Azure Cloud Services vs. Platform.sh

I like the security provided by Microsoft Cloud Platform that gives us comfort that our Clouds data and applications are safe and secure with excellent backups and recovery capabilities and our entire organization depend on this platform for effective data migration. The system integrations with this platform are highly intuitive with the ease to customize its API and excellent performance monitoring capability to all our Clouds applications.

In our organisation we are the only team that uses Platform.sh to host any site. This was a cost effective way for us as we were using Acquia Cloud earlier for these websites. We mostly use Platform.sh for those sites which are always in development as it is simpler and faster to handle these operations in Platform.sh. Then we do a lift and shift to Acquia as we move more towards the go live and post production maintenance side.

Incentivized

• Azure excels in providing scalable infrastructure and services. For example, organizations can use Azure Virtual Machines to dynamically adjust computing resources based on demand.
• Azure's Platform as a Service (PaaS) offerings, such as Azure App Service, empower developers to focus on building applications without dealing with the underlying infrastructure.
• Azure seamlessly integrates with on-premises environments, facilitating a hybrid cloud approach.
• Azure Functions allows organizations to execute code in a serverless environment, triggering functions in response to events without the need to provision or manage servers.

• As this is a PaaS it mitigates the complexities of a Cloud infrastructure like Acquia
• We are easily able to integrate our sites with different technologies like Python and Rest
• Helps us in providing Continuous Development cloud deployment hosting solution

Incentivized

• Azure MySQL single server to flexible server migration
• Database Migration Services
• Azure VMs

Incentivized

• Platform.sh is not for beginners in my opinion. It has a good amount of learning curve in my opinion.
• As this is a PaaS, teams habituated with cloud infrastructure may miss the server side support from their cloud teams. I believe you will have to work on server bugs more on your own.
• During normal maintenance periods, integrations may fail if you are working on your sites in that time, in my experience.

Incentivized

I feel AWS offers a robust and versatile platform for cloud infrastructure and services. It's scalability, reliability array of tools make it a top choice for businesses of all sizes. AWS has better open source communities such as Linux, Jenkins and GitHub in comparison to Azure service cloud

In our team we use Platform.sh mostly while sites are in developmental phase. Then we do a lift and shift to either Acquia or AWS depending on the type of sites we have. Platform.sh is really cost effective and more fluid in terms of Continuous Development hence the usage. After said development is done, we generally lift and shift to Acquia for more content heavy sites and to AWS for more transaction oriented sites.

Incentivized

• Remote data accessibility via the platform is effective.
• Data security through the system is guaranteed.
• Easy data recovery solution.

Incentivized

• Continuous development for sites in build has been fluid
• Platform.sh is really cost effective when comparing to AWS or Acquia Cloud
• On the other side, lack of server side support demands a big learning curve from its users in my opinion.

Incentivized