Amazon CloudFront Reviews

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.

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.

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.

I use the solution for CDN.

We use the platform to deliver files and media across the world.

The speed and usability of the solution are valuable. It's part of AWS. It’s pretty useful.

The tool must provide regional control. It must provide features to allow only one region to reach the content via CDN.

I have been using the solution for six years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

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

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

The tool is very easy to set up.

I have seen a 100% return on investment in the product.

The product could improve its price. People using the product must pay attention to what they are setting up. The cost can greatly increase if they do not take care of it.

Overall, I rate the product a ten out of ten.

We use Amazon CloudFront as a monitoring tool. It helps us receive notifications and alerts for any issues or experiences within AWS. Amazon CloudFront and CloudWatch allow us to monitor production servers and detect issues. Additionally, the tool's global access capabilities ensure users worldwide can access content without failure. 

The tool is highly available and reliable. It helps to access server applications easily. Integrating Amazon CloudFront with other AWS services was very easy, I would rate it eight out of ten.

Amazon CloudFront is harder to understand compared to Azure. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. It ensures the site is available globally without latency for 24 hours.

The technical support team from AWS is excellent. They provide very good support and are responsive to any issues we encounter on their cloud platform. If we face any problems, we can easily raise a ticket with the AWS team, and they assign an engineer to help resolve the issue. Overall, there are no issues with their support. Configuration issues can arise within our local technical team, which manages our cloud platform services for customers. In such cases, the AWS platform provides a reliable solution, ensuring a hundred percent resolution.

Positive

I used to work with AWS and Azure, and we provided cost comparisons for customers to help them choose the right services. Azure tends to be more user-friendly and easier to understand, while AWS may take more time.

I rate the overall solution a nine 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.

We work for a bank. We use the solution to host some public websites. The CDN hosts images and static content related to the website. We are not working in an active production environment. Currently, we are conducting User Acceptance Testing. We have only released it to a few focus development groups to check how the site is used.

I like the solution’s ease of use and configuration. Getting the certificate signed and using it in CDN was easy. It is easy to configure. The product is easy to configure compared to other AWS services. We can choose locations close to our users. It helps reduce latency and improves the time it takes to refresh the site.

It normally takes over a day to get a reply from the support team. The support must be improved.

I have been using the solution for seven months.

We are still testing the tool in the UAT phase. So far, our experience with the tool’s stability has been good.

Globally, we have 60,000 to 80,000 users. We plan to deploy a full-scale production. We might have almost five million users.

The support team does not provide immediate responses.

The setup was straightforward. Most of the features are available out of the box. The learning experience was very straightforward. The answers to a lot of our questions were available in the UI. There is a link that we can click to learn more about the features. It was quite user-friendly. The tool is deployed on the cloud.

The setup time was much less when we deployed the tool on the cloud. The procurement of the services, testing, and deployment was quick and easy compared to on-premise provisioning. We have a team of eight people for deployment, including managers, developers, and testers. The setup was very smooth and easy to configure.

The product provides reduced latency and quicker site refreshes. We have seen a significant improvement over the on-premise version we used earlier. The sites appear faster to the users.

The product must enable cost optimization. We do not have many options to optimize costs. Most of the prices are fixed. It would be good if the vendor could provide different tiers or allow users to optimize prices.

We have not used the security features to the fullest extent. Initially, we had an on-premises solution. I recommend that people use the tool. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.