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 most valuable feature is that it is simple."
"The main feature that I like the most is the variety of solutions that it provides. It provides some analysis, business information and more. It provides a wide variety of services."
"I think Amazon AWS is easy to use, and it's a good service. I also like Amazon EKS because it's good."
"As a service vendor, we have helped clients to achieve faster "go to market" on their products, and have provided highly flexible cost-effective system management solutions."
"The product is nice and stable. Its performance is great."
"Friendly console for implementation."
"Amazon AWS is easy to use and in the past two years, I've never had any issues with scalability or stability."
"Amazon AWS has good performance and easy management."
"The valuable features of Microsoft Azure are that it is cloud-based and has good storage. The storage is completely managed by Azure. We do not need to do any patching of security because it is handled by Azure which is a benefit. The solution is fully compatible with the Microsoft technology stack and is very scalable."
"Microsoft Azure is scalable."
"Kubernetes service and API management are the most valuable."
"The solution is similar to a plug-and-play system, it is easy to use."
"SQL Server has been most beneficial for our client’s workload."
"The platform's user-friendliness eliminates the need for lengthy training periods, enabling swift navigation for new users."
"I like a lot of features. For example, the Windows virtual solution has helped in such a way that our client-based application was converted into a web-based version through the use of the Windows Virtual Desktop."
"The most valuable features of the solution are ease of use and the enhancements are continually being updated."
"We would appreciate it if the product was cheaper."
"The customization could be improved."
"Recently we had a long conversation about functionality that is missing in Alexa — in Mexico, specifically. Alexa for Business is a service and platform that Americans can use to make a call to an Amazon Echo device or a telephone via the app. But in Mexico, we are not allowed to use that technology. This is a significant disadvantage of AWS for those living in Mexico."
"At times we find ourselves a little trapped, with the lack of customization, for what we need."
"The customization could improve. However, it depends on the customization needed."
"Support response times can be improved, especially in areas where faster assistance is crucial."
"AWS for API, or Seller Central, is no improvement from what we had (our internal tools we designed to update accounts, change customer network profiles, monitoring, MRTG graphs, etc), when AWS should be blazing."
"The overall convenience and the ease to use could be improved."
"I believe that some of the services need to be available on the on-premises version and not only based on the cloud."
"We need more customization and support for doing so."
"The pricing needs to be a bit lower. It's an expensive solution right now."
"The local support is fair but it is sometimes limited, the service could be better."
"The security of the solution could always be much better."
"The process by which our customers can switch from one subscription to another should be simplified."
"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."
"Customer services and support should be improved. If a user faces challenges in accessing Microsoft Azure, the support team takes time—it could be 24 to 48 hours—to resolve them. We need solutions in four to five hours. And there are business-critical issues where we need an immediate resolution."
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.