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.
"It has good reporting and documentation."
"The initial implementation process is not difficult or complex."
"This solution offers a very detailed dashboard that has some metrics, such as performance and budget."
"Amazon AWS is very user-friendly."
"The services that we are using have frequent updates, at least twice a year. They provide a new version that has more capabilities or features that fit our process and procedures."
"Cost-effective and tolerant."
"I like that is very easy to use and that it's flexible."
"Amazon AWS is good in terms of deployment and user experience. Their certificate management and load balancer are also good features."
"Microsoft Azure has a large scope, it can do many things."
"It's a cloud service, so it's always up to date."
"The product is rather stable. We haven't had any issues with it in that sense."
"The Azure Portal has an advantage in terms of UX making buying resources or downgrading is really easier to understand. AWS has micro, smaller functionalities whereas Azure has more end-to-end focus which makes it easier saving you time and money."
"The solution is user-friendly and compatible."
"It's stable, easy to use, reliable, and cheap."
"I think the single sign-on functionality and the ease with which you can deposit things on the cloud have been valuable. Azure has very robust security functionalities and authentication features, which come with mobility, along with backup and credential checks."
"The technical support has been good."
"One of the problems that I have seen is that some of the products are not as mature as others."
"We have a very good approach internally with what we have developed. It involved overcoming some hurdles regarding the single point of truth or single point of configuration, which is sometimes not that easy for AWS. There are dashboards and you have your web service, but bringing all these together and orchestrating is sometimes quite difficult."
"The pricing could be a bit high at times. It's something they could improve upon."
"In some scenarios, Azure will support hybrid cloud better while AWS offers direct connection."
"In terms of additional features we'd like to see, the one thing that comes to mind is better integration with Oracle. We have a lot of Oracle databases, and there is no other option to either migrate to PaaS, stay on-prem, or use Oracle Private Cloud."
"There's not much room for improvement but that being said, they can improve the overall process of the overall product features and backend."
"In terms of technical features, I don't see anything missing. The only two points in favor of other providers are the price and local support. The main problem that we see here in Brazil is the price. It is much more expensive than any other cloud provider. Their local support can also be better. We get more support from some of the other providers here in Brazil as compared to AWS."
"Some extensions are better than others."
"They should create integrations with more platforms."
"The solution needs a more integrated password feature."
"Microsoft should have one package for all their solutions in one place to be found."
"At this point, the latency is too high to use Azure in our production environment."
"The biggest area needing improvement involves the licensing cost."
"With Microsoft, our only concern is exchange rates because we're paying in dollars. It's very expensive for us because of the exchange rates. It would help if they partnered with someone locally so we can pay in our local currency."
"The subscriptions are complicated."
"The solution should emulate what MuleSoft is doing. At the moment MuleSoft has a lot of other features compared to Azure API integration."
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.