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.
"This solution features ease of use and market adaptability."
"In general, Amazon's performance is good."
"I think the AWS interface is good. It's easy to understand and use."
"Easy to upgrade, easy to expand storage and change your EC2 types."
"The most useful feature of Amazon AWS is it can be accessed from anywhere."
"We have many projects where we can resolve a lot of issues with Amazon AWS. It has given customers a lot of visibility with their data. Many customers do not know what they can learn from their data and I provide them with this using useful information using Amazon AWS."
"We like the that, within the public subnet of this solution, a new instance of the tool is launched when it detects an issue, in order to prevent interruptions in performance."
"A scalable and secure product"
"The most valuable feature is the instant availability of resources."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of use."
"Its resiliency is most valuable. It is also a very scalable solution, so you can spend the resources on demand."
"The product makes it easy to spin up new environments and develop new technologies."
"I think Azure's level of automation to achieve efficiency or agility is valuable. I also like the change capability cadence, the showback capabilities, and understanding what our costs are."
"Easy to deploy services"
"I like the familiarity of this solution."
"It's stable, easy to use, reliable, and cheap."
"AWS could be more scalable."
"It would be better if there was a way to see which components were still on. We have some situations where I forget that some components are turned on. We forget some components are on, and we only see that these components are on when we see the bill at the end of the month. It would also be better if AWS had specialized firewalls or integrations with leading products. For example, a specialized firewall with content filtering. We were looking for some firewall tools, and we saw that AWS doesn't have any specialized firewall tools in its services portfolio. So, we are looking for other tools like FortKnox, Forcepoint, and Check Point because we didn't find the solutions in AWS services."
"Amazon AWS could be improved by lowering the general storage price."
"We would like the system documentation for configuring this solution to be improved, in order to provide better process clarity."
"Identity and access management on AWS could be straightforward."
"I think that the interface could be improved."
"The user interface (UI) needs improvement. Right now, it's not the best."
"Many of our clients prefer in-house cloud rather than the application data sitting in the infrastructure owned and managed by Amazon."
"If you compare it with AWS, it is not very friendly to use. I find the UI better to work with on AWS."
"They should include a cybersecurity feature to improve the protection of the systems. They could do better in terms of the pricing model. Its price keeps on changing. Their technical support can also be better."
"Monitoring options should be more sophisticated, as there are dashboards on which a end user is able to pin a lot of charts and a number of web parts, but for example, I would love to have some option like in Operational Management Suite."
"I would like to see more advanced functionality in terms of information security."
"While integrating services from different vendors, the perceived costs are high, with occasional confusion about specific charges, especially in data transfer scenarios between regions."
"There is a need to be better on-premise solutions that are more helpful. However, I don't think that is the goal of Microsoft Azure. They want the solution to be secure cloud solutions with cloud applications. This is their main goal at the moment."
"We have faced some challenges trying to deploy a new ESP application."
"The solution could improve by having more security features around my data and the platform."
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.