Amazon CloudFront Reviews

My primary use case involves setting up Amazon CloudFront and then using C# code to generate a token to get files from the S3 bucket. It mainly provides an additional security layer when accessing files.

Amazon CloudFront provides valuable security by ensuring secure file access when accessing files from S3. This security layer is essential for maintaining privacy and data protection in our operations.

I recommend Amazon CloudFront for situations requiring secure file management in the cloud environment.

I haven't worked extensively with CloudFront to identify any specific areas that need improvement. However, it might benefit from multi-region support to enhance performance.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for one year.

Amazon CloudFront has been very stable and reliable in my experience. It has performed well for our specific use cases.

I have not yet performed any large-scale performance tests, so I cannot comment on the scalability of Amazon CloudFront.

I have not contacted Amazon for any technical issues, so I cannot comment on their technical support. However, in general service interactions, they have been very helpful.

Positive

I also use Azure's cloud environment.

The initial setup of CloudFront is not straightforward and requires some research, however, it is not overly complicated. On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the easiest, I would rate it a five.

I handle the deployment and implementation of Amazon CloudFront by myself.

The pricing for Amazon CloudFront is acceptable and comparable to similar solutions.

I have experience with Azure's cloud environment - not with other CDN services like Fastly or Azure Front Door.

I recommend Amazon CloudFront when security for files is a priority. Overall, I would rate the solution at eight out of ten.

I primarily use it to serve static content and to provide an additional call drive to the API Gateway.

It is very effective in enhancing our application's global reach with its distributed network across geographical locations. It has improved both the performance and reach of our applications.

The most beneficial feature is capturing the static data, which is crucial for our operations.

There is a bit of a workaround required for custom domain management on CloudFront. Mapping the domain involves some complexity with the domain provider, and it's tricky when doing it for the first time.

I have been using CloudFront for five years.

Stability is good. It does not face significant issues or break down.

Scalability is good, there are no issues observed.

Customer support is rated six out of ten due to knowledge-related aspects.

Neutral

The initial setup is not straightforward and requires some prior knowledge and experience.

CloudFront is relatively cheap and worth the money.

One needs to be aware of how data caching works, especially when trying to refresh data, as it involves cache invalidation, which requires some management.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We work for a bank. We use the solution to host some public websites. The CDN hosts images and static content related to the website. We are not working in an active production environment. Currently, we are conducting User Acceptance Testing. We have only released it to a few focus development groups to check how the site is used.

I like the solution’s ease of use and configuration. Getting the certificate signed and using it in CDN was easy. It is easy to configure. The product is easy to configure compared to other AWS services. We can choose locations close to our users. It helps reduce latency and improves the time it takes to refresh the site.

It normally takes over a day to get a reply from the support team. The support must be improved.

I have been using the solution for seven months.

We are still testing the tool in the UAT phase. So far, our experience with the tool’s stability has been good.

Globally, we have 60,000 to 80,000 users. We plan to deploy a full-scale production. We might have almost five million users.

The support team does not provide immediate responses.

The setup was straightforward. Most of the features are available out of the box. The learning experience was very straightforward. The answers to a lot of our questions were available in the UI. There is a link that we can click to learn more about the features. It was quite user-friendly. The tool is deployed on the cloud.

The setup time was much less when we deployed the tool on the cloud. The procurement of the services, testing, and deployment was quick and easy compared to on-premise provisioning. We have a team of eight people for deployment, including managers, developers, and testers. The setup was very smooth and easy to configure.

The product provides reduced latency and quicker site refreshes. We have seen a significant improvement over the on-premise version we used earlier. The sites appear faster to the users.

The product must enable cost optimization. We do not have many options to optimize costs. Most of the prices are fixed. It would be good if the vendor could provide different tiers or allow users to optimize prices.

We have not used the security features to the fullest extent. Initially, we had an on-premises solution. I recommend that people use the tool. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We used the solution to host a public website.

The support team is knowledgeable.

The UI could be more user-friendly. There were a lot of technical terms on the UI page.

I have been using the solution for three to four months.

Once the product was deployed, it was stable. Other than human errors, we did not face any issues. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The product is quite scalable. Even high-definition images load up pretty quickly. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We have 20,000 users.

The response time is better than that of Microsoft.

Getting the correct documents for the setup was a little difficult. It was easier to find information on Microsoft. It took us a few weeks to deploy the tool. It is a cloud-based solution. Some configuration parameters were a little difficult to understand. I had to go through a lot of documents to understand the configurations.

The deployment was done in-house. We had five members, including managers, on our technical team.

We developed POCs using Amazon CloudFront and Windows Azure CDN. The functionalities of both products are the same. We used Amazon S3 and Amazon CloudFront for hosting. We also did automation using AWS Lambda.

People who want to use the solution must first go through the documentation. It is much easier than directly jumping into the service. The documentation helps us understand what we need to get the configuration done. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use Amazon CloudFront for various purposes based on our needs and budget considerations. For instance, if we have live content like static images or videos that should be quickly accessible on our website, the tool is handy. It enables us to deliver content swiftly to end users. The cache features also reduce the need to access the origin server, optimizing our website speed.

Previously, we were directly fetching videos from our Amazon S3 URL, resulting in slow image loading and high latency on our landing page. To address this, we explored Amazon CloudFront features with edge locations to improve content delivery speed. We integrated Amazon S3 with Amazon CloudFront, and now all content is served through the product, leading to better optimization than our previous setup.

The beneficial feature for the entire AWS community is the presence of edge location servers. These servers are strategically located in multiple locations, allowing efficient content delivery from the nearest server. 

We opted for the tool because we already used the Amazon S3 bucket. Since Amazon CloudFront is an AWS feature, integrating it with our S3 bucket was easy. Transferring data from one source to another within AWS is straightforward. The process might have been more time-consuming if we had chosen a different CDN provider. Amazon CloudFront, a managed service by AWS, offers an easy integration solution.

The solution can benefit from expanding its data center and server locations to multiple places for smoother content delivery with even lower latency. The latency we experience is sufficient for our needs, and we are doing well. However, if they expand their locations in the future, it could be a positive factor. Its competitors have multiple data and server locations. 

I have been working with the product for five years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. Customization is easy with the product. 

I rate Amazon CloudFront's scalability a ten out of ten. I use it 24/7. 

AWS technical support can't be fully assessed at the moment. In the basic support plan, users have the option to open basic support tickets, and AWS provides choices for responses through calls or live chat. To access advanced technical support, users need to subscribe to premium plans. Its response time is quick. Though they give a timeframe of 24 hours, support is immediately initiated.  

Positive

I have used Akamai CDN before. I chose the product since it integrates easily with my internal system. It is widely used and comes with rich documentation and resources. 

The tool's deployment is easy. For inexperienced resources, I rate deployment difficulty an eight out of ten. For me, it's nine point five out of ten. The product comes with a vast amount of resources and documentation. 

We had a deadline of one and a half months. However, we could go into production within four weeks, i.e., 25 days. Deployment includes quality assurance and staging processes. One resource is enough to handle the deployment process. The person responsible for deploying the solution should know CI/CD processes. They should understand security compliance, gate methodologies, and the functioning of code push and pull. Familiarity with Webhooks and the dashboard of AWS CodePipeline or check kits is necessary.

Once the setup is done, the tool doesn't require frequent changes. Two resources are needed for maintenance, and one would be enough later. 

We have seen an ROI of 45 percent with the tool's use. 

I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. The licensing follows a pay-as-you-go model. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use Amazon CloudFront for offloading our media libraries for WordPress. It is mostly used for our clients' websites where we need to use a CDN for speed optimization of websites.

Using Amazon CloudFront drastically increases the performance of websites. The integration process is simplified and clear, especially with the plugin we use. This has improved our speed optimization effectively.

The best feature of Amazon CloudFront is its simplified process and easy integration. The plugin we use does most of the work, making it easy for us. The speed optimization is another valuable feature.

There are some solutions needed for integration that are not free. It would be better if there was a straightforward way to configure it without additional costs.

I have been using Amazon CloudFront for two years.

I do not remember having any difficulty with stability while using Amazon CloudFront.

Amazon CloudFront is easy to scale up or down as needed.

The initial setup of Amazon CloudFront requires experience and expertise.

I haven't compared pricing with other solutions, so I can't comment on it. Usually, it depends on the number of files you are uploading and the resources you are distributing. It is a pay-as-you-go model.

I would recommend Amazon CloudFront to other people.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our newest AWS connection was initially in Europe and we experienced very high latency. However, bringing it to Bahrain has drastically improved performance, not just for us but for all the regional operators connected to our ISN, including entities in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. The ultimate users of these services are the enterprises themselves. However, we don't sell directly to them. Instead, we sell to operators, both Bahraini and regional, who then sell the services to the enterprises.

Its main advantage is that it offers something in this region that wasn't available before; previously, you had to go outside the region to get the same level of service you can now access right here in Bahrain. It's truly incredible. Our customers are more interested in accessing CDNs and peering with each other. Moreover, building this IX has significantly changed how traffic is handled. It has enabled better regional connectivity and access to content, which was our main goal. It has saved us money and time.

The only issues we've faced were when AWS itself had problems, and that's very rare. I can only recall one instance when they had issues, but they managed to resolve it quickly.

I have been using the solution for three years now.

The technical support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is very straightforward. We support our customers by shipping the equipment and providing all the necessary information they need. Our team receives and keeps the equipment until the customer is ready to install it. The deployment time depends on the customer, but we provide all the support and cross-connects they need. We've even done same-day setups when needed. While not everything is urgent, we're happy to accommodate when there is a sense of urgency.

The tool is affordable.

Going for the tool really depends on the preferences of the company. Both Azure and AWS have their own advantages and disadvantages, which is why they're both in the market today. Some people prefer using Microsoft Azure, while others prefer AWS. However, it's important to note that switching from one cloud provider to another is not an easy decision. It requires a significant investment of time and effort in training and setting up equipment on a particular cloud platform.

Overall, I rate the solution a perfect ten.

I've used CloudFront, as the company's CDN, to distribute content across better local servers to help the final user perform better.

The most valuable feature is the number of servers they can put your content in while being reliable. They are stable. It's a strong feature that helps distribute content close to the users.

The user interface could be improved. It's much easier to control or see financial results from similar solutions from Google.

The solution is very stable. I can only remember one or two times that the product was unstable, but overall, it is very hard for something to go wrong.

The solution is very scalable.

In the free tier, you receive very little support from Amazon. You get more support with premium support, but I believe Amazon lacks documentation. This is mainly a problem with people like us from abroad because it's not common for them to translate materials, and they are closed off from the community, so they do not offer the greatest support.

Neutral

It takes a long time to deploy the solution, but the most difficult part is deploying it nicely. The user should fine-tune the configuration to achieve the solution's full potential.

Depending on the complexity of the deployment, the number of people required varies. Just deploying the CDN on the cloud is not hard. If you have one or two good developers, they can deploy the solution themselves.

I rate Amazon CloudFront's pricing a five out of ten.

Amazon CloudFront is not the most complex application for Amazon to set up, but some complexities could be improved to get the most of the power out of this service. However, the solution works perfectly when designed well by the architect.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.