My primary use case of AWS is cloud computing. I have been using the EKS, EFS, S3, and Lambda. I have a lot of experience with the Kubernetes cluster service, as well as AWS, Azure, and GCP.
This solution is cloud-based.
My primary use case of AWS is cloud computing. I have been using the EKS, EFS, S3, and Lambda. I have a lot of experience with the Kubernetes cluster service, as well as AWS, Azure, and GCP.
This solution is cloud-based.
Amazon AWS has many merits, in terms of scalability, stability, and availability. I have loved using this tool.
Amazon AWS could be improved with cheaper licensing costs.
I have been using Amazon AWS for more than four years.
This solution is stable.
This solution is scalable.
In my organization, there are approximately 500 to 1,000 users of Amazon AWS.
Amazon's technical support is excellent. I am very satisfied with their support.
The initial setup was very simple. I have been using Terraform as an infrastructure as code tool, and with Terraform, it's very simple. Within one day, I can provision the AWS Infrastructure as a Service tool and install our platform based on the cloud and data analytics.
From a cost perspective, Amazon AWS is excellent. You need to pay for a license to use AWS, and the license could be cheaper, but in each of the cases and instances I've used AWS, there has been a good chance to save money.
I rate Amazon AWS a ten out of ten. I usually recommend AWS because I have loved using this tool. Most of the time, I recommend it as a real-time information and patching service with Lambda.
AWS makes deployment and management of infrastructure easier. We are using so many features, including Lambda, Elastic Beanstalk, Elastic Container Service, EC2 instances, and Landing Zone. We rely heavily on AWS, and we're constantly taking advantage of new features as they come out to see how they can add value to the business.
AWS's containerization is the most useful feature for us.
I'd like to see AWS implement consolidated billing for businesses operating under one group. We want to consolidate the functionalities but keep the billing separate. That is a challenge we've faced, and I feel it's something they can improve on. For example, maybe you have three businesses that are operating under one group, and you want each entity to have a separate bill for the respective workload that they're using. But in terms of technical expertise, you want to consolidate the technical support and function of the three accounts. That's an area where AWS is struggling.
I've been using Amazon AWS for about four or five years.
AWS is stable.
AWS is scalable. We're serving close to 7,000 or 8,000 end-users with it.
AWS support is good.
AWS is pay as you go.
We reviewed the main three cloud providers: GCP, Azure, and AWS.
I rate AWS 9.5 out of 10. I would recommend it.
The scalability and security of Amazon AWS are the most valuable features.
There are multiple operational and administrative services on AWS, I am expecting to see an integrated single platform of all the services so that it will be easier for the administrators to monitor and manage.
We are resellers of the production services of AWS. I have been working with Amazon AWS for almost 8 years.
The AWS products are stable.
The environment is stable. Every time a new feature is introduced, it advances the capabilities. Once the product is deployed, you can scale up easily.
Technical support has been very good.
The initial set up of AWS is easy and not complex.
The pricing is reasonable and comparable to similar services when run on-premise.
All the services and features provided by AWS are good. They are always improving their features.
I recommend implementing the products on Amazon Web Services. It is a stable environment and mature cloud platform. I would rate the product an 8 out of 10.
I've used it to create some internal projects for my organization, particularly for designing the infrastructure of those projects.
One feature I find most valuable is the easy deployment by using the channel model for serverless architecture. Another feature I find valuable is the versatility of the service S3 because it allows you to give permissions to describe the users from their own accounts, from external users, or external accounts.
On the console, they used to have some shortcuts making this solution easier to work with, but now we have been dealing with so many problems on the console, and some of the options are not very useful in my perspective, so they should bring back those options that make things easier to run some of the services.
Most of the time the options are pre-selected, or you have to go with the default settings, but from my perspective, there are some services which are now more complicated to use than before.
An additional feature I'd like to see in the future is more integration with public repositories, though some use their own repositories for security purposes, but I think it'll be easier to deploy services through public repositories.
I've been using this solution for almost four years now.
This solution is stable. I've been using it for a long time and have only seen an outage in one of the regions. It's a good solution.
The scalability of this solution is good.
The technical support of AWS is very good. When I need something, they reach out to me fast.
The initial setup was straightforward. The complexity of the setup will depend on the number of services e.g. it's something that involves a lot of services, it could get complex, but for a complex setup, you could use things like transformation or Terraform because they will enable you to use infrastructure as a code to make it easier. There's a lot of things to configure.
Licensing of this solution is paid on a yearly basis.
I evaluated Microsoft Azure.
This was deployed on the cloud. I don't remember which version because I didn't deploy it. I was not the person running the project of implementing AWS, but I know the client used it, but I don't know which version.
It's not so difficult to use because there's a lot of tutorials.
I'm not completely sure about the number of AWS users in our organization. We have a partnership with them so we have some accounts, but we don't completely have our load on AWS. We are mostly on Azure. Our main server is on Azure. On AWS, we mostly have some internal projects and services, but most of the main load is on Azure.
We have a small workload on AWS. Sometimes we use it to deploy some of our best projects. We use it on some internal projects. It's a random thing so it could be 1,000 users or 50 users. I'll say approximately 200 to 500 users.
We don't require too many people for deploying this solution because our projects are proof of concepts. Up to ten people from different departments would be needed for deployment if it's a business requirement e.g. people from Approvals and Projects, etc.
As for increasing AWS usage, the organization sometimes thinks of moving some of the load to AWS because of good pricing, because currently, our main streams are on Azure, but it's not a sure thing.
I'm unsure if there's any additional cost aside from the need to pay the license annually because I don't directly manage it.
My advice to organizations looking into implementing AWS, especially if they're going to use it on a big scale, is to take advantage of AWS' organization model to make integration with their policies easier. It will also make administration easier for the different accounts, departments, and structure of the organizations thinking of moving to AWS.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
My primary use case was as a place to migrate legacy systems.
AWS has reduced our costs and maintenance requirements. It also allows us to control our load in peak times and automatically increases or decreases your capacity as required.
The features I have found most valuable are S3 buckets and Lambda services.
An area for improvement would be API creation - a lot of tools are provided, but there can be issues with integrating them. There is also a cost underlay, in that at the end of the day, some costs are not in the picture, so AWS needs to improve its costing toolset.
I have been using this solution for two years.
The stability of AWS has improved over time and can now be well managed.
This solution is scalable to any limit.
I previously used Rackspace Openstack but switched because it required more manpower than AWS, and AWS is more cost-effective and tolerant.
The setup was somewhat complex. It was done in three phases over a year.
This solution reduced our overhead cost by 30-40%.
Technical support is expensive to use.
I evaluated Oracle Cloud, but it was more complex to use and provided a smaller toolset than AWS.
This solution is one of the top tools available for legacy migration. I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.
We are using the solution for our core applications and our core infrastructure.
The product offers a lot of functionality.
Our vendor who provides us a specific core application uses AWS and it's just simple for us if we use it too.
The initial setup is straightforward.
The solution has been issue-free. It's very stable and the performance is good.
The solution can get to be a little expensive.
I've been using the solution for a year and a half.
The product is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. The performance is good.
We have about 100 users on the solution right now.
Technical support is good. We have had no issues with them. We are satisfied with their service.
We also use Microsoft Azure.
The initial implementation process is pretty simple and easy. It's not complex or overly difficult. A company shouldn't have any issues with the deployment process.
The costs could always be lowered.
How often we pay can vary, depending on the exact service. We pay, for example, both yearly and monthly.
As a cloud-based solution, we are using the latest version all the time.
I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.
I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations.
Our primary use case of AWS, for most projects, is for hosting on AWS and developing locally, as well as testing some AWS environments. We are mostly using this platform from a developer point of view. AWS is our cloud platform by choice.
One of the most valuable things about it, besides the stability, is that you can forget about infrastructure because you're just doing it on AWS. I remember the times before AWS and other cloud solutions existed, and it was a huge pain to get real hardware, put it inside, configure everything, report everything, and do a scale. It was very, very difficult compared to how it is now. Not even just AWS, but what all these cloud providers are doing, I would say, is a huge advancement in technology.
AWS could be improved with more integration, but I can see that they're developing these features and working very hard on their platform.
I have been working with AWS for a few years.
Amazon AWS is very stable.
One of the major points for AWS is the scalability that comes with it. You can monitor it really well, and you can even adjust down, or sometimes up. What this technology allows is very nice.
AWS is predominantly used in most of the projects that we have. In my organization, there are thousands of users who are using AWS.
I have never personally contacted tech support.
There isn't really an installation for AWS, but you will need certain certificates to download the interface. I generated some certificates, put them on my machine, and then used them to connect to AWS services.
It depends on the project, but there is usually only one guy needed for deployment. For bigger, more complex platforms, you may need two or three guys to deploy AWS.
I implemented AWS myself.
You pay for a license, and that's how you get your own account. These are usually not individual licenses, but rather for a group of people. I think these licenses come at some volume, but I don't know many details about the licensing.
I rate AWS a five out of ten, but it's mainly because I don't feel very experienced in AWS. I have gone to the console many times and seen many features that I have never used. I'm sure I can learn quickly, though, because there is a lot of information shared on the internet about how to use it—there are a lot of resources that you can use to learn, and there are a lot of features available on AWS. They're working very hard on their platform, and I can only see their usage growing in the future.
I would certainly recommend AWS to others.
I use the solution for deploying some applications that use cloud computing.
It offers a lot of tools, which we leverage.
At the moment I'm using Lambda service and also AC2 machines - as a platform as a service and infrastructure as a service.
The pricing model is good. It's pay-as-you-go. You only pay for what you use.
The solution offers a lot of very helpful documentation. There's also a great community that surrounds it that is quite helpful if you have questions or want to learn something.
Personally, I need to improve myself in terms of the knowledge I have around the product. My goal is to maybe get certified in order to understand it better. It would be helpful if they would be able to provide me with more certification information.
It's a good platform. I don't have any issues with it at the moment.
It would be ideal if they could provide automatic health reports. That way, I would be able to understand at a glance the state of my services at any given time.
I've used the solution for three or four years at this point.
The solution is stable. We have many items deployed in AWS and we haven't had any issues. there are no bugs or glitches. It's problem-free.
AWS provides us with a lot of tools for deploying automatically when we are working, for example, in a new feature. We have options for automatic deployments and don't have issues with size.
There's a lot of great documentation and community support. I'm learning a lot and can find any answers I need there.
I'm working with AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud Computing right now.
I work with my customer's solutions and I deploy into AWS to provide the end product for my customers. I don't directly deal with AWS implementations themselves.
The pricing is good and it's set up as a pay-as-you-go. It's not overly expensive.
I'm just a customer and an end-user.
I'd highly recommend the solution to other users. It's one of the best cloud options out there right now.
I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.
