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.
"Very good automation and very stable."
"We are mostly using EC2 compute and other resources. Most of our managed services are in AWS, which some of our clients prefer."
"The scalability is a valuable feature."
"Amazon has a much better understanding of the workflow of data scientists and machine learning processes. This is seen by their SageMaker which offers different versions of the models to be used."
"The price forecasting and billing dashboard by service, with billing budgets and alerts, have helped us shut down resources that were accruing costs that we no longer needed, saving us money."
"Cloud Trail API log storage."
"It's quite stable and scalable. The price is good as well."
"The performance of AWS is excellent."
"It's been pretty useful in terms of migration and disaster recovery strategy."
"The most important thing is we don't have to maintain any physical infrastructure. With typical conventional on-premise solutions, we have to maintain many things like the hardware, clusters, etc. With this cloud platform, you don't have to worry about all those things. We have the service always available, and this is the main advantage. I like that we use everything on our standard Active Directory on on-premises on Azure. The key advantage is that you can have the sole indication based on the cloud. This isn't possible with an on-premise Active Directory. This enables work from home and at the office because it's on the cloud."
"Being cloud-based saves the provisioning aspect of an on-premises solution."
"Its scalability is valuable. Depending on our requirements, we can add as many virtual machines as we want. We are able to get high availability for services. Services are always available, and they have the maximum uptime. If there is any issue with one of the services, another service is always available. It is pay-as-you-go. You don't have to spend any money upfront. You use the service and pay after one month or a couple of hours of use."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Azure is the compatibility with all of our Windows applications and other Microsoft technologies"
"We have found the most valuable feature to be the pricing calculator."
"Provisioning a server is fast, taking only one or two minutes before it is ready."
"It is easy to deploy."
"The product should reduce carbon emissions."
"They're really good on the business computing side, but there are other services where they can do really well. They can improve the data analytics platform and the data warehousing platform."
"Amazon still has room for improvement in terms of being more mature on the monitoring side and in terms of the native capabilities. Amazon should get their services portfolio stronger on OEM-based workloads such as Microsoft and Oracle. There are a lot of areas that still do not have offerings, so there is room to grow. I would be happy if they bring more maturity to the monitoring capabilities and SaaS offerings. They are strong on Infrastructure as a Service, but they are not mature on SaaS."
"Amazon tools are for more mature DevOps. The process and the Dev is very good, but it doesn't compare to the ease of using the Google Cloud Platform."
"I generally don't like the user experience of Amazon. It's not the best."
"The AWS documentation is written in a way that is not very intuitive. That's an area they can improve."
"They should have a better big data stack."
"Its subscription model or pricing model is too complex, which should be improved."
"The solution needs to offer more data analysis services."
"Could be more user friendly; security features should be improved."
"We have faced some challenges trying to deploy a new ESP application."
"The subscriptions are complicated."
"Potential improvements to the price calculator tool"
"Lacks flexibility in terms of storage or resource allocation."
"Quite an expensive solution."
"Due to the pandemic, I haven't been able to utilize their full resources. This has made it complicated to scale up. I hope this will be resolved after the pandemic."
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.