We performed a comparison between GitLab and Microsoft Azure App Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rapid Application Development Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool helps to integrate CI/CD pipeline deployments. It is very easy to learn. Its security model is good."
"Git hosting has an integration with ACD which is why we liked this solution in the first place."
"The user interface is really good so that helps with huge teams who need to collaborate."
"GitLab is very well-organized and easy to use. Also, it offers most features that customers need."
"CI/CD is valuable for me."
"I have found the most valuable feature is security control. I also like the branching and cloning software."
"The SaaS setup is impressive, and it has DAST solutioning."
"The stability is good."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure App Service is customization. It provides the building block from its modularity. You can add what you need with the appropriate code."
"One of our reasons to use the product is its cloud service. Our usage is mainly on the cloud and we like the benefits that we can get from the cloud. You can easily do the literal shift of your application easily. You can jump into the cloud very quickly."
"Azure data factory is a good tool."
"The feature I find most valuable is the 'Diagnose and Solve problem' function. This not only allows us to fix a problem, but also to generate analytics on why the issue occurred."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure App Service is autoscaling and resource grouping. Additionally, the integration works well, it is easy to do."
"The technical support from Microsoft Azure App Service is good."
"I'm a decision-maker, not a technician. From my perspective, the most significant advantage is that Azure is a one-stop shop. Everything we needed was included in the Microsoft Agreement. During COVID, it was the most convenient and most straightforward decision."
"It's a platform as a service, so we don't have to manage the infrastructure to hold the websites."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration into the CI/CD pipeline, an autocomplete search tool, and more supporting documentation."
"The documentation is confusing."
"GitLab would be improved with the addition of templates for deployment on local PCs."
"Based on what I know so far, its integration with Kubernetes is not so good. We have to develop many things to make it work. We have to acquire third-party components to work with Kubernetes."
"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."
"The solution does not have many built-in functions or variables so scripting is required."
"I believe there's room for improvement in the advanced features, particularly in enhancing the pipeline functionalities."
"The integration could be slightly better."
"The solution is somewhat expensive."
"The cost management of this solution could be better. We only receive estimations."
"Customers love it when a solution is affordable, but with Microsoft Azure App Service, you can start and stop it, and when you stop it, it won't be reachable and it won't be available, yet you're still being charged for it. You'll still be charged even if the solution isn't accessible because Microsoft Azure App Service runs on a shared virtual machine that keeps on running, so if there's a way to work this out, it'll be a great improvement to only pay for what you use. The solution should have no hidden cost and no extra charge when it's stopped. This is what needs improvement in Microsoft Azure App Service."
"When trying to scale up, it has a limitation, specifically an upper limitation. In general, scalability should be improved."
"Having a surplus of tutorials from Microsoft, rather than relying solely on documentation or features from other sources like YouTube, can be beneficial."
"I would like to see some significant improvement in the technical support provision for this solution."
"The setup is complex if you have no experience."
"Sometimes customer service and support can be challenging."
GitLab is ranked 10th in Rapid Application Development Software with 70 reviews while Microsoft Azure App Service is ranked 8th in Rapid Application Development Software with 38 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure App Service is rated 8.4. 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 App Service writes "A solution with great server management and helps improve performance". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, SonarQube, AWS CodePipeline and Tekton, whereas Microsoft Azure App Service is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Oracle Application Express (APEX), ServiceNow, Pega BPM and Appian. See our GitLab vs. Microsoft Azure App Service report.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software vendors.
We monitor all Rapid Application Development Software 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.
