Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

I use the solution in my company for the applications we have on the on-premises part, and we want to convert them to SaaS or PaaS. We want to use Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) with the solution, as there are areas that depend on both tools when we want to migrate something to the cloud.

The tool's most valuable feature is that we don't have to worry about the infrastructure. The cost or price of Azure is lower than that of the on-premises version, which is why we might want to implement our solutions in Azure.

Azure has too many tools that can make your work easier. With Azure, when we are going to implement a chatbot with translation for text-to-speech, we found that it should already have a tool that does that. In our company, we have to have our budget to add more tools, and then the developer solves the issues associated with the product. Too many tools in the product can be beneficial.

The tool's UI is an area of concern that needs improvements. I don't like the UI so much, so it is a problem. I don't like the tool's UI or how it looks, but it is easy to use. The UI is so clear on how to start with them. If you take a course or a tutorial associated with the tool, the UI becomes easier.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for a year.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

On a scale of one to ten, if ten means easy, I rate the product's initial setup phase as a nine.

The time required to deploy the product depends on the volume of the solution we plan to use. In the media space, the deployment takes a week, but it is easy to manage it.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model, but we are using it more in the cloud infrastructure.

In our company, we have a deployment area with people in the infrastructure team, where around 20 people work. These people don't work on just one deployment. Three engineers are involved in the deployment of the solution, or sometimes, only I am involved with the solution.

The tool is easy to implement and learn.
 

The product's price is low, especially if we compare it with other tools or clouds, like Google Cloud or AWS Cloud. Sometimes, Azure is cheaper than the other clouds.

We don't have a team just for the tool's maintenance. It is maintained by the same developers who develop the solution. We have teams with five or six developers. In exact cases, the people who do the maintenance are the architects or me.

The tool's integration features are easier to manage if you use Microsoft technologies. Apart from Microsoft, if you use other technology, programming language, or another framework, the tool can be easily integrated. The integration is easy if you use Kubernetes or Docker with DevOps. The tool's integration features are very simple and easy to use.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

I primarily use Microsoft Azure App Service to deploy Python-based applications. It was majorly used for deployment purposes only. When you buy a virtual machine, you need to do lots of configuration, but using Azure App Services gives you lots of flexibility. It's easy - you just upload the code and do a few clicks.

Deployment is really quick, which eliminates the need for a separate team dedicated solely to deployment. A simple software engineer can handle it, making live updates seamless and reducing the need for thinking cycles.

The ability to deploy applications directly from my Visual Studio Code without needing to access Azure is helpful. Additionally, scalability is straightforward, and you can quickly adjust the resources to meet demand.

The interface is a bit complicated and not straightforward. Documentation is not well-organized, making it difficult to find current and relevant information. 

The logging process using stream is not always accurate, and the pricing is quite high, often twice the price of virtual machines. 

Additionally, in terms of scalability, they do not offer the option to have two different virtual machines with separate configurations.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for more than a year now.

I have never faced any stability issues in my last year of usage, so I would rate its stability nine out of ten.

Scalability is easy and helps improve application performance. However, there is no option to configure different virtual machines with various configurations, like one with eight GB of RAM and another with 16 GB.

I have had poor experiences with customer service. Although I have rarely required support, whenever I created a ticket, I never received an answer. I would rate their support one or two out of ten.

Negative

I used Amazon AWS virtual machines before. However, Azure App Service is much better, although it's costly.

The setup is quick and easy, taking a maximum of five minutes if you know which resources to choose.

The pricing is very high. It's approximately twice the cost of AWS virtual machines. While the deployment feature is convenient, the costs make it unaffordable for many in the industry.

I recommend Microsoft Azure App Service because it is easy to deploy. However, the pricing could be a deterrent for many users who might prefer manual configurations at a cheaper rate.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The main use cases for Microsoft Azure App Service are mostly related to creating front-end applications, which would connect with a document bot we were developing.

Regarding its automatic scaling and load balancing features, those capabilities are really effective. Certain philosophies are inspired from Kubernetes as well, which makes these features essential and beneficial.

In terms of handling traffic spikes and maintaining optimal performance, it has been highly effective.

I have used its integration capabilities with Azure Functions and Azure databases, specifically Redis, and the integration process was straightforward.

I am familiar with its built-in security features such as authentication and SSL certificates. We use NVA and have integrated it with most of our in-house applications. We are also planning to use NVA for our product where we are trying to offer our product as a PaaS offering.

I evaluate the effectiveness of Microsoft Azure App Service's monitoring tools and diagnostic capabilities as good. Though as an architect, I wouldn't recommend any kind of vendor lock-in, if you are comfortable with the budget, Azure Insight is beneficial as it comes with all monitoring capabilities out of the box.

Microsoft Azure App Service could be improved if it had AI-based integration, which would be much more beneficial. Currently, there's a trend toward prompt-based deployment where one can create a pipeline based on simple English prompts. The system should handle all the setup, allowing users to review and complete the deployment. This kind of integration is available in GCP, but I'm unsure about its availability in Azure, though it should be there.

The price is an issue relevant only for Azure Firewall because until we figured out the policies, there were issues. Once we determined the required policies, we were able to budget the pricing and set up alerts on the pricing part.

For Microsoft Azure App Service, we did not have the same pricing issues. App Service is straightforward, and most of our usage was related to smaller applications, primarily POCs. We didn't encounter pricing issues because we had the option to start the application. For production-based applications, fine-tuning might be necessary, and pricing-related conflicts might arise.

We have not used the hybrid and multi-cloud capabilities of Microsoft Azure App Service to deploy applications across different environments.

Overall, Microsoft Azure App Service is a very effective tool. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 10.

We developed a low-code platform in Microsoft Azure App Service, for showcasing a mission-running application in a replay format for sales validation purposes.

This solution is providing us with options for machine learning that we didn't have before that have helped the organization.

The user interface and the ability to quickly develop are the two main advantages of Microsoft Azure App Service. You can develop anything without having any coding experience and it is not complex and the components are easily customizable. 

There is still room for improvement in terms of the maturity of the solution. Everything is available that we need, but the issue is that they are still upgrading. Even though they have Azure applications and automation services, they still need to mature more. There are many things that need to mature and the road map for this is quite long, taking another three to eight years to have a mature solution.

The dashboards could improve. Customers are still not satisfied with the current releases, and because there are too many releases.

Microsoft Azure App Service apps cannot be deployed on-premise. They can only be deployed in the cloud.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Azure App Service is a scalable solution and can be done easily. The solution does not take long to deploy and scale to multiple environments.

The number of people using the solution can vary, as there may be multiple concurrent users at any given time, such as 23 users. Overall, we may have approximately 100 to 150 users. It depends on how we configure the pipelines. Concurrently, we may have 23 to 100 users accessing the solution at the same time.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure App Service a six out of ten.

We only use support when we encounter a problem. We don't have much support up front. We have to rely on trial and error to fix issues.

I rate the support from Microsoft Azure App Service a seven out of ten.

Neutral

We tried Appian and Oracle Application Express prior to using Microsoft Azure App Service.

We switched to Microsoft Azure App Service because the customer already had an Azure license and could use it, which was not the case with Appian or Oracle. The licensing cost is much higher for those platforms and they also have their own cloud. Additionally, Appian requires the use of all three clouds. The customers are more familiar with Microsoft products. They preferred to use Microsoft Azure App Service over Oracle or Appian. They wanted to have a single solution for their entire organization and most of their work is done with Azure. These were some of the issues we faced and why we switched to this solution.

The deployment of Microsoft Azure App Service was simple. We had integrated cases with everything set up for us. It didn't require much knowledge. Anyone with basic knowledge can do it. It doesn't require an extraordinary person. It's one of the easiest setups.

The deployment of the solution does not take long. It is very simple and can take as little as 30 to 40 minutes.

We use scripts and execute them for the deployment. We have some scripts that are automated. Everything is based on script-based automation. We follow the DevOps process to create and deploy the applications.

Once it is configured, it doesn't require any additional resources. Only if there are any corrections needed, then we would require resources. Otherwise, the pipeline is automated and there is no need for manual intervention unless there is a problem.

I rate the initial setup of Microsoft Azure App Service a seven out of ten.

Deployment is done by only one person but it can depend on how the pipeline is configured.

In terms of resources, we have created an automated solution that has reduced manual effort. It is also providing us with options for machine learning solutions that we didn't have before. This has reduced the number of development engineers needed, as it doesn't require as many resources. For example, creating a user interface and backend are eliminated in this solution. The development effort and resources required have been reduced. Previously, we needed 10 resources, now we only need three resources to handle the same workload. This has resulted in a saving of seven resources.

the licensing cost is too high from some perspectives. For example, if we can deliver a package that is already being used by others, it would be better for new customers who are low-income, as they cannot afford the high prices or fees. This is because the chargeable aspect is a problem for them. Additionally, once we have developed something in Microsoft Azure App Service if we want more of the same in the future, we have to create another application, which is not ideal for low-income customers as they prefer to have everything in their own control.

It could be beneficial to provide proper licensing options. It would be helpful if they split it into multiple packages from a development perspective. Additionally, offering free licensing for development and charging for production could be beneficial for Microsoft.

The price of the solution is high overall.

I rate the price of Microsoft Azure App Service a five out of ten.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing Microsoft Azure App Service.

I would recommend that if others already have a cloud platform, specifically a Microsoft Cloud, they should use Microsoft Azure App Service. It allows for faster development, even if you don't have many resources or coding knowledge. Instead of creating apps from scratch, it is a great tool to use a no-code solution to develop apps. It's a rapid development tool. If you have limited resources this is a great tool to use and scale them.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

We use Azure App Service for several web services and websites hosted on the Azure cloud. It was a COVID-driven decision because we serve hundreds of colleges and schools that are part of our industry. All the services hosted in-house had to be scaled and made accessible over the cloud. Azure was the easiest available option at that time. We have around 80,000 users on our Azure Cloud applications and about three admins.

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. 

Now, we are reevaluating all the hosting post-COVID and realigning our strategy. Initially, our main concern was ensuring business continuity and remote work.

I want more transparency in billing. It would be better if we could understand and control the billing to customize it. Also, Microsoft should provide more guidance about the widgets and subsets of various products. The Microsoft portfolio is so huge that it's sometimes difficult to choose the correct option. There's always a chance we are paying more than necessary.

We have been using Azure App Service for about two years ago.

Azure App Service is a stable product, but we're reevaluating everything with an eye toward achieving the optimum utilization of various platforms. I believe there is still a lot of room for optimization compared to how we are using it today. In the future, we'll be more selective about which services we will use on Azure Cloud and other clouds. We are moving toward a private and hybrid cloud setup.

It is quick and easy to establish anything on the public cloud these days. I had no problem provisioning and creating machines. We have ample technical resources, so it was all straightforward for us. 

The cost requires a lot of monitoring to ensure it doesn't go through the roof. Azure is expensive, and the pricing isn't transparent relative to other options on the market.

We are reevaluating each application to optimize our hosting. It isn't one size fits all. I don't think will be hosted on Azure, AWS, or Google Cloud. We will mix and match based on orchestration requirements and requirements, traffic loads, etc.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Services seven out of 10. To use the product, you need to be trained in Microsoft solutions because they all work closely together, though they are compatible with the other services. However, Azure does have a high density of Microsoft-native products. If a person does not have a strong background in Microsoft products, they will struggle initially. It will be easier with some foundational knowledge. 

We have been using Microsoft Azure App Service to host small apps. We have either hosted applications on VM directly or we use Microsoft Azure App Service to host our applications. We have various applications for sales, service, and other purposes where we're using Microsoft Azure App Service.

Within one Microsoft Azure App Service, we can have multiple applications hosted. We thought that it would help save costs instead of using VM, as we can use Microsoft Azure App Service to host multiple applications.

We use Microsoft Azure App Services extensively. It is easy to integrate with other services through simple drag and click functionality.

We have been successfully integrating it with SQL databases and Azure Functions.

Auto-scaling is helpful for Microsoft Azure App Service. However, recently, we are seeing that Microsoft Azure App Service is consuming a lot of resources. We plan to evaluate whether we should switch to containers or use AKS instead.

For Microsoft Azure App Service, they need to make it less resource-intensive or less costly, because from a cost perspective, we are seeing that it is proving more expensive for us.

We have been working with Microsoft Azure App Service for two to three years.

The scaling ability for Microsoft Azure App Service is satisfactory, warranting an eight out of ten rating. However, if we were to switch to containers, that would be better as we could scale much faster and easier.

Support for Microsoft Azure App Service varies in quality. Because we have premium support, we get responses quickly. However, many times we have observed that they send someone who cannot solve the issue immediately and takes some time. An expert typically arrives after three or four hours to work on the problem. On a scale for support, this warrants a six or seven out of ten.

The setup process for Microsoft Azure App Services is simple.

I have not tried other products, but I think Google or AWS would have good competitors for Microsoft Azure App Service.

We have been integrating Microsoft Azure App Service with SQL databases and Azure Functions. Based on our experience, we rate Microsoft Azure App Service a 7 out of 10.

We primarily use the solution for MDM management. 

We primarily use the solution for application deployment. It is very easy to use. 

The solution is very simple to set up. 

It is stable and reliable. 

The solution can scale.

Pricing is moderate.

So far, it has been good. We haven't used it for that long and haven't had any issues. 

The pricing is average. It could be lower.

There are still some improvements that could be leveraged in the future to make it even better.

The response time could be better.

We've used the solution for about one year. We've used it quite often.

This is a stable, reliable product. We haven't had issues. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate stability ten out of ten. 

We have 600 people using the solution.

It is a scalable product. I'd rate scalability ten out of ten. 

I've never contacted technical support. I'm not sure how helpful they would be.

I did not previously use a different solution. We chose this solution to help improve the daily management of mobile users. 

The initial setup and implementation have been quite straightforward. It is not complex. I'd rate the ease of setup ten out of ten. It's very easy. 

The deployment process was very good. It took maybe a few hours, including lead time. 

We have 500 people deploying and maintaining the solution. 

We've witnessed ROI while using the solution. It's worth the purchase. 

The pricing is decent. It's not overly expensive. I'd rate the affordability five out of ten. The pricing is average. 

We may have looked at other options as well. We did also look into Office 365. 

We are end-users and customers. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

It's useful for companies that use iPads. 

I am using Microsoft Azure App Service for running web applications.

The most beneficial aspect of Microsoft Azure App Service is its automated DevOps deployment, which includes configurations that ensure secure connections to key vault and database resources.

Extended uptime and improved speed would be beneficial for both development purposes and the free tier of the service. Currently, the uptime is limited to a few hours per day, which could be increased to provide more continuous and efficient usage.

I used Microsoft Azure App Service within the last 12 months.

Microsoft Azure App Service is highly stable.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.

The solution is scalable. 

We have approximately 20 people using the solution.

Microsoft Azure App Service offers multiple tiers that can be scaled out as per the specific requirements of the developer or team. Choosing the appropriate tier depends on the performance and load requirements of the website.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

Often, the team responsible for supporting a particular solution may have biases towards it and may encourage customers to use it, even if it may not be the optimal solution for their needs. Additionally, the support attempt to upsell solutions that are not desired.

I rate the support of Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

Neutral

I have previously used WebLogic, Tomcat, Red Hat, and JBoss. There are a lot of application servers, which we used to run on-premise. We switched from these solutions to a cloud offering. Many companies are moving to the cloud.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure App Service is straightforward and easy. It is helpful to read the documentation. It takes a few minutes to deploy.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

One person is able to do the deployment.

We received a return on investment using  Microsoft Azure App Service.

As you move up the license tiers it becomes expensive.

I rate the price of  Microsoft Azure App Service a seven out of ten.

The solution requires one person for maintenance. Some of their responsibilities are updating the code and deploying the web app.

If you need to quickly set up and run an application without incurring any setup costs, this is the way to go. With this approach, you don't need to install or run anything on-premise. Simply create the application and start using it - the setup process is straightforward and fast.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.