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.
"Machine learning is a valuable feature."
"It scales extremely well."
"The main reason why we use EC2 is because we are not dependent on maintaining the hardware inside our premises. Also, we have full control over the infrastructure, and we can modify it as per our own requirements."
"The monitoring is the most valuable aspect of the product."
"The product's scalability is good."
"Almost everything is good. It is a whole ecosystem. It is not only the storage, computing, or networking. It is interesting in the way all things are combined to form this ecosystem. It is a very well-built and logical ecosystem that has some small building blocks. These building blocks can be used in the right way to build a much bigger ecosystem that is robust, secure, scalable."
"It is easy to use."
"It has helped reduce the cost by rationing the computing power and paying only on a per usage basis, instead of provisioning unneeded, idle, or unutilized computing power that is used only at 20% of its capacity or time."
"The incorporation of several kinds of storage, such as SSD Premium, enhanced the performance of machines."
"It's a reasonably priced solution."
"Provides a high level of availability and 99% uptime."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the integration between all of the components in Azure."
"The automated connectors to some of our critical enterprise systems are an important feature. These are very large, critical, global HCM systems."
"Infrastructure as a service is most valuable."
"It is easy to use. It is also stable."
"I like the functionalities and the price. I'm very satisfied with Microsoft Azure."
"The AWS documentation is written in a way that is not very intuitive. That's an area they can improve."
"An integrated platform would make it easier for administrators to monitor and manage."
"Its subscription model or pricing model is too complex, which should be improved."
"Like anything, Amazon AWS has room for improvement, but it's not bad."
"I want to use AWS as a full solution for my website - for domain and website hosting, and everything in between - however, I was not able to find everything together."
"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."
"The cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"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."
"I would recommend some enhancement regarding integration features."
"The biggest area needing improvement involves the licensing cost."
"I think it would be good to keep making progress on giving users the ability to do action calls on Data Factory. Right now, it's mostly local. Perhaps Microsoft could add the ability to put some calls in the workflow."
"Predictability and quality. Make sure things work predictable, as expected, and documented."
"The permissions and controls in the product are not easy to use."
"The solution is less mature than AWS."
"The response time and stability of Microsoft Azure need to be improved."
"It would be helpful if Azure provided more information on the various add-ons to give people an understanding of what they are used for, and how they're applied by other companies or businesses."
Amazon AWS is ranked 1st in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 26 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 2nd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 40 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Offers integrated services and quickly spin up and shut down applications using EC2". 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 Platform and Pivotal Cloud Foundry, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Oracle Cloud Platform, 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.