"Amazon Transcribe helps me not to fall behind in a meeting and not know what's going on. Even if I do, I have the transcript at the end to help me figure out what was said during the meeting."
"We don't run into any issues with bugs or glitches."
"It was easy to understand, easy to configure, and easy to use."
"The UX and UI could be improved on the AWS console."
"I would love to see Amazon Transcribe have its own section or its own page about how to make adjustments if you're using it for accessibility."
"The quality needs to be updated. For speech to text, support for additional languages can be included. For example, support for the large markets in Eastern Europe, such as Polish or Romanian, would be nice."
Amazon Transcribe is ranked 3rd in Speech-To-Text Services while IBM Watson Speech To Text is ranked 4th in Speech-To-Text Services. Amazon Transcribe is rated 7.6, while IBM Watson Speech To Text is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Amazon Transcribe writes "Can fix errors in the transcript but needs better instructions on adjustments when used for accessibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Watson Speech To Text writes "Easy to understand, configure, and use". Amazon Transcribe is most compared with Microsoft Azure Speech Service, Google Cloud Speech-to-Text, AssemblyAI and Rev.ai, whereas IBM Watson Speech To Text is most compared with Google Cloud Speech-to-Text, Microsoft Azure Speech Service and AssemblyAI.
See our list of best Speech-To-Text Services vendors.
We monitor all Speech-To-Text Services 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.