Amazon Elastic Container Service vs Microsoft Azure Container Service comparison

"For Amazon EC2 Container Service, providing the ability for users to select specific processor, memory, disk, and interface types might be an ideal feature. But, the practicality of offering all possible physical combinations is nearly impossible due to the underlying physical machines. AWS and Azure organize options into groups based on essential components like powerful processors or critical interfaces, considering physical restrictions. While expanding these choices is conceivable, it may not be feasible from a financial and practical perspective. Customers generally comprehend this limitation, as even in their own data centers, exact physical machine requirements are often a result of a combination of factors such as price, availability, and new machine generations."

"Amazon EC2 Container Service is a stable solution."

"The production environment is highly available, which nowadays is a requirement for all of the big companies."

"It's quick and easy to have the solution working."

"In seven years, we have not faced a single second of downtime."

"The most valuable feature, after using Amazon EC2 Container Service for two years, is to set the availability and also for network throughput."

"The tool's most valuable feature is the ability to create revisions on the configurations."

"ECS is a useful platform."

"Microsoft Azure Container Service has a good level of stability."

"Storage is one of the most beneficial features of cloud providers, specifically Azure because when you are working in their cloud environment, you can easily use a storage interface and a storage object that is provided by Microsoft Azure. In a local environment, you have to be involved in establishing and setting up distributed storage file systems for containers which are very difficult and complex. In a cloud environment, you are not concerned about the storage and the dashboard provides you with storage objects with high availability."

"The most valuable feature is that you don't have to maintain the infrastructure."

"It's a great product if you are in a Microsoft environment."

"The most valuable features are that it is simple, and the compression of the data."

"The product makes things easier since it's self-managed. Therefore, there is less administration workload and operational costs."

"Visualization is the most important feature."

"They could provide easier options for third-party integrations similar to internal AWS services."

"The solution's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"Sometimes, the instances fail under the ECS container cluster, and we have to manually go and find out the black sheep in the ECS container instance. We had an issue earlier where one of the instances under the ECS container cluster went down, and we were not able to identify that instance. The instance got terminated, but a new instance did not come up. Therefore, I had to manually get that instance up. It could be optimized better. In production, we normally cannot sustain such things. It can be optimized in terms of instances, durability, and serving the requests of customers."

"In the next release, they could add some customization options for high computer workloads."

"I rate the platform's stability an eight out of ten. It easily dies."

"We noticed a problem where our container doesn't always run, and the traffic in our secured license exceeds 100%, leading to increased container costs. We are working to understand and reduce this traffic to control costs."

"Visualization is an important factor for me, and I don't think that the visuals within ECS are good enough because it doesn't show you all the details you might need to see at a glance."

"The solution can still be expensive, even with per-second billing."

"Since the product is fully managed, it is expensive."

"In terms of the container strategy, they need to make it more compliant with the Linux OS."

"f Microsoft Azure can provide GUI dashboards for end-users and administrators to work separately to manage all the Kubernetes clusters without a need to connect to Azure environments and through CLI it would be better."

"In the future, I would like to see it generalized and have the ability to better integrate with open-source tools."

"I wasn't very impressed with the documentation."

"Standard support could be more helpful and responsive."

"The customization is an area that needs improvement."

"They offer a pay-as-you-go pricing model for the product."

"I don't know the exact amount we were charged for our use of ECS, but I do know that it can be costly, especially when there is a bug or an error caused by default configurations."

"Amazon EC2 Container Service is cheap."

"The solution's cost could be reduced."

"If you want to scale without the traditional methods, the solution is a bit cost-effective."

"Amazon Elastic Container Service is an expensive solution."

"The tool's licensing is monthly."

"The solution is expensive, but not too much."

"The costs depend on the resources that you use, and there is a cost-management system to help calculate it."

"Microsoft Azure Container Service has costs but in the container environment, there are no costs because it is open source and we are using Docker as the container engine in the master and worker nodes established in the Azure environment."

"The solution's pricing is reasonable."