We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Heroku based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This solution is used as the basic requirement for any virtual machines use cases, the storage is used for each use case."
"AWS's containerization is the most useful feature for us."
"The storage is most valuable. The gateway and documentation are also quite good."
"The AWS feature that I most enjoy is Lambda functions. I primarily use serverless components because they allow you to process things without having to compromise on resources like when running EC2 instances or virtual machines. With minimal effort, you can scale up an unlimited number of processes, even concurrently, to process things. I frequently work with web APIs, so I use Lambda a lot in this area."
"The solution has good speed. It's very fast."
"There are many valuable features, I find the EMR in the platform easy to use and to learn."
"I am impressed with the solution's EC2 EKS."
"One of the features offered is scalability on demand."
"What I found most valuable about this solution is that it's easy to use and integrate with GitHub actions."
"The most valuable feature of Heroku is the continuous integration and applications it provides."
"I like the tool's scalability, CLI, and dashboards."
"One of the best things about Heroku is that it is very easy and straightforward to deploy an application."
"It's easy to push a change and to deploy new things."
"We use Heroku to run generic data. We also use it for our customer development environment. It helps us to build and test websites."
"Thanks to Heroku, we don't need to do as much direct management in AWS."
"The platform is very Node.js-friendly, which is something that is important to us."
"The customization could be improved."
"Some of their well-listed services are not super configurable."
"The pricing of AWS is very unclear. They make it quite confusing."
"Some of the storage services could be cheaper."
"The technical support should be better than what is on offer right now."
"Price is an area with a shortcoming in the solution that has a scope for improvement"
"We would appreciate it if the product was cheaper."
"The price could be better."
"They could flesh out some of their analytics a little more."
"We have to do daily restarts of some processes, which is annoying, and the support for custom CI could be better."
"Their support is good, but they can improve their response time."
"I improved the application performance by monitoring and adjusting the cleaner configuration to help set better lightweight limits on containers that run the app instances."
"Heroku had an authentication problem a few months ago, but they solved it."
"We don't find the pipelines intuitive. The user experience could be better. Having to set up multiple apps, then a pipeline, seems like an overkill on the amount of work to do."
"Heroku doesn't support Docker images on the CI infrastructure."
"The tool's configuration is complex."
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in PaaS Clouds with 250 reviews while Heroku is ranked 13th in PaaS Clouds with 27 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Heroku 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 Heroku writes "Useful for mobile and web applications, and helps with rapid development cycle ". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Heroku is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Google App Engine, OpenShift and Engine Yard Cloud. See our Amazon AWS vs. Heroku report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.