Amazon Elastic Container Service vs Microsoft Azure Container Service comparison

"The solution's technical support is good."

"We use the product for website and email database hosting."

"The support from AWS is incredible."

"Amazon ECS allows users to deploy and manage container applications like microservices or web applications on Amazon clusters. It's easy to install and designed for AWS targets, serving as a serverless container platform. It offers features such as automatic scanning, load balancing, and service discovery to help users manage their container applications."

"Amazon EC2 Container Service has multiple valuable features like load balancers and autoscalers."

"ECS is a useful platform."

"The most valuable feature is the volume size they offer."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its scalability."

"Storage is one of the most beneficial features of cloud providers, specifically Azure because when you are working in their cloud environment, you can easily use a storage interface and a storage object that is provided by Microsoft Azure. In a local environment, you have to be involved in establishing and setting up distributed storage file systems for containers which are very difficult and complex. In a cloud environment, you are not concerned about the storage and the dashboard provides you with storage objects with high availability."

"The product makes things easier since it's self-managed. Therefore, there is less administration workload and operational costs."

"The most valuable feature is that you don't have to maintain the infrastructure."

"Visualization is the most important feature."

"It's a great product if you are in a Microsoft environment."

"Microsoft Azure Container Service has a good level of stability."

"The most valuable features are that it is simple, and the compression of the data."

"I think that it would help if the vendor provided more use cases and explanations as to how ECS can be utilized."

"The orchestration of the workloads running in ECS needs improvement."

"Since it is a managed service for container orchestration, it may limit our control over certain infrastructure functions."

"There is room for improvement in the pricing of Amazon EC2 Container Service."

"Sometimes, the instances fail under the ECS container cluster, and we have to manually go and find out the black sheep in the ECS container instance. We had an issue earlier where one of the instances under the ECS container cluster went down, and we were not able to identify that instance. The instance got terminated, but a new instance did not come up. Therefore, I had to manually get that instance up. It could be optimized better. In production, we normally cannot sustain such things. It can be optimized in terms of instances, durability, and serving the requests of customers."

"The solution can still be expensive, even with per-second billing."

"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."

"My company has faced some stability issues with Amazon EC2 Container Service."

"Since the product is fully managed, it is expensive."

"In terms of the container strategy, they need to make it more compliant with the Linux OS."

"The customization is an area that needs improvement."

"Standard support could be more helpful and responsive."

"In the future, I would like to see it generalized and have the ability to better integrate with open-source tools."

"f Microsoft Azure can provide GUI dashboards for end-users and administrators to work separately to manage all the Kubernetes clusters without a need to connect to Azure environments and through CLI it would be better."

"I wasn't very impressed with the documentation."

"I don't exactly deal with the pricing. We have a separate Infra team that deals with the pricing. They are more into the scalability part. Based on our requirements, the pricing will increase. The automation teams will test some of the benefits to see how can we can optimize the cost. They'll have a security manager connection and some alerts based upon the usage to see how to reduce the building cost based upon the installations."

"We have to pay a monthly licensing fee for Amazon EC2 Container Service."

"Amazon Elastic Container Service is an expensive solution."

"There is no need to pay anything towards the licensing costs of Amazon EC2 Container Service."

"The product's pricing is good."

"The pricing is good."

"If you want to scale without the traditional methods, the solution is a bit cost-effective."

"The tool's cost is good."

"The solution's pricing is reasonable."

"Microsoft Azure Container Service has costs but in the container environment, there are no costs because it is open source and we are using Docker as the container engine in the master and worker nodes established in the Azure environment."

"The costs depend on the resources that you use, and there is a cost-management system to help calculate it."