Amazon Elastic Transcoder vs. IBM Cloud Internet Services

It is well suited in a large setting where people use different file formats and various apps to record and transfer their audio or video files across devices. In such scenarios, the transcoder would of real help to eliminate the hassle of converting the files into desired formats for viewing or doing some other analysis.

The transcoder would not be of much use if all the files have the same format and does not need any conversion from their source file formats. It would prove costly and not useful if it's just an additional step that is of no particular use

Incentivized

In terms of business challenges, it simplifies the job of my engineers and significantly increases the productivity of my teams when they collaborate with IBM teams all over the world. Now that we have completed a proof-of-concept using the services supplied by IBM, we expect it to assist us in managing them more efficiently; thus far, management has been straightforward.

Incentivized

• Works at scale, you can can transcode a high number of videos at the same time.
• Supports a good number of formats.
• Good integration with AWS S3 and other AWS Services.

Incentivized

• Integration with IBM Cloud applications
• Easy to manage web application firewall
• Ease of protecting CloudFoundry applications
• Good console UI
• Protection for rare managed service offerings such as CouchDB through IBM Cloudant

Incentivized

• Amazon Elastic Transcoder requires a fair amount of setup.

Incentivized

• Request proxying is done by way of DNS name resolution, which is inflexible.
• Proxy services do not work on wildcard DNS entries.

Incentivized

I have seen faster and more user friendly interfaces like Azure

Incentivized

Support for Amazon Elastic Transcoder is the same as any other service within AWS. If you are familiar with AWS, it is easy to start using Elastic Transcoder

Incentivized

Amazon Elastic Transcoder is in a league of its own when compared to other alternatives in the market. The most noticeable competitor would be either Microsoft or Adobe or Google. When I had a chance to compare Azure products and Amazon products, the difference is obvious and the experience provided by both the products are very different in terms of user experience and interaction with the application. The cost and availability also were taken into consideration when choosing between the two shortlisted choices. So we went with Amazon's product as it is widely used and has support and maintenance which is basically better than the competition.

Incentivized

I have used Salesforce to explore it as an app but I have found them both able to solve my needs and requirements when it comes to security. While I choose IBM Cloud Internet Services for more accessibility, a better price was available with Saleforce. Although that is just my observation.

Incentivized

• Less time for integration with this service if you are already in AWS stack
• No real time transcoding is a negative

Incentivized

• It had a positive impact with a big improvement on the performance of web applications.
• Services are quite fast to implement and easy to maintain from an IT perspective.

Incentivized