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 initial setup is simple and straightforward."
"I like the flexibility of this solution."
"It has a dynamic scaling capacity which is very helpful."
"In general, Amazon's performance is good."
"AWS has many integrations and plenty of tools available for anyone to take advantage of. There are new features being added all the time."
"One of the most valuable features is that Amazon AWS has a lot of data centers and regions where we can position our virtual machines for leverage. Amazon AWS is also easy to use. You can quickly spin up something, use Explorer, building proofs of concept, things like that. Once the proof of concept is built once and we know how things are going to look from a production perspective, we try to move everything to the data centers. These features and the ease of use are the main reasons why we use AWS."
"We found the solution to be reliable."
"Amazon for DevOps is fantastic. Amazon has fast clouds, and the process and the Dev is very good."
"I come from the DBA side so for me it's the easy maintenance; backups are very easy as well."
"The product is rather stable. We haven't had any issues with it in that sense."
"Provides a high level of availability and 99% uptime."
"Easy to deploy services"
"Feature-wise, I like its stability. Also, it is easy to access the solution and its options."
"We use Microsoft Azure for operations, email, and office applications."
"The solution has proven to be quite stable so far."
"Kubernetes service and API management are the most valuable."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"The cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"At times we find ourselves a little trapped, with the lack of customization, for what we need."
"Not all of the functionality is available in Europe and our customers in France want to be able to use features that are only available in the US."
"Somehow Amazon associated their marketplace as a place to find images of various installs (preconfigured software) and was late in the game enabling and promoting SaaS-based solutions. Thus, the AWS marketplace has near zero awareness in the mind of the prospect to find solutions to various problems plaguing them."
"IAM must be made simple and straightforward."
"Some services that are not used often have poor quality and need to be improved."
"I think that the interface could be improved."
"It would be nice if there was an on-premises version of the solution, and it wasn't just cloud-based."
"The solution needs a more integrated password feature."
"Stability can suffer in the context of a large architecture."
"Integrate as a service. A lot of Microsoft software licensing options aren’t yet in Azure. Also, the ability to integrate with other technologies, such as other options on the market based on RISC Technologies."
"The license price could be lower."
"The solution lacks fluidity and is not intuitive."
"We use Microsoft Server 2019 and 2016. And I didn't like the 2019 client, so we had to downgrade back to 2016. The main issue there was its monitoring system. Our client needed an alternative, and if they were using more Windows products, they also needed to make that downgrade."
"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."
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.