What is our primary use case?
Our primary use case for AWS Cost Management is to manage costs. One of the financial institutes that we assisted once, incurred a 40-45 million dollar pay quarter on data center costs and moving into Azure. AWS Cost Management brought that down to $45 million for an entire year.
What is most valuable?
It is one of the oldest templates on cloud. They shape it to fit any implementation requirement, so you could almost have a template for absolutely anything that you have on-premises that you want to move into the cloud.
Our specialization is optimization. So we optimize the infrastructure before it moves into the cloud so that the deployment in the cloud is okay. If you use the wrong template, AWS will charge you more, or for a bigger workload than it does for on-premises. And that's why we use it on-premises.
What needs improvement?
What Amazon is trying to do, is to put everything into their cloud and show the customer costs. I suppose that's a good sales pitch, but I don't believe that a single cloud provider can do it for every customer. I think that, with Microsoft being so prevalent in the market, they have a space and their cost management model is much more effective.
For example, I don't believe Amazon's version of SQL is very efficient. So they can definitely beef up.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using AWS Cost Management for two years now.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
This program is not very scalable.
How are customer service and technical support?
We do our own technical support, because we've got all the skills. All our guys are certified technicians.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We've used a solution called vROps. We used it for determining what our workloads were and so on. But the problem with vROps is that, when you start using it in an enterprise mode, it becomes hellishly expensive to run in major enterprises. That is why we changed over to AWS Cost Management.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup wasn't complex at all. They make the ability to show the cost on cloud solutions very, very easy. They use a tool that I don't believe is very effective because what they do, is to do a workload analysis of the on-prem cloud solutions. And then this tool is meant to determine what workloads are running where and if they're running efficiently and so on. I don't believe that to be very efficient. But that's what they do.
What other advice do I have?
Cloud solutions exist because of costs and efficiency optimization. Those are the key parameters for going to the top, otherwise you just have it on-premises and carry on running it the way you are.
Being able to do absolutely every part of the technology from your disaster recovery solution to your backup, to your cloud adoption, the cloud integration, your application integration is a service. So everything is done as a service. It's a more cost effective way of informing and telling the business how they manage their costs or their money.
My advice to others looking into implementing this solution, would be to go for it. They should bite the bullet at the beginning and spend the money, because it will help the organization in managing that cost for adoption for the entire lifetime of that cloud solution.
An additional feature that I would you like to see included in the next release, is automation. Part of what cost management is to determine the best way to use a solution, a cloud or a workload. Those workloads have the storage association. They have CPU association and they have computer association. What AWS Cost Management needs, is a backend into an optimization tool that can automatically manage your resources so that you don't over-spend on resources.
My rating for this solution would be a six out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)