Amazon CloudFront Reviews

We use the solution for content delivery and website acceleration. We use it because AWS and CloudFront are under one environment. It requires AWS configuration.

We didn't face any issues. The AWS environment was very helpful in terms of integration.

The solution could be more simplified for new users. It could be more user-friendly. Also, support needs to be improved.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for more than a month.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is pretty scalable. It works as we expected. We are setting up this solution for a bank with 200 staff employees and more than 5000 users.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven to eight out of ten.

It is hard to get technical support from Amazon. They have launched in the Philippines around June, but it's very limited.

Neutral

We have DigitalOcean but we use AWS because it is cheap.

The initial setup is moderate in AWS but difficult in Azure.

I rate the product’s pricing a six to seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Amazon CloudFront is a service that allows us to host our website or video on a domain. If we want to access a specific page on our website directly, we can create a CloudFront connection to the hosting server for our website. If we want to launch our website and then link it to documentation or other elements quickly, we can do so directly through CloudFront. Afterward, we can link our domain to the CloudFront distribution.

Amazon CloudFront is a service that dramatically accelerates the delivery of our static and dynamic web content.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed of delivery. For example, if we have HTML, CSS, PHP, images, and media files, CloudFront can deliver them quickly and reliably through its worldwide network of edge locations. This reduces latency, allowing webpages to open faster, while also providing high performance.

If the content is not stored in the Amazon CloudFront location, it will be retrieved from an origin, such as Amazon S3, a MediaPackage Channel, or an HTTP file server. For example, if the content is stored on a web server, that server can be identified as the source for the requested content. Suppose that we are hosting an image on a traditional web server, such as a PNG file. We might place the image on a website with the image name adhikary.png. This way, our users can easily navigate to the URL and see the image. When we use Amazon CloudFront, however, they may not be aware that the request is routed from one network to another. This is because the complex connections of interconnected networks that comprise the internet are hidden until the image is found.

Amazon CloudFront can improve by accurately determining the latency of a non-defined URL that the solution encounters. For example, if we have a direct connection, the solution will link to the data in a fraction of a second but if we don't have a direct connection and are using a domain name instead, it will take longer to connect. To improve this, we should consider getting a direct connection.

I have been using the solution for several months.

The stability of the product is very high, and it will not be affected by the connection of the endpoint to CSS, HTML, or CloudFront. Amazon CloudFront is an independent product and its stability is also very good.

I give the stability an eight out of ten.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

The technical support provides extensive support for their managed services. In most cases, we don't need much support, but if any issues arise, AWS provides quick and reliable assistance.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. I give the deployment an eight out of ten.

I believe the solution is more expensive. Amazon's pricing varies depending on the data transfer. The cost depends on how much data is transmitted from that particular CloudFront. The cost is lower if we are located in America and hosted in America.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

Navigating Amazon CloudFront is easy and provides many options. Image access management, CloudFront delivery, and the location and IP address range of the CloudFront server is all easily accessible. I find Amazon CloudFront to be particularly productive, making it a great choice for my needs. If an organization is using Amazon's cloud service it is best to use Amazon CloudFront and stay away from other solutions.

We used the product for one of our projects associated with online gaming.

The product is very well interconnected with other Amazon services. It is very well connected with EC2, so the integration with S3 becomes easier. It reduces latency to some extent. If all our services fall under the AWS landscape, the user experience would be much better.

A lot of caching features must be added to the solution. It only has the standard caching features. Akamai has properties that have multiple features that can be added as rules. Something similar must be added to CloudFront.

I have been using the solution for more than three years.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. A team of three people was using the product in our organization.

We opted for the standard support. The support was not the best. It was satisfactory. The support people took a lot of time to answer. Though we explained our issues well, they did not understand them clearly. It might be because the support team lacked skilled people. The expensive support packages might not have such issues.

Neutral

I have worked with Akamai.

The initial setup is easy.

The solution’s price is reasonable. It is much more reasonable than Akamai.

I would recommend CloudFront to people dealing with simple projects and AWS infrastructure. Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

We use the product as a CDN in front of several public websites.

The platform's most valuable feature is its ability to deliver content globally, optimizing website delivery for users worldwide. Additionally, it is an inexpensive product.

I encountered challenges with seamlessly integrating different services. Specifically, integrating a WAF (Web Application Firewall) with CloudFront took a lot of work. The process required managing infrastructure, including configuring VPC (Virtual Private Cloud) settings, setting up load balancers, and connecting them to the WAF. The lack of seamless integration made the setup process more complex and required additional research to manage all the services properly.

We've been using Amazon CloudFront for about 3 months now.

The platform is stable.

The product is highly scalable, even if you use it on a large platform. It's designed to handle increased demand without errors. Additionally, if you need more power or resources, you can easily find a solution within AWS.

The initial setup was straightforward, but it required some research. For a small website, it took about one day to one and a half days to complete the setup. Without prior research, it could take up to three hours to set up once you're familiar with the process. The complexity ultimately depends on the architecture, but managing the website takes two to three hours.

Our ROI with CloudFront is quite favorable. We can deliver our services without incurring significant outbound traffic costs, as it's included in the price and quite affordable. Compared to managing several instances implemented in different locations, it proves to be much more cost-effective. The exact ROI depends on the use case. Still, for scenarios like hosting a website that requires global accessibility, it can lead to significant savings, potentially up to 50% or more compared to alternative solutions.

The product has a mid-range pricing.

The security features have helped to protect the content. It is an expensive product with valuable features. I rate it an 8.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront to create and then set up a signed URL, which is something I need for my project.

Feature-wise, I like the solution's signed URL because it provides security for me.

I don't know yet what can be improved in the solution. I don't have time to dig into it.

During the setup phase, there were some hiccups in terms of security, the user role, and the permissions. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for one of my recent projects. I am a customer of the solution.

For scalability, considering AWS, I can say for the Docker container, I can launch multiple instances.

I haven't contacted customer support yet. I'd use online pages, YouTube, and all kinds of sources, but I won't prefer calling customer service directly.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I think everything in the solution looks fine to me because I've been back and forth between Azure and Amazon's UIs. So, I think I'm okay.

Since I haven't explored the solution yet, I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

This product is used for website content distribution.

We implemented CloudFront for two of our clients, including one called NIS (National Administrative Technologies). They provide a platform for students to access classrooms, lectures, and examinations. The students required fast processing and content delivery, so we used CloudFront for that.

So, CloudFront significantly improved content delivery performance.

Primarily, it reduces latency. We only use CloudFront in certain projects, including some government initiatives.

The distribution aspect of CloudFront and its ability to reduce latency are most beneficial. It really helps reduce the time it takes for content to reach the client.

Compared to Google, where we work with some big clients like JSL (one of India's top ten companies), AWS offers smoother integration. Their services are mature and well-documented. This makes the process easier for us.

There is room for improvement in customer service and support. 

We have a PDM [Program Delivery Manager], but we struggle to get help with things like competencies and documentation. 

For example, we need business plan document formats, and they say we can't get that support until we're an Advanced-Tier partner. 

Partners below Advanced-Tier aren't getting the resources they need. There should be something in place for partners who are still growing.

I've been working with it for about two years now. My company has been working with AWS for five to six years.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

Sometimes, I find that the customer service and support are not easily approachable. Even as a close-to-Advanced Tier partner, we sometimes struggle to get the support we need regarding documentation. Overall, I'm not happy with their technical and sales support.

Neutral

The initial setup is not complex at all. I didn't have any difficulty or major issues configuring it.

Moreover, integration with other third-party solutions is very easy. Compared to Google, where we work with some big clients like JSL (one of India's top ten companies), AWS offers smoother integration. Their services are mature and well-documented. This makes the process easier for us.

Compared to competitors like Azure and Google, we find AWS pricing to be advantageous.

AWS excels in its detailed documentation and security features. That makes it a better choice for us.

I would definitely recommend using this solution. We recommend CloudFront, which provides a clear benefit, not universally for every project.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I use this solution for image loading. 

The image loading process is easy and cost-effective too. 

Improvements are needed as per customer requirements.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for four years. 

The cloud automation is created within minutes.

We use the solution to build social media solutions. They distribute the short videos using the cloud.

CloudFront is good, comparing all aspects of the platform. It has built-in DDoS protection, which protects against DDoS attacks.

Support needs to be enhanced.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for 3 years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

10,000-20,000 users are using this solution, but it dropped these days.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

We have basic customer service support. We usually use chat or call. It goes first to non-technical people, like salespeople or supports agents, who then forward the cases to a technical person.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy. You can do it on the dashboard itself. It requires minimal experience.

It takes five to ten minutes to deploy.

We have private pricing on AWS. We get a fifty percent discount.

I recommend the solution. It has good services. It is scalable and cost-effective. We can add a graph on the other security on top of Cloudflare.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.