Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution is hosting web applications which can be Linux or Windows-based. Microsoft Azure App Service is a multi-tenant environment where customers can load and run the application. It is similar to a platform as a service.

The most valuable feature is the ability to scale the application. It scales dynamically and comes with two features. If you can find a fabulous feature in the Azure Functions app, it allows you to scale, so you don't need to worry about manually scaling or setting any scaling parameters. Then it automatically does the scaling on its own.

The other feature comes with VNet integration. So we can connect the Microsoft Azure App Service to a VNet so that it can privately communicate with other resources within Azure with a private IP. It also comes with the CDN feature, which can automatically load in some of your configuration files and use it instead of going back to storage to pick that up. It also has awesome features like backup, so you don't need to set up a recovery service, as it automatically does that. So you can back up the existing state of your application in case of any loss. In a nutshell, it has dynamic tools.

The outbound connectivity is not great but can be improved because, on virtual machines, the Microsoft Azure App Service uses four or five outbound IPs. So basically, if you want to communicate with an external source, you can use outbound IPs. For example, you must whitelist the outbound IP when communicating with an SQL database externally. However, because it's a multi-tenant environment and other customer applications are being shared on a skills tab, there are always limitations in the smart port. So each customer has a particular allocated smart port, which they should exhaust. It helps to work with the code. Regardless of features like a firewall where they have a hub and an environment they have features like a front door which can increase the smart port's limits to about 64,000. Hence, it will be good to have one IP without needing to add any other infrastructure.

Additionally, they can improve scaling the typical environment in terms of scalability. I believe the limit for the multi-tenant environment is about 20 to 30 maximum on the PV3. So if they can increase that, other than having these significant scaling limits for the Microsoft Azure App Service environment, which is about 200, that will also help.

Also, dedicating one outbound IP for App Service will go a long way.

We have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

They have a good support team. We don't think the front-end support is of concern because the front end has to talk to the internal respective application engineering team. Sometimes the core platform issues may take about two months or more. They can answer your queries, and they can help you do investigations.

Additionally, depending on your support package, if you have a premium plan, you get the best because you have support engineers who are intelligent. But you get different services with the pro-direct support plan. There's miscommunication between the front end and the application engineering team. I think that's something that they need to improve. On a premium plan, you get excellent support. I rate support for pro-direct a six out of ten and premium support an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is easy. You can set it up through the portal, a template, or Terraform. It integrates with other features like Docker so if you have your image in Docker Hub or ECR, you can select the image, and it pulls those images in and runs your application.

It has many features, and other deployment methods like Bitbucket, FTP, DevOps, and GitLab can integrate these things into Microsoft Azure App Service. It is easy to set up because you don't need to start building servers. We also don't need to complete any maintenance. 

The price of this solution is competitive. It works as an App Service plan so you can have multiple App Services that are part of a plan. So, for example, you can have about 10 App Services in an App Service plan. It's like a VM, where you have different applications running and you are not charged for all of the applications. However, you are being charged for the plan, so I think it's worth having that setup. At the same time, you need to plan how your costs will be and their ranges of variations. As we call it, SKU is where you can easily factor in so it is okay in terms of price.

One of the best products is the Functions app, which comes with serverless computing in the sense that it gives you about a million transactions for free every month. That is one of the cheapest. So you don't need to worry about how long your function triggers, just that if it scales more than that and performs more transactions, you get charged for it. The exact cost depends on the SKUs.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is for hosting web apps so people can deploy this application and host it on an app service.

We have found the scalability feature most valuable. When you host an application on Microsoft Azure App Service and have a lot of users, there are times that there will be high traffic. High traffic is when many people try to access the Microsoft Azure App Service simultaneously. So Microsoft Azure App Service can scale up to meet the demand of those trying to access it. It has been at approximately 98% availability, and if any maintenance is required, it will notify you. You can find an alternative solution and use multiple instances to mitigate the downtime.

For now, I don't think there are any improvements to highlight.

We have been using this solution for approximately a year and a half.

We have had a fun experience with customer service and support, but sometimes customer service and support can be challenging. However, all the challenges we face are related to technology.

There are two options for setting up the CLI shop and the portal. In terms of the portal, you can easily create an app service from the Azure portal. Some people are comfortable using the CLI shop, and some don't like going to the portal and creating the app service. I believe Azure did very well in that aspect.

The pricing is quite fair because of its scalability. Before you choose the type of plan you want, you should look at the workloads that the apps have and what your organization needs. For example, if you have minimal traffic, you can use the basic plan. There's a plan for every type of workload which determines the subscription cost.

I rate this solution nine out of ten. The solution is good. If somebody is considering using Microsoft Azure App Service, it is the best because it's easy to use, and there's a plan for every type of workload. Some features can give you certificates for the domain. If you already have an existing domain, you can bring it in to do it from Azure. Additionally, you can buy your domain and bind it to Azure, but if you already have an existing third-party domain, you can also use it with Azure.

We use Azure App Service for both app development and deployment. Sometimes, we use it for testing, and we also have several products running in production on the platform.

One valuable feature of Azure App Service for us is its integration with Azure DevOps, which we heavily rely on in our development process. It is user-friendly once you understand how it works, although getting to that point can be a challenge. Additionally, Azure App Service offers excellent integration with Microsoft infrastructure and developer solutions.

In terms of improvement, the technical support could be better.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure App Service for almost six years.

We have faced reliability issues due to configuration issues on our end, not the technology itself. While Azure App Service provides information on problems, sometimes it is not sufficient, and resolving issues can be time-consuming.

In terms of scalability, we haven't encountered any issues with Azure App Service. 

The support I have received, mostly from individuals in India, hasn't been very helpful. They tend to send long emails with lots of links, which often don't directly address my specific issue. This can be frustrating and time-consuming, as it doesn't efficiently solve the problem at hand. Azure App Service might offer better support with higher-priced plans, but those might be too costly for smaller external companies like ours. I would rate the support as a three out of ten.

Negative

I have used SolarWinds along with Azure App Service for web application development.

Installing Azure App Service has been challenging at times. Whether deploying through Azure pipelines or directly from Azure, the process can be time-consuming due to configuration complexities. We have encountered instances where resolving issues took days or even two to three weeks to complete the deployment.

Microsoft offers various pricing plans and licensing options, which initially seem reasonable, especially for small companies like ours. However, as we grow, the pricing can become less flexible. We pay for Azure monthly, while some licenses, like the Action Pack, are paid annually.

Overall, I would rate Azure App Service as an eight out of ten. It is a good tool but could be more user-friendly.

I use this solution to learn about the application development technology and platform and be able to recommend it to my employer.

I'ts not being used yet.

I particularly appreciate that this is a very straightforward and easy solution to use.

I would like to see some significant improvement in the technical support provision for this solution. 

I have been working with this solution for around six months.

I have found this to be a mostly stable solution during my time using it.

This is a very easily scalable solution with practically unlimited growth potential.

The technical support for this solution is terrible.  I regularly experience delays in response times when I raise and issue, and have often had occasions when no response at all has been given.

Negative

The initial setup of this solution is very straightforward.

I implemented this solution myself, as it is for personal use.

I would recommend that potential users of this solution enroll in some kind of formal training, perhaps from a Microsoft partner. They should also be prepared to keep up with the regular changes applied to this platform.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are a reseller of Microsoft services and deliver this product to our customers. 

It is for hosting web and mobile applications and data. When we are integrating different applications, we need to connect them with Microsoft Azure services for integration.

We like that it's a close environment where we can do a lot of things. It integrates well across Microsoft products. 

It's stable. Microsoft recently announced it will be adding a local cloud into the UAE.

The solution can scale.

They need to be more transparent in terms of the scalability of the product. It's not clear how many users can use it in tandem. The non-functional information about the platform should also be readily available. 

Unlike AWS, which has many offerings, Microsoft's choices are more limited. AWS also has manuals and videos in order to clarify how things work. Microsoft needs more of that. 

Jordan and Saudi Arabia do not yet have local in-country clouds. 

The solution is somewhat expensive. They have a lot of competition from open-source rivals and need to make their offering more competitive somehow. 

My background is in Microsoft technology, and I have been working with Microsft for five years and with this particular solution for almost three years. 

It's extremely stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We haven't had any issues with scaling just yet. I haven't hit any limitations. We work with both SMEs and enterprises, and it has met the needs of both. 

I handle pre-sales of software and therefore do not deal with technical support. 

It is moderately easy to deploy. A company would require some technical help or know-how. There's maybe 50% complexity in general. Half is hard, half is easy. 

Our support team is able to assist clients in setting up the solution. 

The price is relatively high compared to other platforms. I can't speak to the exact pricing, however. 

There may be some ancillary services that may cost more. They don't have a comprehensive plan, yet they charge for everything. 

We're a partner.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

We are using Microsoft Azure App Service in the government sector.

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.

Microsoft Azure App Service could improve by having better integration and connectivity with other platforms. The solution has good integration with other large companies' solutions but there are smaller service platforms companies where there could be integrated better.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for approximately seven years.

The Microsoft Azure App Service platform is stable. We have a business continuity plan and we need our services to be always on.

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

Microsoft Azure App Service is scalable.

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

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure App Service was easy. There was a logical path in how to do it. I have a development environment because I'm using Dynamics 365.

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

The pricing model of Microsoft Azure App Service could be made more clear. There is a scale and range and it can be complicated and convoluted. Some simplification is needed.

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

I would recommend this solution to others.

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

Microsoft Azure App Service is primarily used to host web-based applications.

Microsoft Azure App Service could improve by having better integration with on-premise solutions.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for approximately five years.

The stability of Microsoft Azure App Service is good.

Microsoft Azure App Service is scalable.

We have customers with 20,000 employees and others with 100,000 employees using this solution.

The support from Microsoft Azure App Service has been supporting my clients.

The setup of Microsoft Azure App Service is easy. The Microsoft Azure App Service can be created within seconds.

The cost of the solution is based on usage. It is less expensive than other solutions.

I would recommend this solution to others.

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

Our primary use case for this solution is hosting applications such as function apps, web apps or API. The solution is deployed on cloud.

The ability to scale the App Service is very valuable. It allows you to host your App Service on Azure and provides the ability to bypass online. Additionally, it offers the ability to autoscale. That ability to scale out the infrastructure or the instances hosting the application is also a very good advantage in Azure which is cost-effective.

The solution can be improved by increasing the number of data centres worldwide.

We have been using this solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 1,000 people are currently using it across major sites.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate the service provided a ten out of ten.

The initial setup is neither easy nor difficult. However, it is simplified because documentation is provided to guide you. The documentation instructs how to host the applications and manage operations. In addition, the documentation aids in training and familiarizing people with the platform's requirements. 

There are different licensing options available, and we use the pay-as-you-go option. A student subscription is available with its requirements, other payment plans, and additional support. A free trial option is available to try out the platform and see how it works before subscribing.

We chose this solution because we support Microsoft Azure.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by increasing the number of data centres worldwide. I advise future users to understand how to use the platform and utilize the documentation provided online, which offers guidance.

My use case for Microsoft Azure App Service is to deploy web solutions faster and easier online. Rather than setting up my servers and worrying about the need to set up the infrastructure, the OS, and the run time, I use Microsoft Azure App Service for faster deployment and to get my solutions to the market at a faster rate.

I've used Microsoft Azure App Service quite a lot, and what I like best about it is that it's a serverless HAM, which is a feature that can run a function, a single function, but faster and more frequently without needing any other assistance. This has been what I found most valuable in Microsoft Azure App Service, the serverless option that's very easy to utilize, and you only need a minimal setup to use this and to enjoy the functionalities required, so the solution gives me a lot of comfort whenever I'm using it.

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.

I've been using Microsoft Azure App Service for four years now, but professionally, this is my second year to use it.

Microsoft lives up to its word. For example, the SLA it promised is 99.7%, and to the best of my knowledge, Microsoft Azure App Service has been able to reach that percentage without any global outage from any of the services and underlying infrastructure that power it. The solution is available 100% throughout its lifetime.

Microsoft Azure App Service is very scalable, and it's built in such a way that it encourages flexibility in scaling. You can grow from a single instance to thirty instances, and you can increase from 5GB RAM to over 30GB RAM.

Microsoft Azure App Service is designed so you can start small and expand as your customer base grows. It's built around that ideology and it's been living up to that ideology. The solution is defined scalability-wise, and it's practical in both approach and usage.

The setup for Microsoft Azure App Service is very straightforward. All you have to do is navigate to the portal, search for the App Services, curate one, give it a name, select a location, region, and resource group, then customize the number of RAM you want. Do you want a disk to be attached to it? Do you want to do some modern networking parameters which are not requirements?

The basic requirements for setting up Microsoft Azure App Service are very straightforward, so anyone who can power his computer can get started with.

You also have several deployment options to choose from for Microsoft Azure App Service which would make life easy. You can deploy from your existing repository, or you can upload your code directly, so for me, the setup is quite easy for the solution.

How long Microsoft Azure App Service deployment usually takes depends on the content, specifically the size of the content you want to deploy to it. At most, if you have a one-page website, the solution takes less than five minutes to deploy, which is quite fast, so you can get your sites up and running in less than twenty minutes with the setup and deployment, so the process is considerably okay.

The pricing for Microsoft Azure App Service is per hour, and you're billed per hour, and it depends on the plan you're using. Each plan can host up to a minimum of four to eight applications at a time, so the pricing is quite okay with how I use Microsoft Azure App Service currently, but with the little testing I've done, I saw that some other regions tend to be costlier than others. If the same SLE is delivered for all services, there should be a way to make the prices parallel across regions. Having more transparent pricing for Microsoft Azure App Service would give customers more comfort.

Microsoft Azure App Service can be used by a lot of people, but either the cloud engineer or the infrastructure engineer should be in charge of it because the solution relates to a lot of infrastructures and other resources such as storage, databases, networking, firewalls, and it can even relate to APIs and other resources outside the cloud environment. A lot of people can work on Microsoft Azure App Service, but it's best handled by the cloud engineer who has an understanding of how to implement the relationship with other resources.

I've worked on Microsoft Azure App Service for four years, and I have enough experience to orchestrate, manage, and maintain it.

My advice to anyone looking to use Microsoft Azure App Service is that you should try it and see the power of getting your applications out at a faster rate. It can get your application to speed up in less than twenty minutes, and it can handle between thirty to fifty thousand users at a time. You can try Microsoft Azure App Service while you're starting, then you can keep scaling until you need more resources or more solutions that can help you with your workload. Try Microsoft Azure App Service out, so you can see for yourself what it can give you. This is the best way to enjoy its features and benefits.

My rating for Microsoft Azure App Service is nine out of ten.

My company is a partner of Microsoft Azure App Service.

One use case was to host the Azure Bot logic code. The Bot logic was hosted on an App Service instance. The other use case was a POC where we were lifting and shifting a monolithic application, a .NET monolithic application, onto the cloud.

The most valuable feature is that it's an ideal solution when it comes to lifting and shifting monolithic applications from on-premises to Azure Cloud. It allows for a quick shift into the cloud without having to analyze and design very specific infrastructure and services for monolithic applications hosted primarily on-premises. Let's say that the team does not want to really redesign monoliths in a microservices-based application and that they want to make a quick move towards adopting the cloud tech stack. Then, Microsoft Azure App Service is probably the best option.

In terms of room for improvement, ease of deployment would be an area that needs some focus. Azure does provide out-of-the-box deployment features, but I found that deploying to an App Service instance can be better in terms of more tools that could be available to perform a deployment.

I've been using this solution since 2020.

It is deployed on a virtual network on Azure.

It is stable, but it really depends on the workload that is being shifted and the base service plan that is selected. Because though it is a platform as a service, you do have the option to design a service plan that is adequate for your applications, performance needs, and overall traffic that hits your applications. In terms of it being a platform-as-a-service feature, it is quite stable.

It is scalable. The user base for the Bot service application was about 400 to 500 users worldwide.

The technical support is average, and I would give them a six out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy and can be done quickly depending on the number of applications being deployed. A single application should not take more than a couple of minutes to deploy.

The cost depends on the App Service plan that you choose. There are a number of tiers available.

If you have a standard enterprise application, for example, for the sake of simplicity, a single server with 50 requests per second, trying to do a lift and shift to App Service is probably a good idea. Bot framework solutions generally tend to use App Service for custom Bot logic, for hosting the custom Bots and the custom logic for Bots. App Service is probably a bit easier in terms of implementation compared to that of other options.

However, for high performance applications that have a heavy load on them and are expected to perform at a certain level of response time, a pure lift and shift to App Service will not work well. You would probably need to choose a higher tier of App Service with a good App Service plan with a certain number of underlying host servers that are servicing it.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure App Service at six on a scale from one to ten.