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.
"Serverless computing: This can be more cost-efficient just regarding computing resources than renting or purchasing a fixed quantity of servers, which involves periods of underutilization or nonuse."
"Our primary use case is to use the solution for running many relatively small instances for back office applications and various other business important applications."
"The product is reliable and quite stable."
"The ease of use is the biggest benefit."
"AWS is stable."
"Amazon AWS is easy to use and in the past two years, I've never had any issues with scalability or stability."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"I think Amazon AWS is easy to use, and it's a good service. I also like Amazon EKS because it's good."
"It is a very easy-to-use platform, and it is very powerful in terms of data backup and Blob storage. It has very good features, especially if you are using Microsoft products, such as Windows, Microsoft SQL Server."
"I appreciate that everything is basically shift forward from a security standpoint."
"The most valuable feature is cloud-based storage."
"We find that it is easy to integrate with other Microsoft technologies such as Microsoft Office."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Azure is the compatibility with all of our Windows applications and other Microsoft technologies"
"It is easy to use. It is also stable."
"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."
"We use the cognitive service, virtual machines, and customer DB. Microsoft Azure is also scalable and easy to install."
"AWS could be improved with more integration, but I can see that they're developing these features and working very hard on their platform."
"Some features may be better in Azure or some other portal. AWS could add some of those features."
"They have a low code platform, but it is for intervention."
"We have a very good approach internally with what we have developed. It involved overcoming some hurdles regarding the single point of truth or single point of configuration, which is sometimes not that easy for AWS. There are dashboards and you have your web service, but bringing all these together and orchestrating is sometimes quite difficult."
"Many of our clients prefer in-house cloud rather than the application data sitting in the infrastructure owned and managed by Amazon."
"Faster API response times and an improved console experience would be better. Enhanced performance across APIs and the console would streamline our workflows."
"The user interface (UI) needs improvement. Right now, it's not the best."
"AWS is very expensive."
"Talking from a networking perspective, when you create a file or a rule in Azure and you want to view this IP group, sometimes the way it is displayed on the GUI, you don't see the name of the group."
"One key area for improvement is the Azure load balancer. Currently, it only supports virtual machines (VMs) running in the same virtual network (vNet) on the backend. They should definitely support machines or IPs running on-premises (prem) or in other Azure VNets. GCP and AWS already support that. So, Azure Load Balancer should support that as well"
"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."
"Integration with other cloud environments can be tricky at times."
"I would like to see more advanced functionality in terms of information security."
"The process by which our customers can switch from one subscription to another should be simplified."
"The microservices and analytics of Azure are good areas that could be improved."
"Could be more user friendly; security features should be improved."
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.