Amazon Elastic Container Service Reviews

At the moment, I am not using anything else that I would give a review on, but I can tell you that Amazon Elastic Container Service is a great product for someone who wants to get started with virtual machines and Amazon Web Services. It helps users understand Linux or Windows because they also have a Windows version, so you could do a Windows server or a Linux server. I never deployed mine or spun Amazon Elastic Container Service with Windows. I did it only with Linux while learning Linux and VM. I was learning about SSH tunneling, key pairs, and Linux administration.

Amazon Elastic Container Service provides a headless server. You SSH into the Linux headless server and everything is command prompt. It helps develop core skills on Bash. You tunnel into your Amazon Elastic Container Service and manage it as you would any other VM, except that Amazon Elastic Container Service in particular is restrictive. You cannot set up an Amazon Elastic Container Service flavor with more than four gigs of RAM, and cannot do more than 80 gigabytes of storage, four gigs of RAM, with restricted processing.

It is much more expensive than deploying an EC2 unit. You deploy it similarly to how you deploy an EC2 unit. It is very similar to an EC2 unit, except that it is restricted in size, storage, and processing speed. You can still use Route 53 to create your DNS records, your domain, and manage your domain. You can still serve it up, install an Apache server, Apache 2.4 web server, or a Nginx server, or any other service that is supported by Linux or Ubuntu, in order to service any small application you may have online.

Because it has four-gig RAM, your application has to be fairly simple. It is not scalable, and you can only deploy applications that are going to use four gigs of RAM and very little processing power. It is possible to deploy a small REST API, if you containerize a MySQL server or PostgreSQL server or something small. Linux also supports SQLite. You can containerize a database, create either .NET Core or a Node.js server to serve up the REST API. You could also load a small front-end solution, possibly React, but more likely in vanilla JavaScript to serve it up using the Route 53 service to provide the front end. You could basically architect a very small solution. It works similar to an EC2 except for those restrictions in size. There are other restrictions too, as you do not have access to many of the AWS services and tiers that an EC2 would have access to.

The most valuable aspect is that Amazon Elastic Container Service allows the opportunity for low cost, as it is less expensive than EC2, to get used to all these concepts, paradigms and techniques. Users learn how to SSH in, manage domains with Route 53, and gain practical experience without having to pay substantial costs for that process.

The availability is another significant advantage. Since it is Amazon, everything is saved on their cloud networks. There are numerous features available for creating clones and duplicating storage. The redundancy afforded through Amazon's vast web services ecosystem is particularly valuable. The ability to create redundancy at specific time intervals prevents data loss during deployment.

This enables excellent continuous integration and continuous deployment pipelining. Users can save every iteration and new version of deployment to cloud features.

The main challenge with Amazon Elastic Container Service is the significant learning curve. Everything mentioned took months to understand. It is not for the faint of heart. Though they have graphical interfaces and numerous dashboards that help create all the services graphically, learning to use Bash can be challenging. Because these are headless servers by nature, there is no graphical interface. It is not similar to Windows where you can hit the start button and look for your program, or Mac where you can look for programs on your desktop. Instead, users must understand this new paradigm of a Linux headless server, which requires using command-based prompts for builds and development.

I did not have any recollection of contacting their support team. This was before large language models became prevalent, and I became accustomed to using Google for solutions. I may have contacted them once or twice when I bricked the VM, meaning I killed it or could not access it. I lost my private keys, but when you brick a VM by loading something inappropriate or locking yourself out, there is not much that can be done. Once you own and spin up the VM, it becomes your responsibility.

It is similar to having a safe in your house - if you forget the password, you need an expensive service to break into it. With a VM, if you lock yourself out, you must rely on redundancy features. Having a clone, copy, or image of your VM contents and database-level redundancy means you might only lose an hour or two of data rather than everything.

I no longer use AWS for my websites because it is too expensive and prohibitive. I found a service called DreamHost among many competitors in the EC2 space for virtual machines that can be launched online, attached to DNS, and used for domain management. I now use DreamHost to launch a VM running Ubuntu 22.04. EC2 offers similar functionality with Ubuntu, Linux, or Windows options, managed virtually through SSH access to a headless server.

When I encountered issues such as bricking the VM or losing access, there was limited support available since the VM becomes the user's responsibility after deployment.

Amazon Elastic Container Service has significant limitations regarding scalability. The service restricts users to a maximum of four gigabytes of RAM, 80 gigabytes of storage, and limited processing power. This makes it suitable only for small applications with minimal resource requirements.

While you can still utilize Route 53 for DNS records and domain management, and install various servers such as Apache 2.4 or Nginx, the resource restrictions limit the scope of possible applications. Small REST APIs, containerized databases, and simple front-end solutions are possible, but larger applications requiring more resources are not feasible.

Additionally, Amazon Elastic Container Service users have limited access to AWS services and tiers compared to EC2 users, further restricting scalability options.

I rarely needed to contact their support team. I primarily relied on Google for solutions. There were perhaps one or two instances when I bricked the VM or lost access due to lost private keys. However, in such situations, support options are limited since the VM becomes the user's responsibility after deployment.

Positive

I have switched from AWS to DreamHost for hosting websites due to AWS's prohibitive costs. DreamHost is one of many competitors in the EC2 space, offering virtual machines that can be launched online, attached to DNS, and used for domain management. I currently use a DreamHost VM running Ubuntu 22.04. The functionality is similar to EC2, allowing users to launch Ubuntu, Linux, or Windows servers managed through SSH access to a headless server.

The initial setup can be accomplished using AWS dashboards, which are particularly user-friendly. Users can spin up servers, attach domains, and connect databases through the dashboard interface. AWS offers pre-loaded VMs with Linux boxes that come with Node and Express already installed.

AWS provides a server-based Bash terminal for online use, eliminating the need for a separate Bash installation. They attempt to simplify the basic operations for users. However, more extensive operations involve a significant learning curve.

I would recommend starting with Amazon Elastic Container Service. If you specifically need an AWS server for particular AWS features from their extensive offerings, I would recommend starting with Amazon Elastic Container Service and progressing to EC2.

If you are trying to save money, start with Amazon Elastic Container Service. If budget is not a concern, then proceed directly with EC2 as it allows you to bypass an additional layer of learning. However, if budget is limited and you have time for deployment and learning, Amazon Elastic Container Service is the recommended starting point.

This review rates the product as 7 out of 10.

A quick specific example of a project or application I have deployed using Amazon Elastic Container Service includes using Python-based, Node-based, PHP-based, Go-based, and many more other self-hosted tools, deploying on Amazon Elastic Container Service Fargate environment based on our needs.

I typically use Amazon Elastic Container Service in multiple ways, as there is not a specific thing; I am using it at an advanced level.

Out of those features, the one that has made the biggest difference for my team and workflow is the ease of scaling, logging, monitoring, and easy deployments, as well as being self-managed by AWS, facilitating multiple things such as internal communication and private networking.

I would add that there is a namespace service where I am using service discovery, with a few more networking-related features, including VPC Resolver, which impacts our VPC and Amazon Elastic Container Service environment to control incoming and outgoing traffic.

Amazon Elastic Container Service has impacted my organization positively by being very helpful, cost-optimized, and easy to deploy; from a developer perspective, user perspective, and DevOps team perspective, it accommodates everyone, whether they are a fresher, intermediate, or advanced user, thanks to its easy UI features.

I have seen specific outcomes including time savings and the removal of code dependency on DevOps when using Amazon Elastic Container Service, contributing to saving time, cost, and many other benefits, with these being the two major points.

Regarding Amazon Elastic Container Service's AI capabilities, I think its governance and security are solid due to features including ARM-specific secret management, IAM-specific containerization, task role, task execution role, and read-only EBS related elements within container mounting volumes, showcasing multiple security features provided within the UI.

When it comes to the accuracy and reliability of outputs from Amazon Elastic Container Service's AI capabilities, I find it far better, especially since AWS launched their AI-related help bot, generating accurate answers that help resolve and debug issues.

What needs to be improved with scalability is not specific, but it involves occasions when the scaling trigger does not perform up to the mark, and sometimes it gets stuck in the draining state when a container goes down due to reasons including being unhealthy or crashing, requiring a wait for the container to transition before a new one can come up.

I would rate the customer support an eight on a scale of one to ten.

I give it a nine out of ten because, although it is not a direct alternative, it is indirectly an alternative to Kubernetes, which is costly in microservices environments where we do not need to deploy multiple things; major users, products, organizations, and companies can utilize Amazon Elastic Container Service compared to Kubernetes, which tends to be expensive, but it ultimately depends on need, situation, and tech stack requirements, so overall, Amazon Elastic Container Service is a major winning.

My advice to others looking into using Amazon Elastic Container Service is to proceed with the implementation.

I have assigned this review an overall rating of nine out of ten.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is used for hosting different applications in a container environment. It makes it somewhat easy to host applications, and as one of the AWS-provided solutions, it is easy to onboard applications into AWS.

Additionally, Amazon Elastic Container Service supports microservices architecture.

Availability is the most valuable feature because if containers are hosted on Amazon Elastic Container Service, they are truly available and do not go down.

Hosting something on Amazon Elastic Container Service is easy due to the provided pre-baked templates. Additionally, Amazon Elastic Container Service is very well integrated with Amazon Elastic Container Service Fargate, which is useful for those who do not want to manage the underlying EC2 instances.

I am not certain about potential improvement areas for Amazon. However, I think the UI should be enhanced to better visualize things.

I have been working with Amazon Elastic Container Service for the last four years.

There are no bugs.

I would rate the ability to scale and expand as nine.

My mark for Amazon technical support is nine; I am quite happy with it.

The setup is not difficult.

I combine Checkmarx, Infosec, and AWS solutions. I work with Amazon solutions such as Amazon Elastic Container Service, Kubernetes, and some of the AI solutions, including Bedrock; these are some of the things I do for daily activity.

Mostly I work with Amazon Kubernetes and also Amazon Elastic Container Service. I also work with IAM for security; Amazon Elastic Container Service requires identity and access management roles, so I have to provision roles for Amazon Elastic Container Service to work.

As a user, I am mostly on the technical side in a techno-managerial role, so it becomes easy for me to host something onto Amazon Elastic Container Service; the onboarding time for Amazon Elastic Container Service is easy and there are all sorts of pre-baked templates to use.

We use Amazon Elastic Container Service as a hosting technology. My organization operates in the legal sector, and we use ECS to handle legal workloads.

Amazon Elastic Container Service makes horizontal scaling easy and is especially effective when working under the ECS service. Most modern workloads can be deployed on Fargate containers, abstracting away the hardware. We do not need to think about physical servers anymore, which is a significant advantage. This approach reduces costs since it eliminates the need to maintain idle service processing units. Additionally, it provides excellent horizontal scalability.

Currently, when scaling with Amazon Elastic Container Service, I have to choose between monitoring CPU or memory usage to scale up or scale out; there is no option to monitor both simultaneously. This limitation makes it challenging to define a balanced scale-out automation since a well-written software should balance between processing and memory.

I have over ten years of experience with cloud hosting solutions.

The stability of Amazon Elastic Container Service is excellent. We have most of our services running on ECS as well as Azure Container Service, and we have not experienced any downtime.

Amazon Elastic Container Service has a scalability rating of ten out of ten. It provides excellent horizontal scalability.

The support from AWS is incredible. They often invite us to meetings to showcase new solutions. We have a very good relationship with AWS support.

Positive

We use solutions across different platforms, including Azure, AWS, and GCP.

The initial setup of Amazon Elastic Container Service is rated eight out of ten. Although it is easy, there are nuances such as needing to define private and public networks and bind all services, which complicates the process slightly.

The use of ECS in combination with Fargate reduces costs. It eliminates the need for processing units for idle services. This saving is achieved since, with EC2, the entire virtual machine must be running regardless of workload, whereas Fargate eliminates this cost.

The pricing of Amazon Elastic Container Service is very competitive compared to Azure and quite cheap compared to Google, particularly for hosting databases.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is comparable to other container management solutions such as Kubernetes. There is no clear difference when considering the container services on different clouds; they are quite similar.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Amazon Elastic Container Service ten out of ten. It is an incredible service.

Our organization focuses on the cloud business, particularly on cloud infrastructure, platform, or software services. Although our primary focus is not on Amazon Elastic Container Service directly, as our organization is not the end user, we are resellers. We take Amazon Elastic Container Service and other AWS products to our customers.

The most valuable feature of Amazon Elastic Container Service is its minimal manageability. We do not need to worry about the underlying infrastructure. It inherently offers scalability by default, without our IT teams needing to take the extra load to make the services available for our end users. We only need to pay for what we use, offered by scalability and elasticity, which is expected from the service provider.

The services are costly, which is one potential drawback. Additionally, when it comes to new-age services around AI, particularly in the areas of LLMs and genomics, these services are not fully available in our region's availability domain. These are the areas where improvement is required.

We have been providing AWS cloud services, including Amazon Elastic Container Service, to our customers for about six months.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is mostly very stable. If our customers require specific SLAs, we integrate other solutions to meet those requirements, ensuring there are no challenges.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is quite scalable. Scalability becomes an inherent capability in the cloud context, and this service does well in that regard.

We do not rely heavily on technical support from AWS as we have our own teams managing the infrastructure. However, our overall relationship with AWS is running smoothly.

Positive

Our managed services team handles the complete installation for our end customers. The installation process involves setting up everything on day zero for our customers.

Our customers often do a trade-off between requiring services at particular SLA levels and being willing to pay a premium price to us as partners. While the services can be costly, the value for money depends on these trade-offs.

Overall, I would rate the solution highly over time as there is no reason not to, giving it a rating of 10 out of 10.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is used for the deployment of our applications, and the advantage is that it auto scales, so we do not need to manage a lot of that infrastructure, which offers us cost savings.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is used with AWS Fargate, and we find it very comfortable and seamless with our standard deployment scripts.

Multiple apps have been deployed using Amazon Elastic Container Service, where each individual app can be a microservice, and within the same app, there can be different services that auto scale based on the need.

Amazon Elastic Container Service supports our batch processing applications as well.

Auto scaling is the best feature found in Amazon Elastic Container Service, and it provides significant cost saving benefits.

IAM for security access control in Amazon Elastic Container Service is good enough for our use cases, as it covers whatever we need with functionalities such as VPC and encryption available out of the box.

Main benefits that Amazon Elastic Container Service provides include saving maintenance costs in terms of saving time, and since it auto scales, we save on infrastructure costs by running at lower instances when it is not heavily used.

While there are other components available for Amazon Elastic Container Service, it does offer tight integration with AWS Bedrock for our AI services, and overall, Amazon Elastic Container Service is working very well for us.

Nothing comes to mind as a potential area of improvement for Amazon Elastic Container Service, though developers can be asked for their thoughts.

A lower price for Amazon Elastic Container Service would be better, but it is comparable to other offerings in the market, so it is on par in that sense.

Amazon Elastic Container Service has been in use for close to one year.

Amazon Elastic Container Service receives a stability rating of eight, as there were some issues where AWS was down recently and experienced a few crashes, but overall, the rating is still pretty high.

Amazon Elastic Container Service receives a perfect rating of ten for scalability.

Technical support from Amazon receives a rating of ten, as AWS partnership provides access to their architects for guidance when needed.

Positive

There is a component on Google Cloud that could compare to Amazon Elastic Container Service, but the exact name of that component is not recalled.

Amazon Elastic Container Service is definitely recommended to other users and clients we are working with. This review receives an overall rating of nine.

I am a cloud consultant working with Devoteam, a consulting company. I specialize in AWS and work with a large range of customers using AWS as their cloud platform. 

Depending on the clients I am working with, I use several services, including compute services like EC2 instances, VPC for networking, serverless services like Lambda functions, EventBridge for event-driven architecture, and Kubernetes infrastructure using Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS).

Moving to Amazon ECS, particularly in Fargate mode, allowed our customer to benefit from not having to manage the underlying infrastructure. This accelerated the deployment of the containers on Amazon’s platform and allowed for easier integration with CI/CD pipelines, thereby improving operational efficiency.

A really good feature of ECS is the integration with AWS services, especially the networking services like Elastic Load Balancer, Service Mesh, and Service Map, which simplifies the service discovery process. Additionally, ECS's auto-scaling capability is well-integrated with CloudWatch, allowing it to trigger scaling based on both basic and custom metrics.

The user interface of ECS could be improved for better navigation and to assist in quickly setting up a deployment. The ECS auto-scaling feature could also improve its reactivity to scaling needs. Additionally, implementing end-to-end encryption natively and more easily would be beneficial, as it currently requires a lot of work.

We did not encounter stability issues during my mission with the deployment on ECS, but it is important to note that we did not have a high number of workloads, so I can’t provide insights on high scalability scenarios.

One strength of ECS is the integration with CloudWatch metrics for auto-scaling; however, its reactivity in scaling can be slower compared to Kubernetes. While ECS is well-integrated for scaling, the auto-scaling process could be more responsive.

The support is generally responsive and provides helpful information. However, when we had specific technical questions regarding encryption, the support was less helpful. For detailed and specialized queries, we had to consult with AWS container specialists.

Positive

Starting from scratch, without prior experience on ECS, setting up a first workload for testing takes about one to two hours. This includes understanding concepts like tasks, task definitions, and networking aspects.

The pricing for ECS Fargate is based on resource consumption, particularly CPU and memory usage per hour. Although it may be more expensive than other solutions, it saves costs on infrastructure maintenance, making it reasonable overall.

If you are on AWS and do not have a lot of time or personnel skilled enough to maintain an orchestration platform, using ECS in Fargate mode is a good choice.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Amazon EC2 Container Service to take complete workloads to the cloud for various applications.

Amazon EC2 Container Service has reduced our infrastructure cost. We migrate some workloads from our on-premises data center to the cloud, where it runs as per the requirement, and we don't have to pay upfront. This helps reduce both the CapEx and OpEx. Some of those managed services help us to reduce the OpEx. On-demand computing efficiently manages the CapEx.

Amazon EC2 Container Service has multiple valuable features like load balancers and autoscalers. Amazon EC2 Container Service is easy to compute.

The existing domain-joined capability the solution provides during the initial boot-up of the compute should be streamlined and made a little robust. If that fails, you cannot do it again. That part doesn't have any resilience.

I have been using Amazon EC2 Container Service for three years.

I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service an eight out of ten for stability.

Amazon EC2 Container Service is a scalable solution. Around 200 users are using Amazon EC2 Container Service in our organization, and we do not plan to increase the usage.

I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service ten out of ten for scalability.

Amazon EC2 Container Service's technical support is very good.

Positive

The solution's initial setup is fairly easy and not that complex. I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service a nine out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

The solution's deployment is very fast and takes around a minute. We follow the infrastructure as a whole, run our pipeline, and deploy the solution. One person can handle multiple deployments, even a thousand deployments.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price, I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service’s pricing a four or five out of ten.

Amazon EC2 Container Service is deployed on the government AWS cloud.

Users can use Amazon EC2 Container Service for their computing. The robustness of the solution is good. And there are different pricing models, and users can evaluate them depending on the workload. The computing application needs must be evaluated before you choose the solution.

Overall, I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service an eight out of ten.

The Amazon EC2 Container Service involves lifting and shifting the on-site environment into AWS. It's a simple copying of your applications since you don't create new virtual machines.

Amazon EC2 Container Service offers great flexibility with a wide range of options, allowing you to choose powerful, smaller, bigger, faster, secure, or dedicated machines based on your needs. We have no concerns about EC2 containers, and the only potential downside is if you move your data center to AWS without leveraging advanced features like serverless or automatic scaling, it might be more expensive. The key is to optimize and make use of all the cloud features for cost efficiency and improved performance.      

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.

I have been using Amazon EC2 Container Service for the past six years.

Amazon EC2 Container Service (EC2) has a very high uptime, typically reaching 99.99%. For customers seeking even higher reliability, there are even more options. However, this decision is left to the customer, mirroring the considerations one makes in a physical data center environment. 

I would rate the scalability ten out of ten. In specific AWS regions like Paris, which is widely utilized by the French community, there might be limitations on available choices due to high usage. While Paris region availability might be constrained, other locations such as Frankfurt and London are generally unaffected. In such cases, obtaining an EC2 from a different location is possible, it may impact data transfer times between regions, and delays in data flows.

Positive

It is very easy and almost takes few minutes.

You have the option to either handle it independently or involve an integrator and even manual setup is possible. Please keep in mind that engaging an integrator may lead to the need for a CI/CD pipeline to manage various aspects required by the guardrails, particularly when dealing with Container Tower. Clarify the details to the integrator because it is crucial to prevent repeated blockages by control tower, avoiding frustration. Also make the integrator responsible for Container Tower or have them build pipelines checked with Container, as this can also be effective. In most cases, trying to proceed without proper communication and understanding can make the process challenging.

We have seen advantages in our companies through its pay-as-you-go model, allowing us to pay only for the resources they use. This flexibility allows to have a cost-effective design based on actual requirements. If a powerful machine is needed only once a year, it can be built and utilized exclusively during that period, eliminating the need to maintain it for the entire year. This approach ensures minimal costs for significant resources, making the cloud setup easy and efficient.

Licensing can be purchased directly from AWS or used with existing licenses, depending on the company's preference. The licensing structure is complex and depends on factors such as machine size, number of processors, and Container size. 

Companies have dedicated staff members managing license considerations full-time to find the most cost-effective options. Also, I have seen some companies opt for a combination of AWS and Azure, using more of Azure for Microsoft licenses due to potentially lower costs compared to AWS.

When utilizing Amazon EC2 Container Service (EC2), don’t treat it like a local data center machine, as this can be more expensive. The key lies in utilizing the cloud features effectively, such as stopping capacity during non-usage periods, like nights or weekends. The product is extremely useful and I would rate it eight out of ten.

My company deals with Amazon EC2 Container Service as a performance container management service and fault management system for telecommunication networks.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its scalability. In terms of storage resources, the solutions need to be quick to provide users with options for growth. Based on prediction, the product sometimes allows you to grow or scale up quickly.

Pricing is an area of concern where improvements are required since the cloud services provided by AWS are not cheap. Due to the expensive nature of the cloud services provided by AWS, many people have opted for an on-premises deployment model.

Amazon EC2 Container Service's upgradability is an area with shortcomings requiring improvements.

I have been using Amazon EC2 Container Service for around three years. I am a system integrator, and my company provides software products.

My company has faced some stability issues with Amazon EC2 Container Service. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten. The last time my company faced some issues with Amazon EC2 Container Service was when Amazon was involved in some internal work and did not bother informing users about it.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

My company requires Amazon EC2 Container Service to deal with its clients, mostly telecommunication companies with around 1,000 to 5,000 employees.

The solution's technical support was poor. I rate the technical support a two out of ten. My company usually tries to figure out and resolve the issues related to Amazon EC2 Container Service even though we are not well-versed with the solution. The solution's technical support team's issue stems from the fact that they look in the wrong places and are not knowledgeable enough to help users resolve issues.

Negative

Amazon EC2 Container Service is the platform with which I have had the most experience to date. Previously, I worked with clusters in an on-premises setup and didn't use a container platform.

I rate the product's implementation phase a five on a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. I don't see anything I can't do in the product, especially once I figure out how to do it.

The product's deployment phase can be completed in a few hours.

My company's clients have noticed a return on investment and benefits from the use of Amazon EC2 Container Service.

The more you use Amazon EC2 Container Service, the more you pay.

I rate the product's pricing an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. Even though I don't pay for the solution, I have observed and seen the product's price and budget based on the bills paid by my company and our customers.

Due to the issues faced by my company with Amazon EC2 Container Service's upgradability, we plan to move to Amazon EKS. OpenShift also has some functionality that helps with the upgradability part.

Amazon EC2 Container Service is not difficult to manage.

I recommend those who plan to use Amazon EC2 Container Service to initially go with a PoC phase and also look into the cost-benefit analysis over a long-term period before buying the product.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.