Amazon AWS Reviews

Currently, I mainly use Amazon AWS for databases and ETL jobs, and historically, I have built applications using compute Lambda, ECS, EC2, RDS, usually PostgreSQL engines, and DynamoDB. I also use other services such as the security-based parameter stores, VPC, and that kind of infrastructure.

The managed services of Amazon AWS help with getting experiments out faster than it usually would have taken. It mainly provides quick accessibility from idea to execution.

Compared to other providers, Amazon AWS offers numerous options to choose from in terms of compute, memory, and instance types. There are many options available for experimentation. Overall, there is a lot of fine-grained flexibility that Amazon AWS provides compared to other platforms.

Sometimes the costs associated with spinning up a service, especially managed services, have implications. For example, if I create a Glue job, that will create S3 buckets and other resources that have cost implications, but once I clean up a Glue job, it does not delete the other accessory resources. Sometimes, I have to go hunting for what resources Amazon AWS might have provisioned and how it is costing behind the scenes.

It can be complex depending on your level of expertise. It is not as easy to get started, especially when it comes to secure practices. Amazon AWS is more hands-on than other platforms.

I have been dealing with Amazon AWS for about six years.

There are glitches sometimes. It is not particularly stable lately. If I am spinning up any managed service from the console, sometimes it fails to start up, and there will be no information about why it failed.

Scale-out is usually good with Amazon AWS.

Technical support from Amazon AWS is excellent for us because we are AWS partners. We have a direct line to Amazon AWS, with premium support and AWS members located within the company. As a user of Amazon AWS within my company, technical support is really good. However, if I were to start up my own account without premium membership, I am not certain about that technical experience.

Positive

I have not used any big vendors such as Microsoft, Google, IBM, or Oracle.

When I start deploying Amazon AWS, the first problem I may face is setting up access keys and securely storing them. I also have to download tools that can use those access keys to interface with the Amazon AWS ecosystem. If I use the console, then it is easier; it is more click and connect. It is mainly the IAM roles that I have to set up and ensure I am not introducing any bad practices into my deployment or development.

I work in all capacities: as a user, partner, and integrator of Amazon AWS.

Depending on the use case, overall, I think Amazon AWS is competitive with other providers.

I have not experienced any setup costs in Amazon AWS.

I work with other products today, mainly Databricks. I also work with open source products such as Prefect.

My company works closely with Amazon AWS, so we have resident architects deployed into our organization. In terms of compliance, I do not directly work with it, but there are teams responsible for that aspect.

We mainly use GitHub Actions and Jenkins for deployment, so we do not use Amazon AWS global deployment tools.

We usually go to third-party tools for enhanced security features. We use Snyk, GitHub security, and TruffleHog for these purposes.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Amazon AWS a rating of eight for stability.

Overall, I rate Amazon AWS a nine out of ten.

My primary use case for Amazon AWS is for learning and experimentation, as my usage in real-time projects is very limited. I use it to understand cloud computing concepts, explore its services such as EC2, S3, and RDS, and learn how applications can be deployed and managed in the cloud. I also use Amazon AWS to build small projects and gain practical experience with cloud infrastructure.

I worked on a project with the help of a colleague where I was hosting a basic website using Amazon S3. I configured an S3 bucket for static website hosting, uploaded the website files, and set the appropriate permissions to make the site accessible online. Through this small project, I learned about Amazon AWS storage services, bucket policies, and how static web hosting works in the cloud.

The Amazon AWS features that I like the most and that stand out for data analysis are its ability to handle large volumes of data, seamless integration between services, and its scalability. Particularly Amazon S3 for data storage, Amazon AWS Glue for data preparation and ETL processes, Amazon Athena for querying data directly from S3, and Amazon QuickSight for creating dashboards and visualizations.

I found Amazon AWS very helpful, and the most important feature that I rely on most is S3. It serves as a centralized and highly scalable storage solution for datasets. It makes it easy to store, organize, and access large amounts of data. By keeping data in S3, I can quickly connect it to analytics services such as Athena and QuickSight for querying and visualization. This simplifies the data analysis workflow, reduces infrastructure management, and allows me to focus more on generating insights rather than handling storage and maintenance tasks.

One additional feature I appreciate is how well Amazon AWS services integrate with each other. For data analytics, services like S3, Glue, Athena, and QuickSight work together seamlessly, making it easier to build end-to-end data pipelines. I also value its scalability and pay-as-you-go pricing model, which allows organizations to start small and expand as their data and analytics needs grow.

The impact of Amazon AWS is evident in every organization that uses cloud-based applications. It has a positive impact by making data storage, processing, and analysis more efficient and scalable. Instead of managing on-premises infrastructure, teams can focus on analyzing data and generating business insights. Amazon AWS services help reduce setup time, improve collaboration through centralized data storage, and enable faster decision-making with real-time access to analytics and dashboards. For the team, Amazon AWS has streamlined workflows by providing integrated tools for data management and reporting, increasing productivity, improving data accessibility, and allowing projects to be completed more quickly and cost-effectively for the organization.

One area that could be improved in Amazon AWS is its learning curve. The large number of services and configuration options can be overwhelming, especially for new users. Understanding its pricing can also be challenging, as costs can add up unexpectedly if resources are not monitored carefully. For data analytics, setting up and integrating services such as S3, Glue, and Athena sometimes requires a good understanding of permissions, data formats, and service configurations. More guided, simplified onboarding for analytics use cases would make the platform more accessible.

One additional area for improvement is documentation and service selection. Amazon AWS offers many services with overlapping capabilities, and it can sometimes be difficult for users to determine which service is the best fit for a particular use case. More decision support tools and guided recommendations would help reduce this complexity. From a data analytics perspective, cost visibility could also be improved since analytics workloads can scale quickly. Having more proactive cost forecasting and optimization recommendations would help teams manage budgets more effectively. Another challenging area is IAM and permission management. While Amazon AWS provides strong security controls, configuring permissions correctly can be complex, especially when multiple analytics services need to interact with one another. Simplifying permissions while maintaining security would enhance the overall user experience.

The other area I would mention for improvement is the overall user experience. Given the huge number of services, which are truly excellent, it can sometimes feel overwhelming to navigate, especially for a new user that requires much training. A more streamlined interface and clearer recommendations between similar services would make it easier to get started. I would also like to see more built-in cost optimization guidance and cost management tools. Other than that, Amazon AWS is a very good and mature platform. Most of my feedback is about making it easier to learn, manage, and optimize rather than adding new capabilities.

I have been using Amazon AWS for the past six months, learning about its services and capabilities daily, and gaining an overall understanding of its core offerings such as EC2, S3, Lambda, and RDS. While my hands-on experience is limited to some extent, I am actively exploring the platform and expanding my knowledge. Overall, my experience is less than one year, and I am currently learning and exploring much about it every day.

I work with Amazon AWS software and other vendors to some extent, including Azure. I do not work fully with Azure Stack, Key Vault, or Application Gateway, as I use Amazon AWS exclusively.

I use AWS Glue on the ESB side, primarily with SQS (Simple Queue Service) for messaging services. Glue is not heavily utilized in my work. I am familiar with Secrets Manager, which relates to KMS (Key Management Service). SNS (Simple Notification Service) is a message service that I do not use extensively.

I use Amazon AWS as a solution consumer, not as a partner, integrator, or reseller.

I work with Amazon AWS Global Deployment capabilities, specifically ECS (Elastic Container Service) and EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Service). These services are used for deploying applications dynamically using CI/CD scaling and horizontal scaling for applications.

I am aware of DocumentDB and Direct Connect, though there are not many use cases related to these connections.

Regarding Lambda, EC2, and S3, I use these products. I do not work with solutions like Athena, Kendra, AppStream, WorkDocs, or Snowball.

Regarding Amazon Linux, I do not use Linux on EC2 instances; I only use Ubuntu Linux. The operating systems are part of that configuration.

What I appreciate most about Amazon AWS is that it is a popular cloud platform that is very easy to use based on the segregation that has been implemented. The compute service, storage service, security, and IAM are each separated, and the RDS service is also well-organized. The console is very user-friendly, allowing me to create whatever services I need on the fly in a simple way, and it provides good options. These features make Amazon AWS very popular and user-friendly to handle and use.

Regarding security features, Amazon AWS provides IAM features for user access management as well as KMS through key management service with private and public key encryption methodology.

I think Amazon AWS could be improved cost-wise, as the expenses can be considerable. There is Azure integration that many people use, with many organizations using Active Directory as a backend service. Amazon AWS has Cognito, but people still depend on Microsoft Azure AD integration. Those aspects could be integrated into Amazon AWS itself without depending on Microsoft Active Directory. Additionally, pricing is an area where Amazon AWS could provide more flexible options, especially when compared to Google Cloud, which offers more flexible options comparatively. Amazon AWS should revisit the pricing options and adopt more flexible strategies, allowing for increased usage and not restricting services to paying users only.

I have been using Amazon AWS for seven years.

Regarding the impact on latency and customer reach, there are no issues because that is a feature of the scaling. When setting up resources, the maximum limit can go high or low, at which time instances are increased, which helps maintain latency standards.

I can address a few questions to update the information. Concerning compliance certifications, 800 NS 800 security compliances are in place, and audit data must be managed depending on customer requirements. The data is encrypted during rest and in transit.

I believe that Amazon AWS supports IoT devices and machine learning capabilities, and Amazon AWS is also supporting AI features. These capabilities are still being expanded.

I do not work with some other products from Amazon AWS. I want to clarify that I am not using AWS SageMaker. Secrets Manager falls under KMS. Elastic Load Balancer is one service, and Elastic Block Store is another service that allows me to create external drives using EBS.

My overall review rating for Amazon AWS is 8 out of 10.

The use cases for Amazon AWS are about deploying our product there, as we are using the infrastructure that Amazon AWS provides, Ooma Olmos, to deploy our products for customers. We use it for development and testing for our products.

What I appreciate about Amazon AWS is that we are mostly hosting Kubernetes closer on-site and utilizing the services Amazon AWS provides, which means we do not need to hire resources to manage this infrastructure if we would host it in-house.

Amazon AWS security measures have protected our data and applications by allowing us to apply different security rules and also monitor traffic. Our requirement tools are quite strict, so if we see something strange happening, Amazon AWS monitoring lets us detect unusual events and apply additional security measures using the same Amazon AWS infrastructure.

What I would like to improve about Amazon AWS is the pricing, which is quite expensive for us, and we would definitely try to lower our spending because we are using quite a lot of our budget on Amazon AWS.

Regarding the setup process for Amazon AWS, I find it complex and it requires people with knowledge, so hiring Amazon AWS professionals is also a challenge. There is complexity in the domain.

I have used the solution for a couple of years.

I have used the technical support of Amazon AWS quite a few times.

My impressions of Amazon AWS technical support are that they are quite knowledgeable and professional, although we have to pay for this business support.

The deployment process involves creating new Amazon AWS accounts for customers for whom we want to deploy our products. We set up the infrastructure request for our product deployment, all done by scripts, telephone scripts, and then we have deployment scripts and provision scripts that we run.

We need about ten people in the ops team for the deployment and maintenance of Amazon AWS, who are maintaining screens and setting company environments.

I cannot comment on the cost-effectiveness of Amazon AWS compared to other cloud service providers because we are using Azure as well, but I cannot compare prices as the environments we have in Azure and Amazon AWS are a little bit different.

For automating our cloud infrastructure, I find using Terraform beneficial for optimizing our deployments.

I would recommend Amazon AWS to other people, but I would advise them to invest in finding professional Amazon AWS engineers, which we have included in our approach.

Regarding the ease of integration between various Amazon AWS services in my cloud ecosystem, I would say it is effective.

The licensing cost for Amazon AWS, as far as I know, involves Moxley.

The licensing is as expensive as I mentioned.

I would rate this review a 7.

I am using Amazon AWS for FinOps work, which involves financial operation and cloud cost optimization.

I work on almost 40 to 50 services of Amazon AWS, including QuickSight, their QuickSight dashboards, the CID frameworks, and even their Trusted Advisor and security services.

One aspect I appreciate in Amazon AWS is their support team, which is excellent. Whenever I have an issue, I can reach out to them via chat or call, receiving support immediately.

I particularly appreciate the recommendation engines they have recently created on the services, such as Savings Plans recommendations and Reserved Instances recommendations, which are very helpful, along with the analyzers such as their IAM analyzer and Access Analyzer. They are excellent, but they need more functionalities because customers always want additional features.

They need to improve the engines' availability of services since they have been reducing that availability. They have increased the durability, but when it comes to eleven nines, they have made it ten nines.

When using scripts for APIs to fetch data, they don't match the data exactly with the request. If something matches with certain data in the API, they share the complete information. For example, if you request instance-related details for PostgreSQL, RDS, and they have Aurora PostgreSQL, they will also share the details for Aurora PostgreSQL, which may not be relevant as the person is only asking for PostgreSQL.

I have been working with Amazon AWS cloud services since 2017, approximately eight years.

The scalability of Amazon AWS is excellent. I would rate it as a 10 out of 10 because they have massive power.

I rate their support as 10 for the availability of service. However, considering the overall support, I would rate it as 8.5 since it depends on the kind of solution you receive from the support. Reaching out to them and talking is different from receiving a complete solution to your problem.

Positive

The setup process for Amazon AWS is simple, and it is even simpler than Microsoft Azure.

I would rate the price for Amazon AWS around a 7. Initially, the price seems reasonable, but as you start accumulating their services and data, the price increases. After three to four years, if you are not managing it correctly, you will be paying more than an on-premise solution, which applies to all cloud providers, so you must regularly maintain and manage for efficiency.

I can recommend Amazon AWS for every type of company, even a company with only one server using Amazon AWS is doing very well.

I prefer Amazon AWS when comparing it with Azure. The reason I choose Amazon AWS over Azure is that it was the first cloud platform I learned, followed by Azure, making Amazon AWS always near and dear to me.

I use their Generative AI service, where you ask questions and receive answers, but I don't use it regularly.

Overall, the product is excellent. They are doing many innovations and new integrations while providing good services. However, they have started changing their pricing, which will cost customers more. It's a good overall product, and I rate it as 8.5 out of 10.

Our clients are the users. We recommend AWS to most of our clients, from the UK government, a shipping company in London, to companies in Washington and Sydney. We maintain their infrastructure on AWS.

We are not partners with AWS. We create and maintain the client's accounts, but the ownership remains with the clients. They pay directly for the AWS services, while we are the administrators who maintain their infrastructure.

AWS offers a lot of services; it's basically all microservices. As the client grows, we scale up to different data centers, security systems, and servers at different levels. We gradually migrate their emails, text messages, and everything else into the AWS infrastructure.

There's something called EC2, which are application servers. They are automatically scalable. They can increase, for example, during peak times like Christmas, depending on the load, and then decrease so the customer doesn't pay a huge amount. It's only during peak times that they automatically increase and then decrease. That's one of the best features of AWS.

Moreover, many Amazon products provide built-in firewalls and security features, eliminating the need for external security solutions. 

One thing that's a bit different is that we're still accustomed to speaking to someone directly. AWS doesn't offer that kind of support. It's only through bots. You're speaking to chatbots, and that can sometimes be frustrating because there's no person on the other side. AI is not a substitute for a person. 

AWS marketplace is very strong, but somehow AWS doesn't promote it much. They have a huge customer base across the globe, and if products were launched in their marketplace, they could sell like hotcakes. They should improve their marketplace and promote the same product across the globe. They can take a cut, but they should promote it. That's something they don't do very much.

So, AWS should promote its marketplace software. The company should promote it aggressively. Currently, they keep it very subtle. If you ask for it, they'll help you out. But they don't seem to advertise, "You're building a product on our platform? Why don't you sell it in our marketplace?"

Improvement in AI:

AWS is a little behind Microsoft Azure in terms of AI. AWS is still getting there, but the kind of examples and help files available in Azure for AI are much better. So AWS still needs to work on its AI functionality.

I have been using it for nine years. 

It's very stable. Some banks are even moving in now. It has 24/7 uptime, which gives 99.97% uptime. That's really good service.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

We create configurable systems that can keep scaling up and creating new servers on the fly. Then, they scale down when there's no load. For instance, if a server's load increases to 80%, we immediately create a new server automatically. 

During peak times, like Christmas, we might increase to seven or eight servers. As soon as the peak time is over, we reduce it back to one server, so the customer doesn't pay for eight servers. So it's very flexible.

It's an eleven out of ten. AWS is the best. We mostly work with enterprise businesses, but there are a few startups that begin with AWS because of the free credits. But those are smaller customers. 40% are smaller customers. And some of those who were smaller customers around eight or ten years ago have become enterprise-class today.

AI bot solves most problems, but we still need a human being to interact with, so I would rate it at six.

Neutral

The initial setup is very easy. The deployment takes half an hour. 

The initial setup experience with Amazon AWS was easy for us. We've been doing this for the last nineteen years, so it's become a piece of cake. It takes hardly half an hour to set up the whole infrastructure initially for any new clients.

So, I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten.

My clients are the customers of AWS. We are the ones maintaining their infrastructure.

There is ROI. It provides free cloud services for a specific duration and for specific customizations. Most clients get onboard and receive free credits, which they can use for two or six months. 

That's something very good with AWS because people can try it out without having to pay immediately. That's one of the best features, where everyone starts thinking about payment after their product is rolled out and they start making money.

The pricing is reasonable. It's not expensive, nor will it be cheap, but the free credits initially given provide leverage for new companies to start their businesses.

I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being expensive.

It becomes expensive if people want to use a lot of AI because that requires a lot of processing. If it's not optimized, it can become quite expensive.

For a startup, it starts with $500 to $1,000, but eventually, it reaches between $10,000 to $15,000 on average per month.

The best part of AWS when starting up is to take the fixed rate and start using it. As you go along, slowly increase the expenses and ask for a little more free credit, as they do extend it. 

AWS does this very nicely. And even for the UK, if you have the right skill set, you can make it economical. But if you misuse it, then it becomes very expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I run applications on Amazon AWS. The applications operate on their infrastructure, and I use Amazon AWS to manage this.

Amazon AWS offers flexibility and scalability. The integration process is straightforward, and they provide a reliable backup solution so that applications run without interruptions. Amazon AWS ensures that in the event of downtime for any reason, recovery is straightforward. Their infrastructure is robust, allowing for increased capacity as user volume grows.

Amazon AWS could improve its user interface to make it more user-friendly, especially for people who are not highly technical. A more intuitive, wizard-based approach could simplify and speed up the configuration process.

I have been using Amazon AWS for a long time, essentially since they launched the service.

I would rate the stability of Amazon AWS as eight out of ten.

Amazon AWS provides strong scalability features, but the scaling process could be made more straightforward. I would rate the scalability as nine out of ten.

Amazon AWS has good technical engineers available, making their customer service reliable.

Positive

The setup process for Amazon AWS is simple. However, work on their user interface would enhance the user experience further.

Currently, Amazon AWS is known to be on the higher price range because popular and in-demand services often come at a premium.

I also have experience using Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud Platform.

Most people prefer Amazon AWS due to its accessibility. Between Amazon AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud Platform, Amazon is considered number one, followed by Azure and then Google Cloud. I rate Amazon AWS overall as eight out of ten.

I use Amazon AWS for ERP implementation. My responsibility is to integrate our application into the AWS cloud and provide AI solutions to the infrastructure.

AWS is stable and has provided a reliable infrastructure for my organization.

AWS offers add-on services such as security and automated solutions, which are very useful for ERP management. It also provides dynamic token security, which is beneficial for data security.

AWS should reduce its cost to become more affordable for small-scale organizations. Currently, it is considered expensive compared to Azure and Google Cloud.

I have been working with AWS for four years.

AWS is stable, and so far, we have not faced any major incidents or issues.

I would rate the scalability of AWS eight out of ten. It is especially suitable for large-scale organizations.

AWS provides real-time solutions through their support center and offers comprehensive online documentation that helps solve issues efficiently.

Positive

Most organizations I work with also use other cloud services like Oracle OCI Cloud or Microsoft Azure depending on the application requirements.

The initial setup of AWS is straightforward and does not require much time due to automated configuration solutions.

In our project, six resources maintain one hundred and eighteen clients for AWS support and infrastructure services.

Large-scale organizations using AWS appreciate its infrastructure, security, and comprehensive global services, which justify the cost for them.

The cost is determined by the space, region, and duration of use. AWS is perceived as quite expensive compared to other cloud service providers.

Some organizations consider Microsoft Azure Cloud or Oracle Cloud as alternative solutions.

For those considering AWS, it's advisable to discuss cost reductions with vendors to make it more accessible for smaller organizations.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use it to run our production workload.

I like the auto-scaling functionality and compliance requirements, whichever they are requesting. 

I also appreciate new setup services, which allow customers to easily manage their entire AWS infrastructure through code, and the managed services that handle the heavy lifting for us.

AWS could benefit from being more cloud-agnostic. This means allowing customers to easily migrate their workloads and applications built on AWS services to other hyperscalers if needed. Currently, the architecture feels closed, making it difficult for customers to move to different cloud providers seamlessly.

One of the issues I'm facing is that my RDS SQL Server version 5.8 is reaching its end of life, and I need to upgrade it to a customer-wanted version. I want to do this on Graviton instances, but Graviton only starts with version 8.0 and currently doesn't support the 5.8 series. 

We've raised a Priority Feature Request (PFR) with AWS to have this functionality added for at least three months. This would give us enough time to upgrade our database to the 8.0 version without any issues.

I have been using it for the last two and a half years. 

The product is very stable and robust. I haven't experienced any issues so far.

The scalability and elasticity are key advantages of AWS compared to other providers. This is one of the main reasons why hyperscalers like AWS are preferred.

If we need to add or remove workloads, the performance remains consistent.

More than 70% of our workforce uses this solution. So, there are more than 40 end users. 

In situations beyond my expertise, I've contacted the engineers. They've been helpful in resolving issues, providing support with freezes, and offering guidance whenever needed.

The quality of the customer service and support depends on the engineer I interact with. 

However, in most cases, including my own, around 75% of the time, the engineers I've encountered have been knowledgeable, supportive, and flexible. 

While individual experiences may vary based on specific learning, I would generally rate the support as good.

Positive

The specific reason my company chose this product was that whatever use case we were expecting, everything was readily available on the AWS cloud. We didn't want to reinvent the wheel. 

We just wanted to choose the right services that would be cost-effective, optimized, meet customer requirements, and offer elasticity, scalability, flexibility, and security. 

So, when we compared AWS to other cloud vendors like Azure or Google, AWS performed significantly better. Based on that, our leadership recommended going with AWS, and the business and technical teams supported that decision. So, by taking into account all the inputs from various departments, we decided to go with AWS.

Setting up AWS was easy. I used Infrastructure as Code (IaC) with YAML codes to deploy the infrastructure quickly.

It took me about half an hour to spin up the VPC, security policy, launch instances, attach the Elastic Block Store (EBS) volumes, connect to the S3 VPN endpoint, and configure cloud-native services like CloudWatch and CloudTrail. 

However, it took me almost a week to prepare the IaC code beforehand. This code can be easily reused and modified for future deployments with any minor changes required by the customer's use cases.

The pricing depends on the workload. For example, if your workload involves Windows technologies, AWS may not be the most cost-effective option. In that case, you might be better off with Azure. 

But if you're working with open-source technologies, then AWS can be a good choice. They have their own process called RabbitMQ, which is an on-premises architecture where you can recompile all your applications to run on your own infrastructure. This can significantly reduce your costs compared to other hyperscalers like Google, Oracle, or Azure.

So, it would be worth my money to go with Amazon AWS at the end of the day. However, if it's a Windows-based workload, I wouldn't recommend AWS.

You can just go ahead with AWS with your eyes closed. You won't regret it.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I build infrastructure from the ground up. VPCs, in-depth virtual machines, new websites, migrations from on-prem to AWS, or even between cloud providers. 

Recently, I started building chatbots using Amazon Connect, IVRs, and Lambda. Lambda is also used for the contact center's business logic.

Based on what I do, it's not one service; they're interconnected. For example, when migrating a website from one cloud provider to another, I use EC2, a database system, and Route 53 for DNS. They really depend on each other. 

Now, if I had to pick just one... I like EC2. I can spin up applications and shut them down. When I work on security groups, opening and closing ports, EC2 allows it.

There is room for improvement in cost. Everyone complains about AWS being expensive. The initial cost starts small but can skyrocket unexpectedly. That's why some people, like my friend, have moved to Linode. 

Linode tells you upfront: "This instance with this configuration will cost $20/month. That's it." There are no hidden fees.

With AWS, it might start at $20, but then it creeps up to $35, $40, $50, and so on. It's a big concern, and people are even moving back to on-prem infrastructure because of it. 

Cost is crucial, and I see it myself. It gets expensive over time. AWS needs to improve its cost transparency and offer more predictable billing options. 

The cost is what everyone is running away from. It gets expensive over time.

I have been using it since 2014. 

Stability is guaranteed because the stability depends on how you design your solution. 

AWS has what's called the shared responsibility model. It simply means there's the work of you, the customer, and the job of AWS as a cloud provider. They handle the physical infrastructure, but you, the customer, need to be able to set up the application in such a way that if anything breaks, you can stabilize it. 

If you're designing your infrastructure using, for example, there are several factors you need to consider when designing your infrastructure, like scalability, security, etc. There are about six of them. 

So, you need to take all of those factors into consideration when designing your infrastructure. Because if you don't design it well, it could fail. So you have to design it so that it shouldn't fail. 

The onus is not entirely on AWS for you to have a stable infrastructure. You need to design your infrastructure properly, and then AWS manages the physical side of things. But overall, it's a stable cloud provider. That's why they're number one.

It's highly scalable. It's guaranteed 99.99% uptime, and it shows you can scale up or scale out whenever you need more space. 

Scaling up means you can add more memory to your VM at any time or increase the size of your database. Scaling out means you can create multiple VMs in different regions if you want; that's where availability zones come in. 

You can add more VMs if needed, and if one shuts down for any reason, the other one comes up. This is where load balancers come into play. The load balancers automatically create new VMs to manage the load of traffic coming to your website or application. So, it's highly scalable.

I have not personally contacted the support team. 

The first time I used AWS was in 2014 for my first project on the platform. That was the first time I logged in to the console, created a VPC, and deployed a VM. Everything was new to me. I used Udemy to learn to learn about this product in 2014.

I actually learned as I went along on the project. I knew nothing about it before starting, and I figured it out along the way.  

The difficulty level for the setup depends on how inquisitive you are and how deep you want to learn. If you're not patient, you might miss things. 

You need to have that initial interest and drive to start, and that makes it easier. For me, it was very easy because I was on a project, and it had to be successful at all costs. So, there was pressure, and I had no choice but to make it work. So, it depends on the scenario. 

But overall, it should be easy for a new person to use AWS because there are so many resources available. There are tons of white papers, online courses, and documentation on GitHub, and AWS has a lot of documentation online as well. So, it makes it easy. There's a step-by-step guide on how to use the infrastructure. So, it should be easy for a beginner. 

Setting up a VPC takes less than three minutes. Then, for it to start loading in AWS, it may take an additional two minutes. Then, for the VM, after creating the VPC, it depends on what you want. Do you want a Linux VM, Amazon Linux, Windows, or Mac OS? Whichever one you choose, if it's already created with all the dependencies from the marketplace, spinning up a regular Linux server on an Amazon VM should take less than three to four minutes. It is easy and very straightforward.

I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. It's pricier than Linode, which has a fixed price and it is still a pay-as-you-go service. While for,  AWS, over time, it gets expensive. 

Linode is much cheaper and good for small businesses. 

It's good for big players like Fortune 500 companies, but smaller companies struggle. My friend's company even left AWS due to costs. So, for smaller companies, it's expensive.

Use the AWS calculator to confirm resources and configuration. That'll give a budget estimate and insight. 

In cloud space, it is called TCO (Total Cost of Ownership). Before buying, ask:

1. How many VMs do I need?
2. Why am I moving to the cloud?

Write down those answers and your resource needs. Then, use the calculator to project costs over six months or a year. Remember, it's not perfect - there might be hidden costs. If it says $10,000, expect $12,000. So, add a buffer. Only then commit.  

My advice is to check the calculator first for an estimate, then research GCP and Azure to compare before deciding. Use data to make informed choices and decisions.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. Saving that one point for pricing.