We compared Gitlab and Microsoft Azure DevOps based on our user’s reviews in four categories. After reviewing the collected data. you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results : GitLab is the preferred option due to its comprehensive product that eliminates the need for multiple solutions and offers a single platform for various management tasks, including source code, build, test, artifact, and deployment management. The platform also has better integration with other platforms, more cloud-native capabilities, and a lower initial setup cost. However, Microsoft Azure DevOps is particularly useful for agile delivery and project management due to its easy navigation, customization, and integration with other Microsoft tools.
"The important feature is the entire process of versioning source code maintenance and easy deployment. It is a necessity for the CI/CD pipeline."
"For us, Gitlab's most valuable feature is the integration with Cypress. We're using Cypress as an automation tool, so we're using GitLab as a tool for running in parallel."
"It scales well."
"GitLab's best feature is Actions."
"The most valuable features of GitLab are the review, patch repo, and plans are in YAML."
"The solution makes the CI/CD pipelines easy to execute."
"A user friendly solution."
"CI/CD and GitLab scanning are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CI/CD pipeline, and the testing automation."
"This is an all-in-one, one-stop shop, nothing comes close."
"The most valuable feature is automation with version control."
"Provides us with user histories."
"I found the Kanban board to be the most useful for my needs."
"It is good for the purpose it is designed for. It is good for maintaining a repository of application code, creating pipelines for deploying the code, building the code, and deploying the code. It can be easily used by developers. There are no issues."
"It's graphical representation and tools are easy to use."
"Setting up Azure DevOps was straightforward. It's easy to use the default templates. Everything is under our control, so it's simple to implement new requirements."
"The pricing model of GitLab is an issue for me."
"It would be better if there weren't any outages. There are occasions where we usually see a lot of outages using GitLab. It happens at least once a week or something like that. Whatever pipelines you're running, to check the logs, you need to have a different set of tools like Argus or something like that. If you have pipelines running on GitLab, you need a separate service deployed to view the logs, which is kind of a pain. If the logs can be used conveniently on GitLab, that would be definitely helpful. I'm not talking about the CI/CD pipelines but the back-end services and microservices deployed over GitLab. To view the logs for those microservices, you need to have separate log viewers, which is kind of a pain."
"There was a problem with the build environment when we were looking at developing iOS applications. iOS build require Mac machines and there are no Mac machines provided by GitLab in their cloud. So to build for mobile iOS application, we needed to use our own Mac machine within our own infrastructure. If GitLab were to provide a feature such that an iOS application could also be built through GitLab directly, that would be great."
"GitLab's Windows version is yet not available and having this would be an improvement."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration into the CI/CD pipeline, an autocomplete search tool, and more supporting documentation."
"For as long as I have used GitLab, I haven't encountered any major limitations. However, I think that perhaps the search functionality could be better."
"I would like to see better integration with project management tools such as Jira."
"I'm new to GitLab, so I would appreciate more documentation about the code and commands."
"I would like to see better integration and collaboration between tools."
"I would like to see improvement in the metrics and the dependencies."
"There is only one key area of improvement for me. The new imaging thing is that there is DevOps, where security is important because it is always lasting. So, to integrate security in our DevOps, that would be nice."
"The tool has a logical link between epic feature, user story, and task, but when you try to generate a report to show the delivery progress against a feature, it is not easy. To see the percentage completion for a feature or progress of any delivery, it is not easy to draw a report."
"The solution is generally stable but not entirely issue-free."
"Its price can also be reduced. It would be great if they are a little bit more competitive in terms of pricing because many open-source products are currently available in the market."
"The portfolio is one area where DevOps has room for improvement. Built-in reporting and visualization also could be better. We're using Power BI and Tableau to compile more complex reports and dashboards. Azure DevOps has some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities, but they're very simple. It's usually okay on the team level, but if you have to run a complex report, it's difficult and insufficient, so we use Power BI as an extension."
"Templates could be improved."
GitLab is ranked 2nd in Release Automation with 70 reviews while Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Release Automation with 124 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Good support, helpful management capabilities, and great Kanban boards". GitLab is most compared with Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube, Tekton and TeamCity, whereas Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with Jira, TFS, Rally Software, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our GitLab vs. Microsoft Azure DevOps report.
See our list of best Release Automation vendors and best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Release Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
