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.
"The solution has very good Lambda functions within AWS."
"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."
"AWS is stable."
"It's a very flexible and customizable service"
"The features with Amazon AWS that I have found most valuable are its flexibility and high availability. These are the most important and attractive points for me."
"The most valuable feature is scalability, as it is very easy to scale."
"User friendly solution."
"The performance of AWS is excellent."
"Technical support has been extremely helpful."
"We have found the user interface to be intuitive. Microsoft is a master at UI."
"It is stable and collaborative."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure is that it is easy to use."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Azure for me are its ease of management, recoverable virtual machines with backup support, excellent customer support, and user-friendly interface."
"The solution has high stability."
"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."
"I'd like the solution to be more plug-and-play."
"They could lower the cost. The setup could also be easier."
"It should be easier to monitor the performance and generate analytic information so that we can determine how to provide better support for our clients."
"An integrated platform would make it easier for administrators to monitor and manage."
"It just needs to be improved from the security perspective."
"The price could be better."
"Its only cons are on the data warehouse side. AWS' data warehouse Redshift is not as good as it should be."
"It has the technical support features, but they need to be improved. It has lots of users, but they need to be managed accordingly."
"The solution could improve by having more security features around my data and the platform."
"Price could always be better. The features come in quickly, so we're comfortable with the feature set that is available to us."
"When we work with Microsoft Azure we deploy it in a hybrid system. We do many operations with the open stack and I used it for APIs connected to Microsoft Azure. The reduction is because those APIs and our tools that are required to connect are not for the Microsft Azure solution. It has a bit of complexity, nothing to do with Microsoft Azure as a CSP."
"Overall, the solution is good but there are some minor technical issues that can be resolved."
"The platform should be available at the same price worldwide."
"Pricing is one area where Azure has room for improvement. There should be some due consideration. Azure has solved some issues with pricing from the development team's standpoint, but it is still quite costly. They should also offer a trial period for the individual platform solutions. I think that would be pretty handy for the developers."
"It would be nice to have faster support."
"I haven't checked the console for some time, however, compared to the AWS console, the interaction console of the web part, the web services, it's not so easy."
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 Google Firebase, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), 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.