Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

We use this solution in a very large number of areas, such as for functional apps, web apps, to trigger HTTP requests, for web API integration. This solution has a vast array of features.

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.

I also find the application insight feature to be essential for use in our production environment.

I would like to see some improvement in the UI/UX design, to make navigation of this solution more user friendly. For example, it could contain more explicit information on each of the features.

There should also be some development on the architectural flow of this product, to show application dependencies across the network. This would help with fixing issues that may impact other areas.

We have been using this solution for four years.

We have found this to be a fairly stable solution so far.

This is an easily scalable solution.

The technical support for this product is very good, with SLA's provided for when issues are raised. There is also a lot of online support available through the Microsoft community pages, forums, and downloadable guides.

The initial setup of this solution isn't complex, but it is time consuming. There is a lot of documentation to go through before implementing this solution, to ensure that it is fit for purpose once deployed.

The pricing for this solution is set in tiers, with the overall cost depending on the features that are required. I would advise organizations to have a detailed look at the functions they need, to ensure that they are in the correct pricing tier.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this product for integration and use a bidirectional approach. Some cases are created in service now, which are pushed to Salesforce. When an item is created in Salesforce, it is also created in ServiceNow which exposes some risk APIs. Those risk APIs are Salesforce, snow and sales group, but it's not enough for our portal because they need some customization, so we do it ourselves with function apps deployed over Azure. The function apps are forced through API and ServiceNow and application performance integration systems. These function apps are consumed by those APIs.

We are able to do millions of things simultaneously. Additionally, Azure maintains and manages the server, which is very helpful because we don't have to. The microservice architecture is also very good. Performance wise it is the best thing I have ever found.

The product could be improved by including crude operations. Previously, we provided it in the same application. However, when the operation went down, other operations also went down. This was one of the risks we had to overcome with this solution to avoid other operations being affected when one operation went down. With this resolved, the performance will be seamless because data can be handled simultaneously.

We have been using this solution for the last six months. Microsoft Azure App Service has multiple plans and subscriptions. It provides access to certain subscriptions and specific profiles, fewer consumption plans and subscription premium plans. So when we work on logic or function apps, they provide certain resource groups. We can discuss certain logic and function apps when we have access to resource groups.

The solution is stable. Everything is organized. Additionally, access is provided to their help centres in case you face difficulty. When we had issues, we contacted them, and they made a ticket and resolved it.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 50 to 100 people in different roles use this product in our company. However, I am unaware of the total amount of people that could be added to this product.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on our experiences with customer service and support at this time.

The initial setup was easy. However, understanding the configuration was important because everything was very systematic. The configuration is slow without understanding the systematic process.

Deployment is fast, and it takes a few seconds to publish it. This often occurs in our application because we have to make changes, but not all of our staff are involved in deployment. We take 15 minutes from the client and 15 for testing, but it takes only two to three minutes to publish.

There are several plans available for different licenses and costs. When using this product for the first time, it is essential to understand the type of scaling required, the kind of skills needed and the level of necessary tiers. For example, to keep services running for up to 24 hours, there is a charge, but if you want to have your app services running for 12 hours daily, there is a different charge. You can also purchase specific plans. In addition, there are different types of client packages. Therefore it is important to explore each package to find the one best suited for the task required. We suggest using this product, which is helpful because it improves performance and loading times.

We chose this product because it has several plans, including consumption plans. My company will not have to worry about maintaining server systems. Hence, we only have to perform a daily routine after deploying and maintaining the service. Our company handed these tasks to Azure. Microsoft Azure takes care of our content application, including when to turn it off. We pay for these services, which saves us the pain of managing them. This is very important when using Microsoft Azure.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten. It is a very good solution that improves our performance. However, it would be helpful to include flow diagrams via logic apps in the next release.

We have used App Services to integrate a lot of solutions, to bring content from a different domain or maybe a different data source. 

We were using a lot of Microsoft Azure services to build. We were also leveraged to deploy non-SAP solutions like Python Machine Learning IOTs, using these App Services to bring solutions into SAP.

We were doing one POC for one of the last customers where we had to integrate mobile solutions and IoT. We were using App Services to build those IOT components, retrieve data, and integrate with SAP.

We were using some temperature readings for our supply chain logistics company. Once we read temperatures, we'll push it to the App Service, and App Service will internally push it to the digital twins. From there, we get the events and consume those events into a function, and then whatever the functions read will be pushed into the DB.

The best feature is the latency is significantly less. The functions which are provided in this App Services app work very fast, and there are no latencies that we see. The realistic data allow us to configure analytics on top of it, and it is very fast.

It is easy to set up.

The cost is reasonable.

We've found the product to be stable. 

Recently, we have used some scheduling and event management. From an IoT use case perspective, we're all good, however, we should have additional plugins.

We started using the solution in 2021.

It is stable so far. We have not received any challenges during our implementation. 

Azure was very fast in doing scalability from a user management perspective. Whenever you add a new user, it automatically aligns, and then the license gets adjusted automatically.

We have a few thousand users. Pretty much everyone uses it. 

We began using the solution due to the fact that digitalization is becoming normal now, and we have to integrate a lot of non-SAP solutions. App Services gives a lot of flexibility for us to bring data from any data source and push it to enterprise services, which we want to consume.

The solution is easy to set up. It's very easy. it's not complex at all. 

It only takes about a week to deploy a bare-bones product. To have an end-to-end solution, it only takes 20 to 30 days. 

From a licensing cost perspective, Microsoft Azure, compared to other cloud services providers, is competitive and reasonable from an implementation point of view.

The Azure license is based on usage. It's pay as you. We pay for what we consume. 

We are partners with Microsoft.

I'm not sure what version of the solution we're using. 

I'd advise users to try out the product.

I would rate it eight out of ten. It is flexible and easy to use. Configuring and deploying are also quick and easy. 

We use this solution for everything I do. We use it on e-commerce platforms and for business activities. Currently, we're using the latest version of the App. However, we used the e-commerce version between 2019 and 2020.

The most valuable feature is the Power Apps because it is very user-friendly. In comparison, the Logic Apps and Azure functions are very robust.

I can't pinpoint a specific feature that can be included in the next release because Microsoft is making new changes to the app every day. Currently, everything works perfectly. 

We have been using this solution for five years. I am a Cloud Solution Architect with TCS, primarily on the Azure front. I research different types of Power Apps. I focus on POCs and deal with architecture data.

This solution is stable as we haven't faced problems working with it yet.

This solution is scalable.

I can't comment on my experience with the customer service and support team because we connect directly with Microsoft whenever we have any issues.

Positive

It is easy to set up if you have experience and knowledge working with it, but the setup is complex if you have no experience. 

Regarding pricing, I can't comment on pricing because I don't deal with issues related to pricing. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. My advice would be to gain experience, get an MSN license and practice before working in production environments.

We’ve used the solution for deploying several applications. We use it for testing purposes. It’s used for testing web apps and developing some proof of concepts.

It's easy to deploy web apps through Common Line or Visual Studio Editor, which is useful as I can deploy container solutions.

It is scalable.

The solution overall is very good.

The implementation process is easy. It’s also fast.

It’s stable.

There are no issues with the solution. I’m happy with the product.

We’ve been using the solution for three years.

It's a stable solution if you select the standard sizing. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze.

The solution can scale well.

Technical support is rapid and extremely helpful. Whenever I have questions, they provide feedback very fast.

The product is straightforward to set up and quick to deploy.

I’m using the free version of the solution. I do not pay for licensing.

I’m using the latest version of the solution. I’m an end-user of the product.

I’d recommend this solution. You can start to use App Service immediately. You only need to have a subscription. If you would like to test App Service, then you only need to deploy in a free sizing version, and you can get going.

I’d rate the solution ten out of ten.

This solution is used for project management, source code and IT. It is used primarily for development purposes.

This solution is easy to deploy.

The cost management of this solution could be better. We only receive estimations.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The initial setup of this solution is very easy.

The pricing and cost of this solution depends on the use and needs of a business.

This is a good solution for those who want to start small looking for a data center that is cloud based.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

We mostly use Microsoft Azure App Service for websites, such as content management systems, WordPress, and others, which are built on Azure Web Repair and App Services.

I like that it's a ready-to-use, out-of-the-box solution that provides all of the necessary functions for customers, such as codes that can be quickly switched from the production version, or from test and DEV versions to production. 

Quote backup and restore vertical and horizontal scaling, and DEV scaling are all available. In this case, developers do not need to learn and spend their time on the configuration for the platform, just coding and asking to compute, which they need and that configuration, which platform provides them.

Price could be reduced.

Particularly with Azure Web Apps. According to their current architecture, moving services from one Azure subscription to another is difficult.

Customers can consume the Azure platform through a variety of subscriptions from various partners, financial visions, current political visions, and so on. Some services on the Microsoft Azure platform can be moved automatically from one subscription to another based on security and financial rules, while others cannot.

Azure Web Apps are the type of service that does not automatically move from subscription to subscription, and region to region. A lot of manual labor must be performed by their organization, customer, and engineers, if necessary.

They must pay too much attention to how to plan this, how to switch off, switch on, on which days, at what times, and so on. A lot of administrative work is done, but it's not very good. 

It would be fantastic if Microsoft morphed after my exit service, removing it from subscriptions and moving it to different regions, especially for that service.

I have used Microsoft Azure App Service for the last 12 months.

Because it is cloud-based, there is only one version.

Microsoft Azure App Service is stable. It's good enough. it's present here, but anyone can take it if it's needed. Especially now, Microsoft offers a very special support program in Ukraine. For example, if a customer needs to support their business processes, they can use any Azure solution for free until the end of the calendar year.

Microsoft Azure App Service is a scalable solution.

We are a technical support team, and we handle all of our support needs. We have not contacted technical support.

I am Microsoft-certified trained. This is why I don't require any additional support assistance; I train others. In other words, every Microsoft commercial partner receives direct Microsoft support. For example, Amazon provides additional information from the traditional partner channel, or by extra support, through premier support contracts. All of them must be present on a commercial basis in order to provide truly high-quality services to customers.

I am a technical architect and I have some commercial partners. I work as a system integrator. It is a software, global company that specializes in delivering cloud software, solutions, and services. As for this, I have over 25 years of experience with all stacks, including Azure, AWS, Google GCP, Oracle Cloud, and others. I was very interested in the Zimbra and Microsoft Exchange compilation because, in my opinion, based on my experience and statistics, Zimbra is not widely used in our accounting and based installation. However, one commercial customer inquired about my thoughts on Zimbra in conjunction with Exchange. It was very unfamiliar to me, which is why I attempted to conduct independent research on Zimbra solutions. Who and how are relevant to that question. I don't think we'll implement Zimbra because it's outside of our stack, but it was very interesting to get some perspective on the questions, nothing special, just vision and experience and growth.

We use what our customers requested from the Microsoft stacks, which are mostly infrastructure as a service solutions. It is a very limited number of PaaS installations or implementations, such as Aurora or Microsoft SQL, Azure SQL as a service, web applications on Azure, and so on. Of course, SaaS, such as Office 365, is a good option, but I can't say what other options aren't because the Microsoft stack is our primary commercial platform for our sources. It's fantastic; it provides us with some commercial advantages.

We recently used Azure, virtual machines, virtual networks, and virtual storage, as well as Azure IaaS Stack, Azure Virtual Machines, and Azure Storage.

Because Azure Web Services is based on the Azure IaaS Stack, it is infrastructure as a service. It's a platform as a service that's based on IaaS for some purposes, but our customers don't need the services to bring ready-to-use apps because they don't have a lot of education and institutes. Overall, Qualys solutions are not widely used in Ukraine, for example, by schools, governments, and institutes, due to commercial issues and, in particular, our notice time.

We chose Microsoft Azure App Service because the customer inquired. We are a very commercial company, and if the market or the customer did not request it, we did not provide it. If the customer requests it, we will provide it.

I don't recall any problems with the initial setup at the time because I believe it was adequate. I didn't hear anything about widespread or public knowledge of some issues in that area.

Most importantly, not too much. The customer has a high level of financial maturity to value DPI; they do not discuss ROI or other metrics. They simply book on current, can say spending, if current model spending is adequate.

Price could always be cheaper.

It is not about the license fees, but rather about the pay-as-you-go services.

Customers consume varying amounts of quality services and pay roughly the same amount. Where there are different customer sizes, some customers consume $5,000 US dollars per month. I have some customers who pay and consume more than $20,000 US dollars per month, for example. It is determined by customer sizes and requirements, which vary from month to month.

I would advise paying closer attention to the architecture of the solutions. If the architecture is well designed, this will be a very good placement on cloud solutions; otherwise, it will be placed incorrectly. It's a common situation, and owing too much money as it should be.

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

We are a Microsoft partner.

I use Azure App Service as an application deployment environment. It allows me to access the FTB directly in deployed applications and change certain rules and regulations like filtering of access management.

The best feature is scalability, which allows you to target potential clients worldwide by connecting the application to a local server. This makes the application readily accessible, and the response time will be much better.

If you're on the cloud, you just get a web interface without much detail for additional configuration or the authority to configure the root or system-level configuration. This is a weakness in the cloud version compared to desktop. In the next release, Microsoft should provide additional options for configuring the deployment environment.

I've been using this solution for three to four years.

This is a stable solution.

Scalability is one of this solution's strongest points.

Microsoft's technical support meets expectations - sometimes there's a bug on their side, and we have some downtime, but it's usually minimal. However, there are some issues with technical staff passing cases on instead of dealing with them.

Neutral

Azure App Service is expensive compared to its competitors, especially its cloud-only version. I would rate their pricing as two out of five.

I would rate Azure App Services as eight out of ten.

We have our application on Azure and it does a REST call through the App Service, which in turn connects to our on-premises database.

We are using Tomcat and Java in conjunction with this service.

This product is user-friendly and the customization is good.

We wanted an application that we can use on the cloud to expose services outside of our premises. Azure provides a good platform and the integration is very strong, as well as scalable. You don't have to worry about procuring a server or maintaining it. You simply write the code, deploy it, and Azure takes care of the scaling and everything else.

There are a lot of features, such as scaling up and scaling down.

Debugging using Application Insights is a valuable feature.

Initially, there were some rare instances when the server went down because it was deployed on Linux. There are some features that are not available on the Linux-based deployment, yet are available on Windows. This is something that I think Microsoft has now caught up.

I have been using the Azure App Service for the past year.

We haven't had any issues with respect to stability.

It scales very well and in the case of our environment, it is good. We have approximately 20,000 people who are using the application.

The technical support is fantastic. We have calls with Microsoft every couple of weeks and they have been very helpful in giving us insights.

We were using Oracle prior to Azure, but that was on-premises. When we made the transition to the cloud, the company opted for Azure.

The initial setup is simple.

We have no complaints about the pricing.

Everything looks good and we are happy with this product. It seems to have everything that we need and I haven't seen any limitations. My advice to anybody who is looking at it is that it's a good platform to start building your integrations.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

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. 

If you are not using the product properly, then it can cost you a lot of money. Hence, you need to make sure that you choose the services wisely. You need to make sure that you have a budget and have some alerts associated with it. The tool's cost can easily go high if you don't consider these things properly. You need to review your existing subscription.  

I have been working with the product for more than two years. 

The product is quite stable. 

The solution is scalable both vertical and horizontal. You should be specific about the Linux or Windows environment. 

The tool's support is good. Sometimes, you need to make sure of the people who are supporting you. Microsoft support can get delayed easily. You need to be in regular contact with the account managers of your account on the Microsoft side so that you can escalate things. Typically, we don't use support and use it only for production issues which require urgency. 

Neutral

The tool's setup is easy since there is a lot of free documentation from Microsoft available. You need to be part of the training as well. The tool's deployment is super quick and gets completed in five minutes. 

The solution is worth its money. 

I would rate the product's pricing a five out of ten and is subscription based. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. I would advise people to go with the trial version since you can use most of the functionality in the trial version.