Amazon Web Services vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

This is something that is actually common across most cloud providers. A comprehensive understanding of one's use cases, constraints and future directions is key to determining if you even need a cloud solution. If you are a 2-person startup developing something with a best-scenario audience of 1k DAU in a year, you would very likely best served by a dirt-cheap dedicated Linux server somewhere (and your options to graduate to a cloud solution will still be open). If, however, you are a bigger fish, and/or you are actively considering build-vs-buy decisions for complicated, highly-loaded, six-figure requests per minute systems, global loadbalancing, extreme growth projections - then MAYBE you solve all or part of it with a cloud provider. And depending on your taste for risk, reliability, flexibility, track record - it might be AWS.

Incentivized

I think it's good for cloud-native companies. A company that, from day zero, they're like, "We're going cloud, and this is how we're going to do it." They get it. It works well for them. Smaller organizations that are under X amount of resources- I don't know what that X might mean- but I feel like it plays well in smaller, more nimble organizations. If you're an older organization or if you're extremely large, it starts becoming a little difficult to manage at scale. And you have to sometimes throw bodies at the problem. Maybe not the most eloquent way of saying it, but that's what it feels like.

Incentivized

• During the month-end, we experience high resource utilization; however, with AWS's scalability, we can effectively tackle the peak load.
• With AWS IAM, we don't need to set up complete infrastructure for identity and access management, as AWS provides end-to-end IAM services.
• With AWS, development has become very easy as it's very quick to spin up and destroy the environment, which saves costs.

Incentivized

• It's really well laid out, with an easy-to-use, accessible UI.
• With Microsoft Defender for Cloud, it has everything you need with the Safelink attachment, the Safelink emails for URL, the way it scans those URLs and attachments within the product, and you're seeing the results. And that adds an extra layer of security for the user, so you feel comfortable knowing the product monitors those. That's something I really like about that product.

Incentivized

• When there is any misconfiguration of EC2 related to SSM Connect. It doesn't clearly states that what particular configuration is missing.
• Debugging networking related issues could be improved.
• From the security group page, it's difficult to determine which resource a security group is associated with.

Incentivized

• Integrations with on-premise workloads can sometimes be challenging. Needs improvement and well standardised integration points
• Vulnerability categories can be difficult to understand. It should allow teams to focus on critical findings and help them keep aside low-severity or suppressed vulnerabilities
• Pricing can be improved as it can be over-priced for smaller businesses and would potentially affect their ROI due to the small scale

Incentivized

We are almost entirely satisfied with the service. In order to move off it, we'd have to build for ourselves many of the services that AWS provides and the cost would be prohibitive. Although there are cost savings and security benefits to returning to the colo facility, we could never afford to do it, and we'd hate to give up the innovation and constant cycle of new features that AWS gives us.

It is a great product that integrates nicely when running an Azure platform and even multi-cloud environment. Not looking for point-solutions but a suite that answers most requirements. It is very comfortable being able to use KQL, workbooks and automation that is native to the azure platform

AWS offers a wide range of powerful services that cater to various business needs which is significant strength. The ability to scale resources on-demand is a major advantage making it suitable for businesses of all sizes. The sheer volume of options and configurations can be overwhelming for new users leading to a steep learning curve. While functional the AWS management console can feel cluttered and less intuitive compared to some competitors which can hinder navigation. Although some documentation lacks clarity and practical examples which can frustrate users trying to implement specific solutions.

Incentivized

My visibility is limited because I'm only doing very small pieces of what the overall org does. And also, we have limitations on what we're allowed to use. It's not like we get a new product as users or leadership level users, and everything is on, and we can just do whatever we want. We're very restricted in what we can use any tooling within the org because of the different levels of regulatory constraints we have, because of just the nature of who we are inherently. So that's why. I don't think it's necessarily the product. I think it's more or less of what we're able to do with the product.

Incentivized

Availability is very good, with the exception of occasional spectacular outages.

AWS does not provide the raw performance that you can get by building your own custom infrastructure. However, it is often the case that the benefits of specialized, high-performance hardware do not necessarily outweigh the significant extra cost and risk. Performance as perceived by the user is very different from raw throughput.

The customer support of Amazon Web Services are quick in their responses. I appreciate its entire team, which works amazingly, and provides professional support. AWS is a great tool, indeed, to provide customers a suitable way to
immediately search for their compatible software's and also to guide them in a
good direction. Moreover, this product is a good suggestion for every type of
company because of its affordability and ease of use.

Incentivized

The API's were very well documented and was Janova's main point of entry into the services.

Amazon Web Services fits best for all levels of organisations like startup, mid level or enterprise. The services are easy to use and doesn't require a high level of understanding as you can learn via blogs or youtube videos. AWS is Reasonable in cost as the plan is pay as you use.

Incentivized

I believe Microsoft Defender for Cloud stacks up well against the other tools we looked at. It is native to the Azure platform and provides the same insights as the other tools. We selected Microsoft Defender for Cloud because it integrates well with the Azure resources and gives the needed insight, security alerts and recommendations.

Incentivized

• Using Amazon Web Services has allowed us to develop and deploy new SAAS solutions quicker than we did when we used traditional web hosting. This has allowed us to grow our service offerings to clients and also add more value to our existing services.
• Having AWS deployed has also allowed our development team to focus on delivering high-quality software without worrying about whether our servers will be able to handle the demand. Since AWS allows you to adjust your server needs based on demand, we can easily assign a faster server instance to ease and improve service without the client even knowing what we did.

Incentivized

• Ensuring compliance with data protection regulations can prevent costly fines and legal issues, positively impacting ROI.
• Effective cloud resource protection can optimize cloud spending and resource utilization, ultimately reducing cloud infrastructure costs.
• The subscription costs associated with Defender for Cloud can add to an organization's operational expenses, impacting ROI.
• Smaller organizations may find the feature set and complexity of Defender for Cloud unnecessary, potentially overinvesting in security solutions.

Incentivized