Amazon QuickSight Reviews

We primarily use the solution for basic reporting, charts, and graphs.

There is no installation required. It is browser-based. 

We like that you can look at groups, users, and like that we can take advantage of column-level and row-level restrictions.

The SpiceDB capacity is pretty large compared to other contemporary options, including competitive software like Power BI, Tableau, etc. It has better performance with respect to large data sets.

The solution is simple to implement. 

Managers can build a dashboard, and over a period of time, they can build very complex dashboards as well. 

It is easy to learn. There is a decent level of documentation already available around QuickSight. There are multiple YouTube channels, videos, and tutorials available, and there is a QuickSight community from where you can get help. This helps users work with the basic functionality of QuickSight.

The solution is stable.

It is quite scalable. 

I just want a few more features to be added. We'd like an increase in the number of visuals, and we find the graphs are still very restricted.

We need reporting around telementary use and QuickSight users, including which user is opening which dashboard, at what time, and for how long he is using the dashboard. They built reader access based on the session. However, they don't report it anywhere.

I was expecting this very basic thing, yet it has not been rolled out. In order to know which user is opening which dashboard and at what time, I have to basically deep dive into the CloudTrail log. Even there, it's not a very detailed log. It does not give you an idea about the session or session duration. It only gives you an idea about whether a dashboard was loaded or not. 

Currently, auto-reporting is limited to some 30 times a day. As it is, if you want to set a data set to get it refreshed every half an hour, you cannot achieve it. We would like to have more auto-reporting.

I've used the solution for three to four years. 

Stability-wise, it is decent. It's reliable. There are no bigs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is very scalable. 

There are data sets where I have millions of records, and the size of the data set is beyond 100 GB as well.

We have more than 500 users on the solution currently.

There is a lot of documentation available that can help users learn the solution and troubleshoot.

On multiple occasions, I have had to check with the AWS support regarding QuickSight, and the support is pretty decent around it.

Positive

I did not previously use a different solution.

I did work with Power BI. Power BI had too many visuals. It's pretty mature, however. Power BI is a very old reporting tool. It has great functionality, yet it is costlier. Still, it is not very scalable as it is limited to 10 GB only. Whereas in QuickSight, you can have beyond 10 GB easily. A few data sets we have are beyond 110 GB.

The solution is online; you don't have to install anything. It's user-friendly so it is easy to get started. If you have users on your AWS account, you can just enable QuickSight access for them.

User management is very easy. 

The ROI a company might se depends on how they are using it. It's a service. If you are not using it efficiently, then obviously, the ROI would be lower.

It's not a one-time purchase.

It's like they build you on three fronts. One is the SpiceDB capacity that you buy. Another is the author account you create in QuickSight and the reader's account. For an author account and SpiceDB capacity, there is a fixed charge. For the author, it's $24 per month. For SpiceDB capacity, it's somewhere at around $0.30 per GB per month. For the reader account, there is no charge. It's pay per session, and I don't know the price per session. 

You need to be aware of how you have it set up. Even though we have, let's say, 50 authors, for example, out of those 50 authors, only two or three authors were creating dashboards. The rest of the authors were sitting idle. At that point, we got billed unnecessarily. Later on, we figured it out, and we removed the unnecessary authors.

We're a customer and end-user.

One big lesson that I have learned is that first, you identify what kind of reporting you want to do. Then, just go and check whether that kind of reporting is already available in QuickSight or not. If yes, then you have to think about the cost. It's pretty much in your face, and you can precalculate it without any issue, and then you have to just play around with a couple of average users.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have used it as rapid prototyping for exploring visualizations and analytics with the data. It seems to work quite nicely.

Our clients are looking for advice. To the extent that they were on AWS, we pointed them to this rather than using Power BI, which frankly we had an awful experience with. We were comfortable with the AWS stack, everything on AWS, and we pointed them to that for some of their analytics and with us holding their hand. Rather than investing in another product, we found a good cost model there. If you're running on AWS and paying for those services, the whole QuickSight thing was a nominal add-on cost for its services. It's actually pretty efficient.

From an analytics perspective, it's really good for self-service analytics.

It's not a Tableau. It's not a TIBCO Spotfire. They could do further integration with some data governance and data cataloging. You can't tell a data story as well in QuickSight as you can on others, especially in TIBCO Spotfire. If they integrated it more with some data cataloging and had some guided analytics where it will walk you through everything, that would be ideal. Most clients don't expect it to do that. That said, once again, it isn't a Tableau. The results are as good as Tableau, and yet, it doesn't, from an engineering perspective, tell the data story or allow a user to be able to access a data catalog that lets you drive how your analytics need to go. I don't if they're working on that, however, that would be a lovely enhancement.

I've used the solution within two years. 

The stability has been quite good. I don't believe we've had any major issues with the stability. I can't recall dealing with bugs or glitches and it doesn't seem to crash or freeze.

I haven't really tested the scalability. There's no reason to think it wouldn't, given AWS's general capability. 

I'm aware of other solutions. however, rather than licensing Tableau or Power BI, or TIBCO, we found that we needed an introductory analyst tool for our clients that we could help them use. The more sophisticated users are using things like TIBCO on AWS, or Tableau, or Looker. However, with QuickSight, we find it to be really good as an introductory tool for our clients that want to do simple analytics.

The cost of the solution has a minimal cost if users are already on the AWS stack.

There are additional service fees based on the services it consumes. However, the cost is pretty mild. 

It's not like it's a few pennies a day. However, it's a per service or CPU and disc storage, and it's mostly CPU. It's a minimal surcharge as you're consuming more services on AWS.

I'm very excited about their product. We were using others, other things for visualization analytics, however, within the AWS stack, it's actually proving to be pretty capable.

It was a whole AWS stack that we're shaping out. Given our partnership with Amazon, they've been pushing a lot of different services and products at us. But the QuickSight was something that was remarkably quick to stand out and recreate some use cases within, for example, Power BI. So we have found that to allow for a really rapid, quickly produced prototype. 

I would recommend QuickSight as, if you were a citizen developer, it's very approachable. Learning something like TIBCO or Power BI is a bigger learning curve. What I do like about QuickSight, is that it gives a relative beginner the ability to really start seeing results quickly. I don't think it's a competitor yet for some of the more sophisticated tools. However, if a developer or developer's client was relatively unsophisticated, it's a very smooth and quick place to start.

I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten simply due to the fact that, in its class, it does well, however, in comparison to some other tools, it's not as robust.

We use Amazon QuickSight as a BI tool for data analysis. When we are working with Amazon data on Amazon Cloud, we use Amazon QuickSight. If I have to build a solution on Amazon data for an IT team or for a quick POC for some customers, I use QuickSite. Additionally, for basic analysis, we use QuickSite. 

The most valuable feature of Amazon QuickSight is its connectivity with other Amazon services.

Our company is heavily bought into Amazon, our entire infrastructure is set up on Amazon for my organization. This is why QuickSite is good for us because everything else is running on Amazon.

Amazon QuickSight has minimal features. The feature set can be improved to allow you to create good production-ready dashboards. This does not happen with QuickSite, it needs to mature to be used in production.

With Amazon QuickSight or any other BI tool, they are limited in what you can do because they're drag and drop tools. For unique features we need or what we want to build, we cannot build using these tools. We use JavaScript for that. We write our own code and build our own solutions.

I need the capability to call machine learning models in Python. For example, while I'm building a dashboard if I am displaying a chart, but the value calculation should be a machine learning model, which is running somewhere else, such as on Amazon. I need that capability because these tools give good outputs, such as calculated fields. However, today the outputs are not straightforward. It's not only some additional or multiplication, but you also need a machine learning output to come, and then you want to show it. These tools cannot do that on the fly. In simple, you can say machine learning on the fly is not currently provided.

I have been using Amazon QuickSight for approximately five years.

The stability of Amazon QuickSight is fine.  It doesn't crash or cause any issues at all.

The solution is scalable according to their marketing. However, there are some issues.

When the data size increases, as we go from a few thousand rows to a million rows to a hundred billion rose to queries. This solution fails. With a few Mb's it works fine but with a few GB's, the solution is likely to be slow. When we tried to use terabytes or hundreds of terabytes of data, the solution does not work.

We have ten users using Amazon QuickSight in my organization. We do not have plans to increase our usage.

I have used Tableau. If the user is a C-level employee, such as a CXO, CEO, or VP, they prefer to work with Tableau. It's easier for them than Amazon QuickSight. Additionally, we have used Microsoft BI.

Amazon QuickSight is a SaaS that does not require any installation or deployment.

Amazon QuickSight you subscribe and you use the service.

My advice to others is that there are many good solutions but it depends on your use case. If you are building something for C-level employees, use Tableau or another solution. If you want to do data analysis on Amazon, use QuickSite. And if you want to build production-ready software use Javascript.

These BI solutions are built with some thought in mind, they're good at what they do, but they don't solve all the problems. The features I need, they cannot provide me because they're not built like that.

I rate Amazon QuickSight a six out of ten.

I am a consultant and an Amazon partner and reseller advising clients about which solution they should seriously focus on. For the current project, I did a comparison on PeerSpot to show them substantial information about which of the platforms is the one which they should prefer because each of them has different strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons.

The solution is very quick to turn around and integrate. You can do everything well on the QuickSight platform.

The platform’s pricing is a bit hard because even though you get a 30-day trial, you have a standard edition that's only in-house. The product is quite expensive because the price is too close to QlikView's prices but it does not ring as well as QlikView.

I am no professional analytics person, but as a developer and consultant, I think the quality of the product can be improved and be made more feature rich as well. They could do some predictive analytics, and have their graphics be a bit better to make it look nicer.

I also think they should focus on QuickSight as a separate line of business so they can generate better revenue. I have seen many companies bought over that just rest on their laurels and do not show substantial improvement in terms of features or performance like a company that has to fight tooth and nail for their sales.

I have been using Amazon QuickSight for around three months now.

The performance of the solution is quite alright and straightforward. Although QuickSight is at the testing level for us, the solution is responsive enough.

The solution is moderately stable. However, I am not very convinced about the stability since I have yet to see a huge implementation of the solution, for over 5,000 viewers for instance.

I have not contacted the support team yet, and neither have I faced any problems with the solution so far. However, I have some local Amazon staff contacts whom I can reach out to if there's any issue.

I worked with QlikView as a part of their evaluation committee about a decade ago.

From what I see so far, it's very easy to start up. Amazon QuickSight is relatively easy to configure, but I think they could optimize it a bit more. The product is in a transition as they're integrating with AWS, so the authentication part gets a bit messy.

There are no additional license fees apart from the standard licensing fees. However, the standard license is meant only for internal users and not for free readers. That's a problem, because to have free viewers, you need to escalate up to the enterprise license which ideally should not be the case.

In addition to QuickSight, I am also evaluating other options like Tableau and QlikView as these solutions are very well evaluated.

My advice is to look at your use case, look at your complexities, the sophistication of reporting that you need, and the end results of what you want. Do you have a simple reporting need? Do you get straightforward reporting requests? Or do you need something more professional and higher-end? Based on these parameters, make the decision. I would rate the solution a six and a half out of ten.

We use Amazon QuickSight for our internal reporting.

A valuable feature of Amazon QuickSight is that it's a cloud-native service provided by AWS. As all platforms within my company run on AWS, that's the leverage of Amazon QuickSight.

Amazon QuickSight is also easy to use, and I find the native connectors from AWS valuable as well.

Right now, you can't use Amazon QuickSight on other cloud providers, so I'd like it to have availability on other cloud providers. This is an area for improvement in the product.

What I'd like to see in Amazon QuickSight in the future is a distributed centralized system where I can manage all reports in one place, and for Amazon QuickSight to become reporting as a service.

I've been using Amazon QuickSight for almost two years now.

Amazon QuickSight is a stable product because it's an AWS native, so it has all the data reconciliation taken care of by AWS. You won't need to worry about stability in Amazon QuickSight.

Amazon QuickSight is a scalable product.

I haven't contacted the technical support team for Amazon QuickSight at this point.

As our platform is on AWS, we decided to go with the native services of AWS which includes Amazon QuickSight.

Setting up Amazon QuickSight was so easy because Amazon provided complete documentation on how to do it.

You can deploy Amazon QuickSight within hours if you're quite familiar with the product, so it all depends on your experience and hands-on knowledge of AWS.

The implementation for Amazon QuickSight was done in-house. I even did some installations myself.

The Amazon QuickSight licensing model my company's on is pay-as-you-go, but I wouldn't be able to give the figures because that's handled by the finance department.

I'm an enterprise architect, and I work for a service desk company, so within the company, people use many other tools for day-to-day activities, such as tools for data ignitions, data orchestrations, data migration, big data, platform management, etc.

Currently, I'm using Amazon QuickSight for semantic layers. There's no specific version for the solution because it's cloud-based and it's managed by Amazon.

My advice, if you're looking to implement Amazon QuickSight, is that if your reporting is too slow and you're using an AWS platform, I'd recommend Amazon QuickSight. If you're reporting with multiple data sources coming from different clouds, then you should go with a different tool.

My rating for Amazon QuickSight depends on the data sources I have, the number of reports I'm going to build, the number of users that require reporting, and the cost. For my current environment, Amazon QuickSight is the best, though it won't be the best for everybody. I'm rating it based on my requirements, and because it meets my requirements, so my rating for it is nine out of ten. It's the perfect solution for my company currently.

My company has a partnership with Amazon.

We primarily use the solution for reports for our finance team. We take in a lot of data and we use the quick site reports to process and present everything back to our finance team.

We're satisfied with the product. It handles the data well.

It is fine for basic reporting.

This solution is very inexpensive, which makes it an attractive option. 

It's not ideal for reports that are more complex. We're actually looking into other options that allow us to get into more complex queries and offer more dashboards. We'd like to be able to present things using graphs and tables. If people just want the hard data, that can just be exported to Excel. However, we have teams that want visualizations in order to look for trends and display peaks of inactivity or behaviors like that.

I've been using the solution for around a year. 

Overall, the product is stable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

We haven't tested scalability too much. We only have five people using the product.

I'm not aware of us ever using technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are.

I'm not sure about the setup or deployment process. That was handled before I arrived at the company. However, as part of the Amazon product suite, it appears to be easy to implement and easy to use. However, that's only anecdotal from my end. 

While the company likely implemented the solution internally without the help of AWS or consultants, it happened before my time and I'm not sure who set it up.

The pricing is very reasonable. They are very cheap. 

Right now, we are paying $200 a month to use it. I'm not aware of any other additional costs beyond that one fee.

We are currently looking into different options right now so that we get more than very basic reporting. Right now, we are looking into Power BI. From our research, it seems to come out on top a lot. 

I'm an end-user.

I use the product in my company. I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. That said, everything is cloud-based and therefore it is likely it is the latest version.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

It is mainly for dashboarding and visualization.

I am using its latest version. It is deployed on the cloud through an S3 bucket connected to Athena.

The ease with which it integrates with different data sources is most valuable. Especially when everything is on AWS, it is easy to connect to the data source and organize different dashboards.

The visualizations that it has got are not as robust as some of the other competitors in the market. We would like to have more visuals. 

The modeling side of it is not as robust as Power BI.

It should support integration with Python or R.

Its support should be improved. There isn't much support for this solution.

I have been using this solution for about a year.

It is stable for what I do with it.

Its scalability is fine because I use a lot of data. Everything on the cloud should be able to scale when needed.

In my organization, we have six developers, and we have up to 50 people who are using it. Based on the security level, we can share these reports with different persons in the organization. 

We don't have a plan to increase its usage. Instead, we are seeing if we could try something else, and that's what I'm currently working on.

There isn't much support available. We had an issue and when we tried to get support, they made it clear that they can't give any support, and what is lost is lost. I would rate their support as average.

We were using Power BI. We switched because what we're doing was hosted on AWS, so it became easier to just stay on AWS. Instead of carrying the data, we stayed at the AWS server. That was the main reason for switching to QuickSight. So, everything is domiciled on Amazon Web Services.

It probably was pretty straightforward. They had already deployed the system before I joined the organization. So, I started using it.

We didn't evaluate other options.

It is easy to use, and it integrates really well with different data sources. However, there is a lot of room for improvement. There are limited visuals, and it doesn't integrate with Python or R. So, you need to be sure of what you're doing and whether it would serve the purpose. If you need basic visualization without too much integration and customization, it is perfect.

I would rate it a six out of 10.

I'm a student, and I'm using Amazon QuickSight for my research paper. I'm using it for visualization.

I like that with Amazon QuickSight, you don't need to install an app to use its services. With other BI tools, you need to install the app, so Amazon QuickSight is better for me in this area.

I have no idea how other powerful tools such as Tableau and Power BI work, but an area for improvement in Amazon QuickSight is the storage. That needs to be increased, but that also means you have to pay for that increase in storage.

It would be great if Amazon QuickSight had a free trial for students.

I also noticed that the product no longer allows the creation of stories. It used to have that feature, so Amazon QuickSight should bring that back.

Another area for improvement in the tool is data cleanup because I'm experiencing errors when cleaning the data. Some data automatically gets deleted, so that should be improved, and there should be more options for data cleanup.

What I'd like Amazon QuickSight to have in the future is documentation. It needs video tutorials to help users write code and show the different functions and purposes of Amazon QuickSight.

I've used Amazon QuickSight for six to seven months now.

Amazon QuickSight is a stable product.

I didn't try other BI tools apart from Amazon QuickSight.

I'm using a paid version of Amazon QuickSight, paying about $22 monthly. As I have yet to learn about the pricing for other tools, such as Power BI, I won't be able to compare. Still, if Amazon QuickSight has lower pricing than Power BI, then it's the better product, but if its pricing is higher, then the pricing for Amazon QuickSight needs to be lowered.

The only BI tool I have experience with is Amazon QuickSight.

I'm using the student version of the tool.

I didn't work with a significant amount of data, so at the moment, I won't be able to advise new users of Amazon QuickSight.

My rating for Amazon QuickSight is six out of ten.

I'm a user of Amazon QuickSight.