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 documentation is very good."
"I think the AWS interface is good. It's easy to understand and use."
"The most valuable features are load balancers, databases, and S3 buckets."
"Easy to access and secure, two important features."
"It has a dynamic scaling capacity which is very helpful."
"We like the that, within the public subnet of this solution, a new instance of the tool is launched when it detects an issue, in order to prevent interruptions in performance."
"Cost-effective and tolerant."
"Amazon AWS is very user-friendly."
"We've found the solution to be extremely flexible."
"Microsoft Azure has a lot of useful features. They have databases, application services, PaaS solutions, such as platform and infrastructure services. The virtual machines' functions and services are good."
"There is the potential to scale."
"I have found Microsoft Azure to be stable. We have large corporate customers and it is working great."
"The product brings a lot of value to our business and customers."
"The time to market is fast compared back to the traditional on-premise hosting. That is one of the better things I can say because there is no need to worry. The Pack services will enable it to start immediately."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of use."
"The solution does a lot of coding and customization, and can go live quickly."
"I would like to receive some alerts when my consumption is getting out of the normal range."
"Setup is somewhat complex."
"While feasible, custom configuration will be more time consuming than standard."
"Amazon needs to develop better tools for troubleshooting network traffic, application insights, performance, and even some aspects of integration mapping. I'm hoping AWS implements something like Azure's Network Watcher and a log analytics solution where a can pull logs from various services and present them in a single dashboard. I want to summarize the performance and usage of every service and application."
"The difficulty of the implementation depends on the project. We have a lot of very complicated and complex project which make the implementation more difficult. However, a small project can be very simple to implement. In general, over 90% of the project tend to be complex implementations."
"An integrated platform would make it easier for administrators to monitor and manage."
"The IEM (Infrastructure Event Management) appears to be complicated, specifically cross-account resource permissions."
"One of the problems that I have seen is that some of the products are not as mature as others."
"More expensive than other solutions without justification."
"The license price could be lower."
"We have faced some issues on the pricing side, but it has improved lately. We are trying to adjust to the new pricing methods that they are using now. It should be better from now on."
"I haven't checked the console for some time, however, compared to the AWS console, the interaction console of the web part, the web services, it's not so easy."
"When we are doing transfers of records in large amounts, for example, petabytes of data or few long datasets, the performance should not degrade as it does."
"Auto ML could be improved technically."
"The support, the cost, the way they have the tiers, this could all be improved."
"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."
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.