Amazon Tensor Flow vs. Azure Machine Learning

A well-suited scenario for using AWS Tensor Flow is when having a project with a geographically dispersed team, a client overseas and large data to use for training. AWS Tensor Flow is less appropriate when working for clients in regions where it hasn't been allowed yet for use. Since smaller clients are in regions where AWS Tensor Flow hasn't been allowed for use, and those clients traditionally don't have enough hardware, this situation deters a wider use of the tool.

Incentivized

Azure can be a more unified product. It feels like 10 different tech teams were building it but we're not talking to each other. An example is when the user needs to know what is the next step. Automatically saving a previous state is very helpful as new users are usually not aware of the functionality.

Incentivized

• Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) allows resizable compute capacity in the cloud, providing the necessary elasticity to provide services for both, small and medium-sized businesses.
• Tensor Flow allows us to train our models much faster than in our on-premise equipment.
• Most of the pre-trained models are easy to adapt to our clients' needs.

Incentivized

• Easy to create the experiment.
• Easy to adopt the best algorithm.
• Efficient way to deploy the model as a web service.
• Centralized platform for the life cycle of machine learning goal.

• SageMaker isn't available in all regions. This is complicated for some clients overseas.
• For larger instances, when using a GPU, it takes a while to talk to a customer service representative to ask for a limit increase. Given this, it's recommendable to ask in advance for a limit increase in more expensive and larger cases; otherwise, SageMaker will set the limit to zero by default.
• Since the data has to be stored in S3 and copied to training, it doesn't allow to test and debug locally. Therefore, we have to wait a lot to check everything after every trail.

Incentivized

• Few models: Even though it has a lot of Machine Learning models, it is quite limited when compared to R. Most Data Scientists still use and prefer R, so the newest models tend to release as R libraries. With Azure ML, we need to wait for Microsoft to evaluate and decide if including a new model is a good idea or not
• Tableau interface: last time I checked there was no easy way to connect with Tableau.
• Cloud based: You always need a good internet connection to use it.

Incentivized

Good UX/UI and overall good usability, but it takes a while to get used to the product & platform. The whole design seems fragmented with little in terms of integration with project management tools such as JIRA, or wireframing. Overall it feels like an unfinished product that's meant for teaching more than for production.

Incentivized

I'm satisfied with the Azure Machine Learning Studio- it fulfilled my goal in a single channel. Even haven't worr[ied] about the maintenance or any fault tolerance. This provide[s] the user interactive UI to grab the features easily. [Their] support teams also very help[ful], they stand with us at any time.

Not sure

Microsoft Azure is better than Amazon Tensor Flow because it provides easier and pre-built capabilities such as Anomaly Detection, Recommendation, and Ranking. AWS is better than IBM Watson ML Studio because it has direct and prebuilt clustering capabilities AWS, like IBM Watson ML Studio, has powerful built-in algorithms, providing a stronger platform when comparing it with MS Azure ML Services and Google ML Engine.

Incentivized

The answer is quite simple: Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Workbench is the cheapest and most user friendly analytics tool I have ever seen! Unless you are running a team of data scientists, this is the tool to go. Most functions (marketing, sales, finance, supply chain, logistics, HR, R&D, etc.) could easily integrate Azure ML in its day to day activity.

Incentivized

• Positive: It has allowed us to work with our overseas teams without any large hardware investing.
• Positive: Pre-trained models significantly reduce the time to develop solutions for our clients.
• Negative: Since it's a relatively new tool, you have to be careful about not paying for large errors while learning to use the tool.

Incentivized

• It is easy to learn and construct, which impacts directly on productivity.
• Good for experimentation and validation for simple models.
• Has a use cost less than the best alternatives in the market.

Incentivized