We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and SAP S4HANA on AWS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is not difficult and it did not take us more than one day."
"Cost-effective and tolerant."
"Macie is great. It is a service that makes recommendations on a data layer for cybersecurity. It is a great service."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Amazon AWS is easy to use and in the past two years, I've never had any issues with scalability or stability."
"I especially like the flexibility and scalability of the solution."
"AWS has a lot of flexibility, which is great."
"AWS's security model, including IAM or security groups, has contributed to our organization's compliance. It manages authentication, permissions, and overall security posture, which helps us maintain compliance."
"It is indeed a stable solution, but it depends on how you architecture the component in AWS. If the component has the right architecture and is properly provisioned and placed, then it will be a stable platform."
"The solution adds great value to any organization."
"I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten because it covers all the fields, has a big maturity, and has something other solutions are missing, which is speed."
"The product’s high availability is its best feature."
"The solution is scalable."
"After the implementation phase of the product, it becomes a very stable tool."
"SAP S4HANA on AWS is an easy-to-use solution."
"SAP has an auto-scaling feature, but Azure doesn't."
"There was some new learning in terms of IOPS on the EBS storage. The concept of burstable IOPS was new and we did have a few outages when we ran out of IOPS."
"The pricing of the solution could be better. It's a little pricey."
"I would like to see CloudFormation made more in the programming way of thinking."
"This solution could offer more security."
"Scaling is an area that can be improved."
"The interface is relatively complex."
"I think that the interface could be improved."
"The customization could be improved."
"The manufacturing application system, it's not as user-friendly in S4HANA."
"There are times when the solution can become slower. The stability could improve."
"I would rate my experience with the initial setup a three out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy."
"Over the last three to four years, I haven't encountered significant issues with SAP S/4HANA. While occasional system bugs are normal in software, the overall experience has been positive. As a business partner, it stands out as a reliable ERP solution."
"The solution is costlier than other products."
"The AI aspect of SAP S4HANA can be improved."
"There are a few complexities when it comes to licensing that could be simplified."
"I would like to see a lower price for the solution."
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 250 reviews while SAP S4HANA on AWS is ranked 7th in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 35 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while SAP S4HANA on AWS is rated 8.2. 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 SAP S4HANA on AWS writes "With good documentation in place, the solution offers good technical support to its users". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas SAP S4HANA on AWS is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, SAP HANA Enterprise Cloud, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and Alibaba Cloud. See our Amazon AWS vs. SAP S4HANA on AWS report.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) 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.