Most of the Azure vs AWS comparison material you'll find online is written for companies with infrastructure engineering teams. For a 40-person business deciding where to host a server or a line-of-business application, the analysis looks quite different.
Short version: if you're already on Microsoft 365, Azure is the sensible default. If you're not Microsoft-dependent, both are viable and the decision comes down to other factors.
Why the Microsoft connection matters
Azure and Microsoft 365 share the same identity system: Microsoft Entra ID. Your staff already have Microsoft accounts. Single sign-on to Azure-hosted applications from those accounts is straightforward. Managing who has access to what, setting device policies, controlling application access all happens from one admin centre rather than two separate platforms.
If you have Windows servers on-site and want to extend to the cloud for disaster recovery or a gradual migration, Azure's hybrid connectivity is mature and well-documented. It's genuinely easier than the equivalent on AWS if your starting point is a Windows environment.
There's also a practical support angle: the pool of IT support providers competent in Azure is larger in the UK than those with AWS depth, particularly among MSPs serving SMEs. Being on Azure means more options when you need help.
When AWS makes more sense
AWS has a larger overall service catalogue, and in specific areas (certain database services, machine learning infrastructure) it leads on features and sometimes on price. The documentation and community knowledge around AWS is also deeper, built over a longer track record.
For businesses that don't run on the Microsoft stack (Google Workspace, Linux servers, custom applications) the Azure integration argument doesn't apply. AWS is a genuine alternative, and your IT provider's competence on the platform matters more than the platform choice itself.
The things that trip SMEs up on both platforms
Cloud cost management is underestimated almost universally. Both platforms have pricing that's complex and easy to misread. Servers left running overnight when they only need to run during business hours. Storage costs growing quietly. Bandwidth charges nobody anticipated. Set up cost monitoring and spending budgets before you deploy anything, not after you've seen the first bill.
Platform support above the basic tier costs money on both Azure and AWS. If you need someone to respond at 3am when infrastructure fails, you're paying for a support plan. Build that into your cost model from the start.
Data residency is worth confirming explicitly for UK businesses. Both Azure and AWS have UK data centre regions. Check that your configuration actually keeps data there, because the default isn't always the UK region.
Lift-and-shift (moving an on-premise server wholesale to a cloud VM) is fast to set up but often expensive to run long-term. Cloud-native approaches using managed services cost less at scale but are more complex to implement. For an SME doing this for the first time, get specialist advice before committing to an architecture. The migration is rarely as simple as it looks.