Azure Container Registry Reviews

Positive

The customers need a container system. In the old days, we used to have binary installations with classic delivery. Now, Azure Container Registry is something related to the packaging of the application. It allows us to package applications and run them anywhere using the application image.

The Azure Container Registry helps in scaling efficiently. In terms of scaling, it helps us deploy quickly from one server to additional servers within a fraction of a minute. It doesn't require the same time that was needed originally, allowing for rapid scaling.

The most valuable feature of Azure Container Registry is that it is a single entity that owns the application image. You put your images there, and it allows you to run the application anywhere based on that image. The whole package is valuable as it allows for easy application cloning and deployment.

There is a need for a graphical interface instead of writing code in Visual Studio to create images. Currently, it requires using PowerShell scripts or YAML files, which means needing to know scripting languages. A single product combining Kubernetes service with Azure Container Registry could improve usability, making actual operations smoother. However, I haven't found any bottlenecks or problems with it.

I have not actively deployed it for any client. That said, I have some experience with it, and am considering it over Docker.

Azure Container Registry is stable. It doesn't break down while it is live, providing consistent performance even if used in older Azure versions.

In terms of scaling, it helps significantly. Scaling means deploying it to multiple servers quickly, ensuring it doesn't take the same original setup time. This ability to clone rapidly facilitates growth from one to multiple instances swiftly.

In the Wiki and Microsoft sites, there is enough information, and we have not needed to contact Microsoft's customer support directly for this matter.

Positive

The initial setup is towards the difficult side, being complex, and not everyone can do it easily. You must know a lot about Docker, Docker images, processes, and port management, requiring at least three to four months of study to gain hands-on understanding.

The pricing is on the lower side and not costly. Customers usually pay approximately $500 USD monthly, though this includes multiple services, not just the Azure Container Registry.

Hosting in Docker Container Hub is an alternative, however, hosting in Azure Container Registry is recommended, especially if everything is under Azure.

If everything is hosted in Azure, it's recommended to go with Azure Container Registry instead of Docker Hub. It is definitely useful.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

It has a geo-replication setup within the deployed region, and ACR provides resiliency in downtime in any specific zone. This results in faster image pull, significantly reducing the time to pull. ACR operates on the same Microsoft network; it doesn’t route through public networks, further enhancing speed.

It was native to Azure and well-documented, so integrating it with my services took me less than half an hour. We can host Helm charts on Azure Container Registry, which supports them. ACR doesn't index Helm charts since it is a container registry. We use Argo CD for our continuous deployment. With Argo, when you traverse other Helm repositories, like JFrog, you can see a dropdown of all available versions. 

I have been using Azure Container Registry for three months.

From a user's perspective, technical support is quite lacking without a support plan. Support staff often don't respond to technical queries, forcing users to rely on forums for help. We have an integrated support plan with Azure, which costs us $100 per month.

The assistance is excellent when our support queries are directed to Microsoft staff. Most of our queries are routed to outsourced vendors, like Mindtree Limited, Microsoft's support partner in India. It often feels like they are just reiterating information available in documentation rather than offering real solutions. We're pretty disappointed with the outsourced support from Microsoft.

Neutral

There were three choices: AWS, Azure, and GCP. GCP wasn't mature enough and lacked the necessary offerings, although they've improved since then. The sheer number of services made it difficult for our organization to find a clear entry point. In contrast, Azure seemed a better choice because they already had their ERP and CRM services. They used Azure AD, SharePoint, OneDrive, and Outlook, making Azure a more cohesive solution.

It offers good support. We use GitHub for our deployment, and the GitHub Actions available in the public marketplace are easily accessible. The process is straightforward and follows the conventions of any typical artifact repository.

We have been able to save 92% on our repository bill for the registry.

They offer three types of plans: Basic, Standard, and Premium. We have the Premium plan for our usage. In terms of cost, it includes 500 GB of free storage as part of the base plan. The pricing is approximately $1.66 per day for one region, which is about $50 for a complete month if your deployment is in one geographic location.

We use GitHub for our repository. For our CI/CD flow, we publish our container images to ACR using the available GitHub Actions. For the CI process, we publish the images, and for deployment, we use AKS. Once the images are pushed to ACR, they are pulled into our AKS clusters, completing the deployment.

If your infrastructure is hosted on Azure, it's one of the best online solutions. I've utilized peer support and documentation, and in terms of cost benefits, resiliency, high availability, and security features, it remains one of the top options. I recommend it to anyone deploying Docker files and containers.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I was working with SQL and in Azure DevOps. When the development team created the microservices, the microservices needed the connection with the SQL database. I used the SQL database to connect the microservices. The microservices were created by Java.

I used Azure Container Registry to send the Docker image to the Azure environment. I uploaded the image to Azure Container Registry to use in the AKS environment.

Azure Container Registry can be used to detect vulnerabilities in your image. If you have vulnerabilities in your code and when you build the Docker image, you can scan the image to find vulnerabilities.

The first impact is that you have a secure image. You don't have an image with vulnerabilities in your AKS cluster. It is the best practice to have a scanner in your container integration. You can use the container scanning to detect vulnerabilities when deploying the image.

The essential tools such as the VMs and Azure Container Registry meet our needs. We have not explored geo-replication features.

I have been using the solution for two to three years.

It's easy to deploy. You only need to search the tool in the Azure portal and you can find the product, associate the product with your account, and connect to Azure Container Registry from your PC or from AKS.

The customer service has been satisfactory.

Negative

I have experience with Azure DevOps and TFS versions 12 and 18. I also have experience with AKS.

I am using the ACR task in Azure DevOps. I'm using other cloud providers, AWS and GCP, for deploying Kubernetes products and applications.

The best recommendation is that you use Azure Container Registry as private. You can use RBAC, the role-based access control, to manage your Azure Container Registry or other products in Azure.

The pricing for Azure Container Registry is based on gigabytes. Microsoft starts to charge in your bill when you use Azure Container Registry with 10 gigabytes. The pricing is not expensive.

We predominantly use Azure Container Registry in our company for the deployment of secure images to ensure consistency.

Feature-wise, the security model and access controls are pretty straightforward and valuable.

I suppose a more detailed management interface that's not available in Azure, if made available, would be useful.

I have been using Azure Container Registry for a couple of months. My company has a partnership with Microsoft. We're a service company, so we deploy the solution for customers.

The stability of the solution has been excellent and rock solid.

I can't honestly say we have any scalability concerns with it since we never really had any thresholds.

I haven't dealt with technical issues. In general, speaking of Microsoft, I'd rate the support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The setup process is mildly complex. There is no straightforward management platform, so there's a level of complexity to it.

On a scale from one to ten, where ten is the most difficult, and one is the easiest, I rate the complexity of the setup a seven.

In my use cases, I've only deployed the solution on the cloud.

We have a small dev team, so obviously, one person could do the deployment. Also, a typical dev team would consist of half a dozen people.

The actual deployment can be done in minutes.

The product is competitively priced.

I'll price the value, and that's pretty good. On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is high, I rate the pricing a six. It's not terribly expensive, but not cheap either.

My suggestion to others regarding the solution is that they need to read the documentation.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.

It's running behind a big financial and legal customer, who runs Service Fabric behind a front door, servicing local banking containers on an ISV solution developed internally.

The building of images on the container is quite cumbersome.

My teams have solutions architecture certifications. For the container portion service fabric, it's more recent—probably six months.

It is very stable. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

For vertical scale resources and high availability, I'd rate it about eight out of ten. 

Our clients are medium to corporate businesses.

The customer service and support are only from Microsoft, but it's not very good.

Neutral

We are a Microsoft partner with solutions designations and specializations in Azure. We have about one thousand customers running on Azure, to whom we provide managed services through our local Microsoft arrangement in EMEA.

We do have extensive experience in Azure networking, infrastructure platforms, and data analytics. We have three teams covering application and data analytics, storage configuration, networking, public endpoints, and the like.

We manage Service Fabric for two customers. We have more experience with Service Fabric than pure containers on AKS or IPS.

The initial setup is quite difficult, I would rate my experience with the setup a three out of ten, with ten being easy. 

We use it as a cloud-only solution.

Setup and configuration take up to five days. Deployment and testing take a few minutes.

Not too much on cost, but more on operational efficiency and high availability. The biggest benefit for us is horizontal scaling instead of vertical scaling.

I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

The horizontal scaling and auto-scaling capabilities are excellent. If our container starts taking on more load, we can load balance the container images into new instances and scale back down when the load decreases.

I would definitely recommend it. 

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I currently deploy the application to facilitate CI/CD processes. I'm in the process of identifying and setting it up.

The continuity screen is a valuable feature. What I initially attempted was deploying an application directly into the company's infrastructure, specifically using the agent mobility infrastructure. However, I've now shifted my approach to utilizing a deposit fee. This change will enable me to conduct operational CI/CD testing.

I haven't delved deep into the details, and I cannot add anything as of now, but they can improve their scalability.

I have been working with Azure Container Registry for some time. 

It is stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

It is scalable. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We used Azure Container Registry because I discussed it with AWS, and while it's developer-friendly, in my research, I've noticed that Azure seems to be the more prominent solution in the market. This preference is due to its cost-effectiveness and the familiarity many have with the platform.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took one day.

I would rate the pricing a four out of ten.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We used Docker, and we aren't using the typical monolith model. We've changed to the microservices model, so we first used Docker for every microservices and then deployed that to different types of clusters. For example, in West Europe, and then the US, etc. We needed help storing those images, so we used Azure Container Registry for image and artifact storage when deploying to multi-regional clusters.

What I like best about Azure Container Registry is that it's fast. It also has 24 x 7 reliability. I didn't face any downtime issues using Azure Container Registry.

I also like how secure the solution is, especially as it's from Microsoft. Microsoft has very secure cloud services.

Azure Container Registry also provides role-based access, a very useful feature, so my team can't access the solution if it's pre-production.

I can say that Azure Container Registry has done an excellent job for the company.

I'm not an active Azure Container Registry user, but I faced some issues, which Azure rectified after six months of usage. During the deployment, my company had a multi-stage pipeline, so whenever the team deploys via the Docker run command or generates an image, the issue arises. The problem is that whenever a new image is generated, that new Docker image isn't updated in Azure Container Registry, so that's an area for improvement.

As soon as the deployment is over, my team has to go to Azure Container Registry to delete the image and start the pipeline, and only then will the image be updated. The new image isn't reflected in Azure Container Registry after deployment. My team had to take extra steps for the new image to reflect.

Before 2020, Azure Container Registry didn't have the option to scan vulnerabilities, as I've heard from my team lead. After 2020, that feature was introduced in the tool, so as long as that feature is available, then Azure Container Registry is okay. I can't think of any other features to add to it in the next version.

I started using Azure Container Registry in March 2021 up to July 2022, so my experience with it is close to one year.

There was no downtime or lag with Azure Container Registry, so I found it stable. I'm unsure if that's still the case because I last used it in July 2022.

My team lead contacted Azure Container Registry technical support because the image was not being reflected on the tool. My team had to use other means, such as GitHub, and then change the pipeline number or the tag to push the new image to Azure Container Registry. That was the recommendation by the support team, and it worked perfectly.

Azure Container Registry is the first container registry service I have used.

Before trying out Docker, my company used Azure Container Registry and other Azure services, such as VMs. The company was into monolith architecture, then moved to microservices architecture.

At the POC stage, my team used Docker and then realized the need to store the images, so the company decided to go with Azure Container Registry as planned since the company earlier used the Azure platform, VMs, and functions. That's the reason for switching back to Azure Container Registry.

Initially, the setup for Azure Container Registry was a bit complex. My company used Docker as the container registry and then migrated to Azure Container Registry, so the process was complicated. Learning how to do it took eight hours, but my team could start using Azure Container Registry after that period. The tool wasn't that difficult to understand.

My rating for the initial setup is eight out of ten.

How long the deployment for Azure Container Registry takes depends on the region. When deploying in the Europe region with clusters present, the deployment is rapid because pushing and pulling images was fast. In the US and Australia regions, my team faced a bit of downtime, but just twenty to thirty seconds, so the deployment was a bit longer than the Europe deployment.

When using Azure Container Registry, it was $1.5 or $1.6 per day, but I'm unsure how much it costs today.

In my team of almost twenty people, only ten use Azure Container Registry, but hundreds or thousands of people could be using it, which I don't see because I only have access to my project. At the time, the company was multi-clustered.

To a person with Docker knowledge, I recommend AWS ECR first. My second recommendation would be Azure Container Registry because I saw that it's a fast and seamless tool, so that's my second preference.

My rating for Azure Container Registry is eight out of ten. I would have given the tool a perfect ten if I hadn't faced the image version mismatch issue between Docker and Azure Container Registry. I would recommend Azure Container Registry to anyone who wants to jump into Microsoft architecture. It's better to start with a basic plan, though I'm unsure about the pricing comparison between different services. Start with the basic, and if you're satisfied with the storage and availability without the retention period, then it's worth it, or you can move to the premium plan.

The company could have some partnership with Microsoft, but I'm not sure. However, I'm a user of Azure Container Registry. I even used the tool for two months for personal projects. I got a developers associate certificate from Azure, so I also have hands-on experience supporting the tool.

Our company uses the solution to store docker or other types of images for products and software that we are developing. We use the solution for its intended purpose and how most other companies use it.

We have some pipelines in Azure DevOps and we store images created through the pipelines in our registry. We use the registry for deployments. 

We work for a contractor who has thousands of projects. It is difficult to determine how many people use the solution because of the number of projects. It seems to be the trend with their projects to use the solution along with AK and Kubernetes clusters. Our specific team includes 15 people who use the solution quite often. 

Specific tokens can be used to set folder structure or restrict things like read or write access. 

The solution has good accessibility and is quite easy to understand. 

Configurations are quite simple. 

The solution could always improve its security measures with regard to access. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable with no issues so stability is rated a ten out of ten. 

The solution is scalable so scalability is rated a nine out of ten. 

I have not needed technical support. 

I have not used other solutions. 

The setup was quite easy and not complicated at all. Other setups, changes, or implementations of the token skew are quite simple as well.  

We have the automation to set up the ACR via the Terraform and also have a graphic user interface that makes it quite easy to create. 

The setup is rated a nine out of ten. 

We implemented the solution in-house and deployment was quite fast because we had Terraform. From the output we saw, deployment was very fast compared to some other resources in Azure Cloud. 

The Premium version that we use includes some enhancements but is still quite okay with regard to pricing. The solution is worth the money. 

From time to time, we check pricing for our resources to see if there is anything we can do to reduce costs. For the solution, the price is quite low so we don't need to worry about it. 

The solution is the best fit for us because we use Azure Cloud which is the native resource for containers.

I recommend that you definitely use the solution. I don't have any issues with it and configurations are quite simple. The scalability is quite good. The solution provides everything that is needed.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

The solution is really useful because whenever you want to deploy the containers, you need to have a place to store those container codes so that they can deploy easily. It is always better to store those codes in the solution itself so that you can deploy them through the pipelines. That is where Azure Container Registry comes into the picture. And also, it can duplicate to different zones and locations.

The most valuable feature is the zone replication and resiliency, because otherwise you have to build a system, and you need to worry about the resiliency and the backup of those codes. With this solution, you don't have to worry about all those things.

The solution has become more popular in the last few years but I find that the technical support has not increased their knowledge base, so more knowledgeable support staff can help improve the solution.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The solution has built-in resiliency and replication zone availability so it is very stable.

The solution is scalable depending on the tier you select.

The initial setup is very straightforward with no hassle at all. The deployment takes about one hour.

The fees depend on the storage you are using. Azure Container Registry, has no cost, but you pay for storage service. So you pay based on the amount you store.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

We have at least two clients that use this solution.

There are a lot of ways to store your codes. You can obviously use your deployment tool, or the code repository to store the code like your GitHub or Azure DevOps. But when it comes to the Container Registry, it is better to store your container codes in Azure Container Registry itself, because it has a lot of advantages over a normal Git repository.