SAP S4HANA on AWS vs Virtustream xStream comparison

"Provides good performance and regular release of new features."

"The HANA database is a valuable feature"

"It is indeed a stable solution, but it depends on how you architecture the component in AWS. If the component has the right architecture and is properly provisioned and placed, then it will be a stable platform."

"There are two main features that we find very valuable. One is the interface and the new user experience. That's really, really helpful for the end-user. The second is the HANA database itself because it speeds up the process. In other solutions, like Oracle, there is a lot of redundancy that slows things down."

"The reporting capability is good, providing very in-depth information."

"We have found the retail business features to be the most valuable."

"The tool's installation is easy. I rate it an eight out of ten."

"They have their own instances where you can host your database."

"The solution has encryption which we did not have before."

"Sometimes, the tool has bugs."

"Doesn't have a common development environment."

"I would rate my experience with the initial setup a three out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy."

"The manufacturing application system, it's not as user-friendly in S4HANA."

"Currently, we have some integration areas like Concur and Ariba that could be improved. Having these integrations as a single source rather than working in silos would be beneficial for customers."

"There are incidents where there are certain glitches, however, they are specifically because of the configuration that people have made and based on the decision I made during the implementation project."

"The tool should undergo an overall improvement, including support. Data sharing should also be faster."

"The initial setup could be easier. It's complex."

"Our account representative was inexperienced, they could improve on how they are managing accounts."

"On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the highest price, I rate the solution's pricing an eight."

"I would rate the pricing as a two and a half out of five."

"Compared to its competitors, SAP S4HANA on AWS is a costly solution."

"It's expensive. It would be good if AWS and Azure could reduce the computing cost for people who move to the public cloud."

"The vendors have different pricing, ways of serving, security, and providing the service. You go and compare the offerings. Some might be better with smaller companies. For example, Microsoft Azure can handle small and medium-sized companies best but still can cover some large companies. Whereas Amazon AWS and IBM are going to cover sized companies. There's no clear advantage. Probably Amazon AWS may have been the first to be certified by SAP as a cloud-hosting partner. Then Microsoft Azure and IBM were certified at the same time. You have to partner up and be certified by the software."

"The licensing of the product is reasonable but the cost of the hardware is exorbitant."

"The pricing is a little bit high."

"SAP S4HANA's pricing model should be more flexible and transparent - there's a lot of negotiation and internal factors, and some customers get better value and services for the same product."

"The solution is a bit expensive, we are still negotiating the price."