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.
"They release new solutions almost every quarter and you don't get that kind of innovation from an enterprise company."
"One of the most valuable things about it, besides the stability, is that you can forget about infrastructure because you're just doing it on AWS. I remember the times before AWS and other cloud solutions existed, and it was a huge pain to get real hardware, put it inside, configure everything, report everything, and do a scale. It was very, very difficult compared to how it is now. Not even just AWS, but what all these cloud providers are doing, I would say, is a huge advancement in technology."
"Amazon AWS has a good Redshift database."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the S3."
"AWS is stable."
"It is very easy to set up. It is also easy to use. It has a lot of services and integrations. We've been able to integrate whatever we need until now."
"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."
"The platform's user-friendliness eliminates the need for lengthy training periods, enabling swift navigation for new users."
"The most valuable feature is the interface."
"Microsoft Azure has thousands of services and products."
"The most valuable feature is the possibility of using Microsoft and non-Microsoft services on one environment."
"The tool's most valuable aspect is the account management side. This involves tasks such as assigning credentials to different individuals, managing user accounts, and implementing Privileged Access Management."
"The application services are the most valuable in Microsoft Azure. I'm not using them directly but I am using the function and the web applications. I don't need to pay a lot for the maintenance. I do not need to have a DevOps employee."
"The most valuable features of the solution are ease of use and the enhancements are continually being updated."
"The ability to create the actual resource on the private cloud is easy to manage with Microsoft Azure."
"Amazon AWS would be improved if it were more stable and if customer support's responses were faster."
"The price could be better."
"AWS support could be better."
"Amazon tools are for more mature DevOps. The process and the Dev is very good, but it doesn't compare to the ease of using the Google Cloud Platform."
"Their metadata management in AWS needs improvement."
"They do not yet have a complete solution for APM monitoring. But this, along with real user monitoring, is something that they are actively working on improving."
"One of the issues I'm facing is that my RDS SQL Server version 5.8 is reaching its end of life, and I need to upgrade it to a customer-wanted version. I want to do this on Graviton instances, but Graviton only starts with version 8.0 and currently doesn't support the 5.8 series. We've raised a Priority Feature Request (PFR) with AWS to have this functionality added for at least three months. This would give us enough time to upgrade our database to the 8.0 version without any issues."
"I have been using Amazon AWS for approximately one year."
"Difficult to understand how it works and it's an expensive solution."
"They can improve the number of requests. Maybe they can increase it from 5,000 requests to 10,000 requests a month. Sometimes when you try to connect, it is quite unresponsive. When you want to communicate using the API, you get an internal error."
"Azure ARM console can be a bit overwhelming at the beginning."
"Any time you use a cloud service, there are increased security risks. If you want more security, you have to have private hosting."
"Azure calculator could be improved, there are issues with login synchronization."
"Its costing can be improved. There should be better cost management."
"Use of the solution could be easier."
"Could be more user friendly; initial setup is difficult to understand."
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.