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.
"I like ETL, the EC2 platform, and Route 53. These features are a great complement to the basic infrastructure of any company. The AWS platform has many features, but the fundamental cloud infrastructure is the most important."
"The features that I have found most valuable are their compute and their Relational Database Service."
"Friendly console for implementation."
"It's very easy to use."
"I like the auto-scaling functionality and compliance requirements, whichever they are requesting."
"It scales well and is flexible."
"The solution offers a low footprint. We don't have to come up with a data center ourselves. We basically don't have to own any hardware. We just rent a slice of their platform and we have everything we need."
"The reason I like AWS is that they have a large market share and a large presence. When it comes to our use case, a big positive is that MuleSoft and AWS are working together very well. So instead of competing against each other, they're meshing together."
"Azure is stable. I don't have any problems with it."
"It is quick and easy to deploy. It is flexible, and we can deploy a resource anytime. We like and prefer the pay-as-you-go model."
"The tool’s stability is good."
"The main benefit of Microsoft Azure is that it is cloud-based. We are using Microsoft Visual Studio for our code and it is tightly integrated with Microsoft Azure. Additionally, the solution is user-friendly."
"In general, the entire suite of PaaS is valuable. It enables a true breakdown of IT siloes and allows an organization to embrace DevOps."
"We are satisfied with the technical support."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of use."
"The scalability is the most unique feature. Whenever our user count is high, and utilization of our application results in high use of resources, Microsoft Azure automatically scales our application so that users can access it without any issues or errors. Microsoft Azure gives you the flexibility to scale your applications up and down at any moment. It is quite easy and impressive."
"While AWS often is at the top of my list to recommend to people, I always have to tell them, "Hey, you got to be careful because if they don't like you, they can shut you down in a heartbeat. And they can kill an entire company by doing that.""
"They can launch the Oracle service in Azure, and we expect that this should be possible in Amazon AWS as well."
"It works very well with open-source solutions like Java, but not with .NET technologies."
"I have trouble with the AWS command-line interface."
"Some services that are not used often have poor quality and need to be improved."
"There was some new learning in terms of IOPS on the EBS storage. The concept of burstable IOPS was new and we did have a few outages when we ran out of IOPS."
"AWS could be more scalable."
"The price of the solution is comparatively quite high in comparison with that of Azure."
"The authentication method only allows me to have up to 90 users, and there are 2,300 people in the company."
"Customer services and support should be improved. If a user faces challenges in accessing Microsoft Azure, the support team takes time—it could be 24 to 48 hours—to resolve them. We need solutions in four to five hours. And there are business-critical issues where we need an immediate resolution."
"The solution should be more intuitive and provide better support. We often do not receive frequent updates or comprehensive support, even as partners."
"Could be more user friendly; initial setup is difficult to understand."
"They can improve the number of requests. Maybe they can increase it from 5,000 requests to 10,000 requests a month. Sometimes when you try to connect, it is quite unresponsive. When you want to communicate using the API, you get an internal error."
"Their backup strategy is a little complex which racks up the VM to other sole storage areas. This should be improved."
"At this point, the latency is too high to use Azure in our production environment."
"The alerts management should be improved. Alerts management is very complicated to configure. You have to go through a lot of tests and config action groups to set up those things. It is very complicated, and it can be simplified."
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 298 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 OpenShift. 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.