Amazon AWS Reviews

I am an integrator. 

We get some courses and communications from the technology, so we update our knowledge about how to use that kind of technology for the cloud.

Cloud Management has been a valuable feature. It depends on how we meet our business challenge head-on with the cloud computing services because sometimes you find that the computing is working fine with Google, and sometimes it's Azure, and sometimes it's Amazon.

One customer is going to work with Azure, and the next year they'll change everything and work with AWS because in our environment the most sensitive data is kept in the on-premise environment the majority of the time. It's more frequent that you can find an environment that has hybrid implementation.

I think in some situations the key difference between Azure and AWS is how they support the hybrid cloud. In some scenarios, Azure will support hybrid cloud better while AWS offers direct connection. Azure provides security by offering information on the whole account where AWS security provides an easy find row. It depends on what the customer wants to have in the environment or how they want to work with that or what is the customer's budget.

Most of the issues are that because it's a hybrid environment, the configuration is restricted with the firewalls. The most common issue that they have found is generated by the person who administers these kinds of solutions.

It would be great if you could find a way to make an architect design and just click one button and put that in the cloud.

I have been using this solution for more than six years.

It's simple because the customer will get familiar with the technology. The customer has to know his company. He has to know it's a new technology and everything gets complicated if the person doesn't adapt to changes. It depends on how they approach all the adoption from this kind of multi-cloud solution.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

My advice is to read about the solution. All of the learning is logical, and you can follow it and put it in practice. I believe it's a great product and great technology.

We build our own service virtualization tools. We use Amazon AWS for cloud hosting. AWS has a lot of services that we use.

Everything in AWS is valuable? AWS itself is valuable in multiple ways. Whatever I use is valuable, which is the reason we use it.

It has a lot of new features that make our lives easier in terms of what we want it to do in the house.

I have been using Amazon AWS for four years.

Amazon AWS is quite stable, which is why it is used by many people.

Amazon AWS is highly scalable.

There's no tech support. AWS operates under a different model. There is no simple tech support available, as there is in other traditional methods. We have an enterprise account, so it's not like individual tickets; we have an enterprise client relationship, so it's very different.

It is easy to access them.

I've worked with a variety of service virtualization tools.we have not used anything from IBM. We don't use Azure, we use Amazon AWS. AWS as an IaaS or PaaS cloud solution.

The initial setup is straightforward. However, you can't give a broad overview of your setup as it depends on your use case.

There are numerous use cases, and the setup varies from complicated to very simple in some cases. As a result, I don't want to give a generic answer.

It's quite good, I would rate Amazon AWS a ten out of ten.

Amazon AWS has a better portfolio. They have an impressive technology and service portfolio.

The invoicing procedure of Amazon AWS needs to be improved. It can be difficult to manage.

I have used Amazon AWS within the last 12 months.

The technical support of Amazon AWS is good.

I have used Oracle previously, and I don't see any difference between Amazon AWS and Oracle from the stability and availability point of view.

Amazon AWS is a bit more expensive than Oracle.

I rate Amazon AWS an eight out of ten.

Propension ML model implementation, so the tech stack involves ETL, storage and computation capabilities for model design, implemented solution also involves pipelines and events handler for automated runs

Development of the product has been consistent which is beneficial for data engineers unlike Azure which has changed a lot, causing them much confusion.

Amazon has a much better understanding of the workflow of data scientists and machine learning processes. This is seen by their SageMaker which offers different versions of the models to be used.

I think that the interface could be improved.

Additionally, they lack good connectors with services within other clouds. For example, it does not integrate well with Power BI which is a Microsoft service.

Sometimes, some of their services can be too complex/technical. It's almost like they tried taking a microservice approach meanwhile the users want a little more integration

In other words the multi-cloud approach is not robustly promoted as there is a noticeable difference in ease of use.

I have been using this solution for eight months.

just one event where the whole service was down, although im not sure if it was anticipated by the service due to not being the actual service administrator

very good, the tier we used is one of the most basic and still performed with no problems

never had experience with customer service or support

Neutral

pretty straight forward, although this project was 2nd one to be implemented on this cloud, so the customer company had already been up the adoption curve of the service

we provide the implementation as a consulting company soy neither in house or 3rd party as we are the 3rd party

If you are looking to implement Amazon AWS within your company, I would suggest finding someone that already knows some AWS as it has a harder adoption curve.

I would rate it a six out of ten. 

I used Amazon AWS to create a server for our local application and integrated it for clients.

What I liked most about Amazon AWS are its services and infrastructure. They're good. It's a very user-friendly platform. Its servers are also more reliable than others.

An area for improvement would be their technical support packages. They should improve the technical support packages for users on free trial. There is a gap between the user and their technical support team. My suggestion is for them to build on their support for their free trial users.

I used Amazon AWS within the last 12 months, but not right now as I used it for my old project, when I was creating an EC2 server at that time. That was my virtual project, so I created an account and used the AWS services, and also created the server, but that project was closed, so the need was unmet.

Amazon AWS is so stable.

Amazon AWS is scalable, and I'm rating it a nine out of ten for scalability.

Installation for this solution is not complicated. It's easy to install. It's straightforward. If I were to rate my experience with the initial setup of Amazon AWS, with five being the best and one being the worst, I'm giving it a five out of five.

Amazon AWS was deployed in-house. I didn't use any integrator, reseller, or consultant.

I was working with Alibaba Cloud before I worked with Amazon AWS. Alibaba Cloud is comparatively more difficult than Amazon AWS.

I also evaluated Google Cloud and the main differences between Amazon AWS and these other products include how Amazon AWS was easy to use, user-friendly, and its infrastructure.

I've also used the server I built via Amazon AWS for our Android applications, and found the reliability and the stability of that server to really good. I can use it again next time when I'm into development. The server's always good.

I had four customers on Amazon AWS. Those customers were architects working in technology and IT companies.

I also created a server for our taxi application client as one of my projects. I have a local user.

I had three to four people for deployment and maintenance. Some were nontechnical, while some were technical, with an IT background.

Because I was on the free trial version of Amazon AWS, I didn't get to use their technical support.

I used the free trial of Amazon AWS for my clients. I used it during the testing period. I developed applications for clients, then recommended AWS servers to them for the applications.

I highly recommend this platform to others who are considering using it, because its stability is good.

We have different requirements vs other users, so I'm not in a position to recommend features, especially because I have not used all the features of Amazon AWS. I can't say that this feature is good, or that feature is bad. I can't say which features to add to the next release.

I'm rating Amazon AWS a nine out of ten and this is both from an integrator and customer perspective.

We use it to run workload applications, ERP systems, LISAP systems, etc. Everything is on the cloud, including our technical infrastructure for computing, storage, and networking. You can deploy applications like SAP or Oracle or run any website with applications on it.

You can build and release applications quickly with AWS instead of waiting for months to get the necessary hardware. That's the real benefit. The time-to-market for developing applications is much shorter. 

The most valuable thing about AWS is its ease of use and agility. You can quickly deploy it, and there are no upfront costs.

One problem is that the AWS public cloud doesn't have shared storage capabilities. The second thing is the cloud performance versus on-prem. I also have one suggestion that's solution-based. For example, if I want to deploy a medical solution, I would like to have a medical template, so I don't have to set up the infrastructure from scratch. They should provide everything in a pre-defined custom solution blueprint. 

We've been using AWS for four years.

AWS is generally reliable, but we've seen a lot of issues lately, so I would say they have some room for improvement. For example, if the user doesn't configure something correctly, it might fail. Even if AWS is reliable, that doesn't guarantee that all the users will be reliable. They need to make the design foolproof. 

AWS is a cloud provider, so the scalability is almost infinite. Our company currently has around 500 users on AWS. 

We have enterprise support, so they have different levels. If you have enterprise support, they have obligations they must meet. In our experience, Amazon support is above average. Sometimes we get good support. Sometimes we don't. I would rate it six out of 10. 

The AWS initial setup is seamless and straightforward. We set it up ourselves, and we have a 10-person team to manage and maintain the solution. Including design and planning, it took us about three months. 

I rate AWS seven out of 10. My advice is to watch out for the cost. A public cloud means you can use any resource, and there is no upfront cost. That means someone can use an expensive computing solution that might cost them tons of money. No one is holding your hand, so you can use it, but you need to be conscious of the cost before using the solution.

We use Amazon AWS to implement services for our customers, like backup systems, webpages, and customer services.

I think the AWS interface is good. It's easy to understand and use. 

It's sometimes a challenge to manage billing on this platform. It takes a lot of labor to generate billing for our customers from the service on the cloud.

I've been working with Amazon AWS for six years, almost seven.

AWS is incredibly stable.

I think that almost 1,000 people.

Amazon support is very good. 

Setting up AWS isn't complex, takes less than a week, and only requires one person. 

I rate AWS 10 out of 10. AWS is a solid product. I feel confident I can provide a good level of service to my customers using AWS. To anyone thinking about using AWS, I would suggest carefully designing your implementation. This is very important because it will impact the monthly cost of the solution. You need to think ahead and talk with your staff to find opportunities to make this more efficient. 

We are primarily using the solution for evaluation purposes.

The functionality and the UI are both very straightforward.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The stability is good.

Technical support is quick to assist.

The pricing could be better. It's a bit expensive. 

The availability could be better.

I've been using the solution for about two years.

I haven't had any issues that would bring stability into question. there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I can't speak to the scaling. It's not something I've attempted. I just use it myself.

I can't say that there are plans to increase usage right now. 

Technical support has been great. They are helpful and responsive. They are very fast.

This is my first cloud product. I did not use something previously.

The initial implementation process is not difficult or complex. It's straightforward. It's basically having the computing power, the storage, S3, and the database.

The implementation was handled in-house. We did not use an external integrator, reseller, or consultant.

It's a costly product.

We pay a monthly licensing fee. It's below $100 a month.

I haven't done any evaluations or comparisons with other products.

We are customers.

We are using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.