they're developing these features and working very hard on their platform."
"Price could always be better. The features come in quickly, so we're comfortable with the feature set that is available to us."
"Azure ARM console can be a bit overwhelming at the beginning."
"Technical support needs to be better."
"They should include a cybersecurity feature to improve the protection of the systems. They could do better in terms of the pricing model. Its price keeps on changing. Their technical support can also be better."
"The response time and stability of Microsoft Azure need to be improved."
"Maybe Microsoft could improve its monitoring around the networking."
"We had issues with the Mobile Service ORM and the Azure SQL Database (cloud version of SQL Server). At times, the queries that are created automatically from the ORM mapping are not very well optimized for this database and that can lead to performance and stability issues. On occasion, the connection manager from the ORM does not handle the database connections very well."
"The security of the solution could always be much better."
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 250 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 299 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. 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 Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, OpenShift, SAP Cloud Platform, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and Pivotal Cloud Foundry, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Google Firebase, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, SAP Cloud Platform and Alibaba Cloud. See our Amazon AWS vs. Microsoft Azure 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.