Amazon QuickSight Reviews

I am a consultant. I support clients who have chosen QuickSight as their reporting tool for their businesses. We focus on major use cases like row and column level security, ensuring that different teams can access the same dashboard and see specific data depending on their roles.

QuickSight is a great savior in terms of row level security, providing almost equivalent value to Tableau and Power BI. It helps save money and is highly secure with excellent single sign-on capabilities.

Spice is a unique feature that serves as a super parallel memory engine. It allows for efficient management of large datasets, significantly improving dashboard performance. Additionally, QuickSight's documentation, integration support, and the generative AI capability with Amazon Q for natural language queries are impressive.

Some areas for improvement include incorporating automatic relevant filters, allowing better handling of large datasets for filters, simplifying image insertion, and enhancing QuickSight's ability to handle relationships between tables. There's also room for improvement in allowing default downloadable PDF exports for all pages of a dashboard and more diverse font styles.

I have been using Amazon QuickSight since the year 2020.

QuickSight is highly stable. It is reliable and performs exceptionally well for users and developers alike.

The scalability of QuickSight is excellent. It offers the flexibility needed for collaboration with cloud architects or data engineers when integrating data within AWS. However, it requires coordinating with a team for setting up certain permissions.

Technical support from the QuickSight team is exceptional. I would rate them a nine point five out of ten. They provide prompt responses and helpful resources during live calls and through AWS tickets.

The initial setup of QuickSight is incredibly easy, I'd rate my experience a ten. The only challenge was estimating the cost.

The customers save a lot of money as QuickSight is cost-effective and highly secure in terms of low level security, single sign-on, and overall functionality comparable to Tableau and Power BI.

Pricing could be improved. QuickSight lacks a desktop version, which makes it more suitable for organizations rather than individuals. I'd rate it five out of ten.

I rate Amazon QuickSight as ten out of ten. It is easy to learn, and the QuickSight team provides great support. The solution has significantly contributed to my career growth and offers great career opportunities.

I am creating multiple dashboards. I have created more than one hundred dashboards in QuickSight for various use cases across all the products in our company.

QuickSight offers a very cost-effective reader account model based on session-based costing, making it easy for us to provision accounts for our employees. Additionally, QuickSight is entirely cloud-based, simplifying the access, creation, and provisioning process compared to Power BI. 

The speed at which QuickSight renders data enhances the efficiency, ensuring users do not lose interest due to delays. The range of calculated fields available is very beneficial for data analysis. 

Overall, QuickSight makes it easy to provision, create, and publish dashboards.

QuickSight needs to add more visuals similar to what Power BI offers. I have noticed that many drill-down visuals and other visual options available in Power BI are missing in QuickSight.

I have been using QuickSight for almost six years.

QuickSight's dashboarding platform is quite stable, which is beneficial for any organization.

The scalability of QuickSight is high, and it adapts well to our needs. However, it is unrealistic to expect one single visual to handle thousands of petabytes of data. Within our current expectations, QuickSight has performed well.

The support system depends on the representative you get; sometimes, the support is excellent, while other times, it is below average. Overall, support is good.

Positive

QuickSight was the first reporting platform that I have used. I did look at Power BI, but it seemed unnecessarily complicated to me.

The setup process was straightforward, taking just a few clicks.

QuickSight is considered cost-effective. As far as I know, QuickSight is cheaper compared to other solutions like Power BI.

I evaluated Power BI, but it did not appeal to me due to its complexity.

I would advise users to keep track of their budget, the types of users they have, and whether they're more author or reader-based. 

Also, the choice of reporting solution should consider the data size and the existing environment, such as whether they're using AWS. 

I rate QuickSight a nine out of ten.

Amazon QuickSight is a business intelligence tool that gives the user all kinds of reports, like real-time and historical reporting. It allows you to showcase various reports and analytics and even trigger some limited actions. It's primarily designed for advisors or analysts.

I've used it extensively for Amazon Connect reporting.  There are many tools that can integrate with Amazon Connect for reporting, but since Amazon Connect lacks native customization features, one way to customize reporting is to use QuickSight. 

Compared to other reporting tools, it is very effective but does require an understanding of certain concepts in QuickSight. This understanding is crucial for creating dimensions, changing metrics, and visualizing reports. If someone has a thorough knowledge of QuickSight, it is a very good tool that allows for significant customization. 

Recently, with AI integrations coming into play, QuickSight has gained a lot of new features, particularly in its integration with Amazon services and the ability to write queries using simple English. This is a fantastic feature that has helped me create and deploy reports more quickly.

One area is that integrating data from different sources into QuickSight can be a bit tricky, especially with Amazon Connect. To get data flowing, you need to use two additional services and configure them correctly. 

The setup isn't straightforward and can be time-consuming.

Secondly, while QuickSight is a BI tool, it lacks features to suggest actions or integrate with other systems to turn it into more than just a data display tool.

Additionally, from a user perspective, QuickSight is easy to use if you have analytics experience. For beginners, it takes more time to understand the mechanics, visualizations, and overall functionality. 

Lastly, integration with Amazon Connect can be unstable. Changes on the Amazon Connect side can impact datasets in QuickSight, causing reporting failures. These are some of the drawbacks that needs improvement. 

I have been using it for three years. 

In previous deployments, Amazon Connect was used by all the supervisors and some of the C-suite executives who were actually using Connect. All those supervisors, C-suite people, and even team leaders in the contact centers used QuickSight for their day-to-day operations. 

They relied on it to understand their dashboards, check wallboards, and monitor how graphs showcase the different performances of the agents and even the voicebots at times. 

In a call center with around 300 total, I have seen 20  to 25+ QuickSight users, which includes C-suite people as well, like the head of the call center and the head of business operations.

It's affordable compared to other long-term contractor business tools available in the market. There are cost advantages with QuickSight, but it needs to be configured properly to realize these savings and get the most out of the platform at a lesser cost.

For first-time users, it's crucial to understand the use case first. Why do we need to use QuickSight? It's like a Lego block, capable of constructing a lot. So, determine whether QuickSight is really necessary for your use case. 

If QuickSight is chosen, take advantage of Amazon's documentation to learn about its strengths and capabilities. Understand the different dimensions, metrics, visualizations it supports, and the various fields and objects. Learn how it integrates with data sources. Knowing these aspects well will help you launch your projects faster and more easily.

Based on my personal experience with the usage and UI, I would rate it around a five out of ten. There are many developments that could still be made in QuickSight, especially in the way it integrates.

We run as a part of our agriculture platform, a lot of web apps and mobile apps. Amazon QuickSight is used in the backend for analytics and data analysis.

We are using Amazon QuickSight as we see at least 30% time savings.

Amazon QuickSight is a SaaS platform where we can run queries and get analytics without installing any software. It works well with the AWS ecosystem.

The cost of queries is very high. Improvements in drill-down ability and evolving it as an OLAP tool would help more.

We have been using it for about one year.

Amazon QuickSight has been stable in the past year.

Our dataset is not very large, so we haven't had scalability issues yet.

Support is satisfactory. Amazon support deserves ten points out of ten.

Positive

For log management, we use an in-house solution and not any third-party product right now.

No installation is required for Amazon QuickSight. Amazon maintains the service.

We see at least 30% time savings.

Competition pricing is high for query processing, however, the Data Lake cost is nominal as it is on top of S3.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use Amazon QuickSight to develop dashboards for the various lines of business that we cater to at the outsourcing company where I work. These dashboards help us visualize and analyze data specific to each line of business, making it easier to track performance, identify trends, and make informed decisions. QuickSight's flexibility and ease of use make it a valuable tool for creating customized data visualizations for our diverse client base.

Amazon QuickSight has several strong points. It is notably fast in handling large data set refreshes, making it efficient for data analysis. It is also user-friendly, especially for first-time users, due to its simplicity.

The product lacks some advanced customization features compared to tools like Power BI, which can be a drawback for more complex data visualization needs.

I have been using Amazon QuickSight for two years.

I would rate the stability of the product as a six out of ten. We frequently encounter bugs with Amazon QuickSight.

I would rate the scalability of the product as an eight out of ten. We have approximately 200 users of Amazon QuickSight at our company. 

I have used Amazon technical support. They are sometimes helpful, but there are times when they can't solve the issues. It varies depending on the problem. I would rate the support as a six out of ten.

Neutral

Yes, before using Amazon QuickSight, I worked with other products, including Power BI and Tableau. We switched to Amazon QuickSight since it was more affordable. Compared to Amazon QuickSight, Power BI offers a broader range of visualization options and more flexible formatting capabilities. Power BI provides more visual choices, easier page formatting with specific control options, and the ability to use bookmarks to enhance the dashboard's appeal. One area where Amazon QuickSight could improve is its formatting features for dashboards. For small-scale businesses, Amazon QuickSight is cost-effective. However, for larger datasets, tools like Power BI and Tableau may be more efficient, even if they require additional AWS services. QuickSight's pay-per-view model is suitable for smaller data, but your choice depends on your data size and requirements.

It is entirely web-based, so there is no need for any installations and it takes less than an hour to set it up. Our team of ten developers maintains the product.

For end-users, the price seems to be based on a per-view model, meaning you pay for the number of views of the dashboard. As for developers, it might involve an annual cost of around $36, although I am not exactly sure. In addition to licensing costs, there can be extra expenses for using Amazon QuickSight. To maximize its functionality, you might need to integrate it with other AWS services like S3 and SMS. QuickSight alone may not be fully usable, so additional subscriptions to these services could be necessary to make it more effective.

I wouldn't strongly recommend Amazon QuickSight to other users. If they have the budget, it is better to explore other BI tools. However, if a company is looking to cut costs and is already using AWS for its infrastructure, then QuickSight might be a viable option. Overall, I would rate Amazon QuickSight at a six out of ten. While it has room for improvement, the fact that they are continuously adding new features every month is promising, so the rating might increase in the future.

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 generate reports from QuickSight, and the data is stored in an S3 bucket.

The graph charts, pie charts, and box plots are valuable.

In one of the use cases, we had to embed the dashboard into the client application. The embedding function doesn’t work well. The solution must be more user-friendly. I have also written some questions on the community page.

I have been using the solution for the last three years.

I rate the tool’s stability a six out of ten. Some functionalities are not available in the product. It is not as mature as Tableau and Power BI.

I rate the tool’s scalability a six out of ten. The product is serverless. It can be scaled, but it takes time based on the workload and the data that needs to be fed from the dashboard. Around 500 people use the product in our organization.

I have raised around three tickets. I get responses from the support team.

Neutral

I rate the ease of setup a seven out of ten. The deployment took hardly two to three hours. We needed three people to deploy the product.

The solution’s price is fine. I rate the pricing a six out of ten. The pricing depends on the number of authors and readers we need.

I evaluated Tableau and Power BI, but our clients’ setup was established on AWS, so they preferred Amazon QuickSight.

People are using the tool without any problems. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.

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.