We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Pantheon based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's very user-friendly."
"The capacity to grow dynamically based on our needs is most valuable. We can increase resources dynamically. It is also very reliable and fast to implement."
"You can build and release applications quickly with AWS instead of waiting for months to get the necessary hardware. That's the real benefit. The time-to-market for developing applications is much shorter."
"Amazon AWS has improved a lot on security and is very good. Additionally, You can integrate your own security into their AWS platform."
"The most valuable feature is the availability, as we work in different availability zones."
"It has a dynamic scaling capacity which is very helpful."
"I like many features, like the recently released useful analytics features. There are many from the data analytics or database side."
"AWS is constantly growing in features with every new version. It's a good cloud provider with excellent availability. The integration is good, and their security products are interesting. Amazon is always innovating and delivering new products to customers."
"The product allows users to create multiple development environments."
"Pantheon has the most valuable workflow model."
"Many of our clients prefer in-house cloud rather than the application data sitting in the infrastructure owned and managed by Amazon."
"The features that should be improved are that there should be better clarity on their invoicing. There are so many things they charge for - high line items in the invoice. I think there should be more clarity and more ease of use with their billing. I'd like to see better ease of use of with the billing console and a clear dashboard to understand the usage."
"Our use case is limited to virtual services and RPA development. We are not using it quite heavily, and there are not many issues or problems so far. However, it would be great if it could be integrated with more AI features and proactive monitoring. It could also have more automatic capacity expansion features. For example, when renting out some space, memory, or computing power, the service can have the capacity to expand by itself without being manually handled by us."
"AWS could be more scalable."
"You'll probably experience some sticker shock with AWS. You attempt to understand the cost, but you don't realize what you're paying until you get your first bill. I don't know if Amazon does that on purpose, but costs can get out of control quickly if you don't have someone who specializes in AWS cost management."
"In the next release, I would like to see better pricing."
"The interface could be improved."
"They could lower the cost. The setup could also be easier."
"The Multidev environment is very costly compared to other tools like AWS and GCP."
"Pantheon has the most valuable workflow model."
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in PaaS Clouds with 250 reviews while Pantheon is ranked 20th in PaaS Clouds with 2 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Pantheon is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Reliable with good security but is difficult to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pantheon writes "The product is user-friendly and performs well, but it is very costly compared to other tools". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Pantheon is most compared with Acquia Cloud, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform, Salesforce Platform and GoDaddy. See our Amazon AWS vs. Pantheon report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.