## 6 Analysis of Existing Key Cloud Providers  
In parallel with the development of the distributed architecture and MSA, cloud computing is also improving. Cloud providers develop managed services for the difficulties brought by the distributed architecture and make them ready to be used in related architectures. Users configure and use the relevant services and are not interested in many quality indicators because the services give warranties on many basic quality indicators and developers focus more on domains and business rules. However, it should be decided by considering the cost of the usage of cloud services.  
In this section, the services provided by Amazon AWS, Google Cloud Platform, and Microsoft Azure, which are the three most preferred cloud providers today, have been examined and which solutions are available for which functions are presented.  
As is seen in Table 3, services are offered by cloud providers for many features. These services are provided as managed by the cloud provider, so you can start using the services by making the necessary configurations. The services have the ability to work in harmony with each other and can be easily configured as interoperable. In this respect, using these products will give us speed. Another important point is the fact that services are developed parallel to each other by all three providers. You can find the equivalent of each service in another provider. Here, which one will be selected can be concluded by making some more detailed evaluations within the scope of performance, usability, use cases, and cost analysis. The absence of a direct solution for some features indicates that it must be a feature that needs to be programed and designed, that is, it cannot be fully managed by the cloud provider. They are more conceptual and design-oriented features. However, by bringing together more than one service, the design criteria recommended within the scope of these features can be met.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Feature** & & **AWS** & **Google Cloud** & **Microsoft Azure** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Communication Style} & & AWS MQ & & Azure Queue Storage \\  & Async Communication & AWS SDS & Google Dataflow & Azure Service Bus \\  & & AWS SQS & Google Pub/Sub & Azure Event Grid \\  & & AWS Kines & & Azure Event Hubs \\ \cline{2-5}  & API Gateway & AWS API Gateway & Google Apigee & Azure API Management \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Service Orchestration} & & AWS ECS & Google Cloud Run & Azure Container Instances \\  & & AWS EB & Google App Engine & Azure App Service \\  & & AWS EKS & Google Kubernete Engine & Azure EKS \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Service Orchestration} & & & AWS CodeDeploy & & \\  & Deployment/CI and CD & AWS CodeBuild & Google Cloud Build & Azure Devops \\  & & AWS CodePipeline & & \\ \cline{2-5}  & Deployment/Serverless & AWS Lambda & Google Cloud Function & Azure Durable \\ \cline{2-5}  & Function & AWS Step Function & Google Cloud Composes & Azure Functions \\ \cline{2-5}  & Deployment/Container & AWS Fargate & Google Cloud Run & Azure Container Instance \\ \cline{2-5}  & & AWS EKS & Google Kubernete Engine & Azure Kubernete Service \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Feature-based service comparison among AWS, Google Cloud, and Microsoft Azure.