Amazon Elastic Container Service vs Microsoft Azure Container Service comparison

"The product's initial setup was very straightforward and not complex."

"The most valuable feature, after using Amazon EC2 Container Service for two years, is to set the availability and also for network throughput."

"The cloud services are readily available."

"Scalability and availability are the most valuable features of Amazon Elastic Container Service."

"What I really like about Amazon ECS is its simplicity and ease of use. Amazon also has really good security."

"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."

"The solution is user-friendly."

"Overall, it is a user-friendly and efficient tool for managing containers."

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

"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."

"Visualization is the most important feature."

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

"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."

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

"The user interface of ECS could be improved for better navigation and to assist in quickly setting up a deployment."

"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."

"There is room for improvement in the licensing costs. There can be better licensing costs."

"After the load balancer gets attached to Amazon Elastic Container Service clusters, I can't modify, remove, or replace it later."

"Billing is extremely complex."

"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."

"In the next release, they could add some customization options for high computer workloads."

"Currently, when scaling with Amazon Elastic Container Service, I have to choose between monitoring CPU or memory usage to scale up or scale out; there is no option to monitor both simultaneously."

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

"Standard support could be more helpful and responsive."

"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."

"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."

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

"Amazon Elastic Container Service has a decent price, which is neither cheap nor expensive."

"Amazon Elastic Container Service is an expensive solution."

"The product's pricing is good."

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

"Our client is paying between $400 and $500 USD per month for this service."

"The pricing of Amazon EC2 Container Service is average."

"The platform is inexpensive."

"Amazon ECS is expensive."

"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 solution's pricing is reasonable."

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