There is room for improvement regarding its technical support services. Also, it would be beneficial if AWS allowed for more granular and customizable pricing options.
Providing online support has proven to be quite valuable. However, it's important to note that this isn't so much an improvement, but rather a standard practice for solutions like Azure Stack or AWS Outpost. Typically, the respective companies send their engineers for installation at the customer's premises, ensuring on-site support. I recall a similar instance when we requested on-site support for one of our locations in Hyderabad, and Amazon agreed to send their engineers to set up the solution in our office environment. That said, in terms of potential improvements, it would be beneficial to have the option for capacity expansion. When customers opt for a solution like Outpost, they receive a fixed set of capacities in terms of storage, network, and hardware. As design engineers, it's crucial to consider use cases and plan for scalability and sustainability. Having the flexibility to extend these capacities could be valuable. Some engineers may not be aware of future needs, and if there's an opportunity to expand capacity without the need for additional functionality, it would be a helpful feature. This way, we can cater to various needs and ensure the solution remains adaptable in the long run.
The product needs more integration in our region. We have high telecommunication costs. The other problem is that it should locate the cost. We buy using American dollars, and the ingress and egress, the input and output, are high. We say that they make us dance here in Latin America to use the platform. Governance is a big problem. The key to success would be to have perfect governance. Then, smaller details could be improved to better the platform, but we can't use the platform if the cost is too high. It's about cost and use case. Not every project is a lift and shift. Over a short time, the cost of the cloud sounds good, but when we look at using it for a long time, the freedoms have a cost and we need to know exactly what we're getting when we are using the cloud. The platform needs to spend more time investing in strengthening its governance and information tools and consider the real needs of its customers.
AWS Cloud Architect Consultant at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2022-02-09T20:16:08Z
Feb 9, 2022
Outposts supports elastic coordinator services, but not elastic container services, which is the native service for containers in AWS. That is something missing in this product.
Product Director, ICDC Open Source Hybrid Cloud at IBA Group
MSP
2020-11-25T07:57:00Z
Nov 25, 2020
The pricing model needs improvement because right now it's very expensive. All of these solutions are very expensive and it prevents other customers or owners of data centers from buying it. For example, Alibaba Cloud provides something cheaper, but of course not on the same architecture. Sometimes it's hard to compare. But the current price is the main barrier for such players. That is why we provide our own open-source solution, which is much cheaper.
AWS Outposts bring native AWS services, infrastructure, and operating models to virtually any data center, co-location space, or on-premises facility. You can use the same APIs, the same tools, the same hardware, and the same functionality across on-premises and the cloud to deliver a truly consistent hybrid experience. Outposts can be used to support workloads that need to remain on-premises due to low latency or local data processing needs.
Depending on the installation process, we have found some bugs and issues with the solution when the same platform is not used.
There is room for improvement regarding its technical support services. Also, it would be beneficial if AWS allowed for more granular and customizable pricing options.
Providing online support has proven to be quite valuable. However, it's important to note that this isn't so much an improvement, but rather a standard practice for solutions like Azure Stack or AWS Outpost. Typically, the respective companies send their engineers for installation at the customer's premises, ensuring on-site support. I recall a similar instance when we requested on-site support for one of our locations in Hyderabad, and Amazon agreed to send their engineers to set up the solution in our office environment. That said, in terms of potential improvements, it would be beneficial to have the option for capacity expansion. When customers opt for a solution like Outpost, they receive a fixed set of capacities in terms of storage, network, and hardware. As design engineers, it's crucial to consider use cases and plan for scalability and sustainability. Having the flexibility to extend these capacities could be valuable. Some engineers may not be aware of future needs, and if there's an opportunity to expand capacity without the need for additional functionality, it would be a helpful feature. This way, we can cater to various needs and ensure the solution remains adaptable in the long run.
The product needs more integration in our region. We have high telecommunication costs. The other problem is that it should locate the cost. We buy using American dollars, and the ingress and egress, the input and output, are high. We say that they make us dance here in Latin America to use the platform. Governance is a big problem. The key to success would be to have perfect governance. Then, smaller details could be improved to better the platform, but we can't use the platform if the cost is too high. It's about cost and use case. Not every project is a lift and shift. Over a short time, the cost of the cloud sounds good, but when we look at using it for a long time, the freedoms have a cost and we need to know exactly what we're getting when we are using the cloud. The platform needs to spend more time investing in strengthening its governance and information tools and consider the real needs of its customers.
Outposts supports elastic coordinator services, but not elastic container services, which is the native service for containers in AWS. That is something missing in this product.
The pricing model needs improvement because right now it's very expensive. All of these solutions are very expensive and it prevents other customers or owners of data centers from buying it. For example, Alibaba Cloud provides something cheaper, but of course not on the same architecture. Sometimes it's hard to compare. But the current price is the main barrier for such players. That is why we provide our own open-source solution, which is much cheaper.