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 ease of use is the biggest benefit."
"The solution has good speed. It's very fast."
"AWS is constantly growing in features with every new version. It's a good cloud provider with excellent availability. The integration is good, and their security products are interesting. Amazon is always innovating and delivering new products to customers."
"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."
"You can instantly scale resources up or down as needed, avoiding the need to build infrastructure from scratch."
"The whole solution is well designed and AWS has decent documentation, which is not to be taken for granted. I've also found that AWS is easy to use."
"I like that it's easy to use."
"The installation is quite straightforward."
"The most valuable features are the interface and customizability."
"It very quickly provisions servers, infrastructure, and apps on the fly and complies with security requirements and data safety."
"The tool's most valuable features are SQL servers and Managed Instance databases."
"We have not had any issues with the performance, or the stability."
"Kubernetes service and API management are the most valuable."
"Microsoft has a lot of partners in this area, and they have a lot of information available online, so it's easy to get support."
"The ability to quickly create and manage resources is critical to getting things done, Azure just makes getting things done a lot simpler."
"Microsoft Azure is built for scalability."
"The interface needs a bit of work. It's not intuitive."
"Some extensions are better than others."
"They are mainly generalists without access to the operating system. As such, they can provide container level insights,not necessarily at the application level."
"The overall convenience and the ease to use could be improved."
"Their support can be improved. In some cases, their support is not as proficient as it can be. They should be quicker at getting back."
"Amazon AWS could be improved with cheaper licensing costs."
"I'm just bugged by the charges that I'm not really able to manage."
"The price needs improvement."
"I would recommend some enhancement regarding integration features."
"Use of the solution could be easier."
"For deploying multiple resources in a big number, such as in hundreds, we need a streamlined process and more user-friendly scrips. The scripts have to be more user-friendly, and they should also supply some standard templates to deploy multiple resources at a time. Currently, it is very easy to deploy a couple of resources, but if you want to deploy multiple resources, it becomes complex. The material that they provide for integration with an existing on-prem data center is complex. They have to make them user-friendly. The scripts related to resource management need to be simplified."
"One area where Microsoft Azure could improve is in offering a broader range of pre-built plugins and tools compared to AWS."
"The price of the Azure license could be cheaper."
"I would want Microsoft Azure to provide some credits that can be used to test and validate Microsoft’s different solutions since it is an area where the product lacks."
"The solution could improve the stability. However, this could be a configuration issue that we are not been trained."
"Stability can suffer in the context of a large architecture."
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 Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Google Firebase, 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.