Azure Functions vs. Engine Yard

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure Functions
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Azure Functions enables users to execute event-driven serverless code functions with an end-to-end development experience.
$18
per month approximately
Engine Yard
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Engine Yard is a platform-as-a-service solution allowing developers to plan, build, deploy, and manage applications in the cloud. Engine Yard also provides services for deployment, managing AWS, supporting databases, and microservices & container development.
$800
Per Month Per Cluster
Pricing
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Platform
$800.00
Per Month Per Cluster
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Features
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Access Control and Security
Comparison of Access Control and Security features of Product A and Product B
Azure Functions
10.0
1 Ratings
10% above category average
Engine Yard
-
Ratings
Multiple Access Permission Levels (Create, Read, Delete)10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Single Sign-On (SSO)10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Reporting & Analytics
Comparison of Reporting & Analytics features of Product A and Product B
Azure Functions
7.0
1 Ratings
1% above category average
Engine Yard
-
Ratings
Dashboards7.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Standard reports9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Custom reports5.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Function as a Service (FaaS)
Comparison of Function as a Service (FaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Azure Functions
8.8
1 Ratings
1% above category average
Engine Yard
-
Ratings
Programming Language Diversity9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Runtime API Authoring8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Function/Database Integration9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
DevOps Stack Integration9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.3 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure FunctionsEngine Yard
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
They're great to embed logic and code in a medium-small, cloud-native application, but they can become quite limiting for complex, enterprise applications.
Read full review
Engine Yard
It is best for rapidly getting your application to the cloud without worrying about standing up cloud infrastructure
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • They natively integrate with many triggers from other Azure services, like Blob Storage or Event Grid, which is super handy when creating cloud-native applications on Azure (data wrangling pipelines, business process automation, data ingestion for IoT, ...)
  • They natively support many common languages and frameworks, which makes them easily approachable by teams with a diverse background
  • They are cheap solutions for low-usage or "seasonal" applications that exhibits a recurring usage/non-usage pattern (batch processing, montly reports, ...)
Read full review
Engine Yard
  • Quick deployments
  • Easily integrate your code from GitHub
  • Ability to recover site quickly to different zone when AWS has a widespread outage
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • My biggest complaint is that they promote a development model that tightly couples the infrastructure with the app logic. This can be fine in many scenarios, but it can take some time to build the right abstractions if you want to decouple you application from this deployment model. This is true at least using .NET functions.
  • In some points, they "leak" their abstraction and - from what I understood - they're actually based on the App Service/Web App "WebJob SDK" infrastructure. This makes sense, since they also share some legacy behavior from their ancestor.
  • For larger projects, their mixing of logic, code and infrastructure can become difficult to manage. In these situations, good App Services or brand new Container Apps could be a better fit.
Read full review
Engine Yard
  • Embracing new Amazon Web Servicess(AWS) features
  • Security groups need more granularity
  • Audit trails of what happens by who in environment, especially when VM is deleted
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Engine Yard
Ease of use
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
This is the most straightforward and easy-to-implement server less solution. App Service is great, but it's designed for websites, and it cannot scale automatically as easily as Azure Functions. Container Apps is a robust and scalable choice, but they need much more planning, development and general work to implement. Container Instances are the same as Container Apps, but they are extremely more limited in termos of capacity. Kubernetes Service si the classic pod container on Azure, but it requires highly skilled professional, and there are not many scenario where it should be used, especially in smaller teams.
Read full review
Engine Yard
More closely aligns to native AWS
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • They allowed me to create solutions with low TCO for the customer, which loves the result and the low price, that helped me create solutions for more clients in less time.
  • You can save up to 100% of your compute bill, if you stay under a certain tenant conditions.
Read full review
Engine Yard
  • Positive in the sense that we can deploy new applications quickly for MVP
Read full review
ScreenShots