Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

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 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.

App Service's best features are that it can be scaled easily and it includes Kudu.

App Service sometimes becomes very slow to respond, and it can be difficult to find the issue causing this. Including more detailed error logs would be an improvement. 

I've been using App Service for five years.

App Service is stable - I haven't seen any issues in the time I've been using it.

App Service is easy to scale.

Microsoft's technical support is good.

Positive

The initial setup was easy, and the deployment took around five minutes.

I would recommend App Service to other users and rate it eight out of ten.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure App Service is the automatic upgrades.

The logging and monitoring could improve in Microsoft Azure App Service.

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

Microsoft Azure App Service is a stable solution.

There should be more scaling options in Microsoft Azure App Service.

The technical support from Microsoft Azure App Service is good.

The initial setup of the Microsoft Azure App Service is complicated.

We have more than one person that handles the maintenance of the Microsoft Azure App Service.

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

We primarily use the solution to create a website. Azure will provide infrastructure without any servers and can provide service to host the websites of the company.

The reason that we are using the product is for the stability that they have.

It's a platform as a service, so we don't have to manage the infrastructure to hold the websites. We use it more for the confidence that it's going to be up and running and is easier for us to maintain.

The network side needs improvement. It has to be more stable. Sometimes we have issues with the network side when we expand the solution. You need to find stability in order to expand the solution properly. When we do that, or we add another app service through the app service plan, we have issues with the network, and we lose communication between our data center and the app service.

The solution needs better integration capabilities on the network side. There should be more options, for example, to update the DNS server, straight to the app service.

I've been using the solution for six months. It's been less than a year, so it hasn't been too long.

The stability isn't as good as we need it to be on the network side. When we try to expand, we run into problems with the network. However, in general, we find the solution fairly stable.

The scalability is affected by the stability of the solution which isn't perfect. You definitely need multiple resources in order to scale effectively.

We have about 500 users on the website at this point. It's new, so people are just getting there.

Technical support is pretty good. Overall, I'd rate it eight out of ten. 

We have their premier support. I've found that the response is getting slower on some cases. They could be faster, however, that's something that's always on the support team. Everyone always wants faster answers.

The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward. The best part is how quickly you can deploy the solution. It's just two or three clicks and you are up and running.

Overall, the deployment is good as, apart from this viable network, we have actually a 90.999% of it up and running.

Azure is a pay-as-you-go type of service. It's my understanding that the pricing is okay, however, it's not an issue I deal with directly.

We're a Microsoft partner.

I'd advise other users just to be sure that they have all of the components on the Azure side in order to do the hybrid configuration. From my experience, that will give you better performance if you have everything on there. That, and it will be totally clear and you won't mix anything up with some private stuff.

Overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our primary use case of the solution is for ETL. We're slowly moving everything over to Azure, so I think this will be our expected hub for the near future. I'm the chief analytics officer and we are a Microsoft partner.

The Azure data factory is the tool we're using the most. And again, we're using it for moving data around and data management. For now, we're pretty happy with the product although we're probably using it in a slightly more limited way. All the tasks we've done would have some reasonable degree of complexity and we've been able to achieve those tasks, or complete those processes. We're still getting familiar with it. 

There has been some building of pipelines where we've had to test and redesign a little so if there were maybe some easier to setup guides or more template data flows that would be an improvement. It would simplify the center processes. It would probably be impossible to have a template for everyone, but maybe there's some way to kind of simplify the initial stack and point frame for new users like ourselves, to make getting off the ground a little bit easier.

I've been using the solution for almost a year. 

The solution is stable. We don't have very large data volumes and we haven't yet migrated high data processing power onto the cloud. 

We haven't been attempting to push the boundaries in scalability. It's probably something we will gradually get to, maybe over the next six to 12 months where we will be migrating some additional processes and workload onto the cloud that we may start to see if scalability becomes an issue.

We haven't yet needed to contact technical support. 

The initial setup was reasonably straightforward. We've kind of been taking slow steps and migrating requirements as we gradually move certain tasks or certain processes into the cloud. We've done all the deployment ourselves. 

I think at the moment we're spending less than USD $100 a month. Because we're a Microsoft partner, we get a certain amount of credit on our partner account, but I don't think we've spent more than about $100, maybe $200 in a single month.

I would recommend the product. I would suggest giving yourself time to learn and adapt to the product. A lot of people would probably come to it having some historic or some existing software product in place and they're maybe migrating onto it. And so it will likely involve changing or redesigning how some existing process works. It's a good time to kind of learn some of the intricacies or the way Azure operates that might be slightly different to what they do on-premise. Ultimately it seems like it can do anything that you might be doing with a different tool or in a different location. It's just a matter of figuring out the configurations and the process.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

The primary use case has been pretty vague so far. Right now, my scope is on DevOps. I'm looking at it from the point of view of having a DevOps platform. We already have a team foundation server and are working from the cloud.

For me, the DDT has been very valuable. 

The code is very good. We are using that. We are currently exploring Azure Codes and Artifacts.

Overall, all of the features are very good.

It's a Microsoft solution, so it's very familiar in look and feel.

It's too early to really say what features are lacking at this point.

I am new to the intervention and I find it difficult to find my way around the user interface. I have my own learning tool. However, it could be simpler for new users.

The pricing could be a bit less.

We haven't been using the solution for too long.

So far, the solution's stability is very good. We have no complaints.

We haven't found any issues with scalability so far. It's been quite good.

We haven't requested any troubleshooting or help so far, as we haven't used the solution for too long just yet.

The deployment varies, but could take up to one or two months. There are a few things we are currently trying. We were looking for a CATD type of model.

We have our own team that is able to maintain the solution.

We've had a long business relationship with Microsoft. We're partners.

We're still in the process of exploring the solution. However, so far, I would recommend it. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

The Data Factory is very good, as is the SSIS, which I also use on the cloud.

The cost of the solution needs improvement.

I've been using the solution for three months.

We're still testing the product. We occasionally have some problems and get some errors. Right now, we have a lot of issues with it.

The product is scalable.

The solution is quite expensive. If you need more features, you need to pay for them.

We use the cloud deployment model.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. There are other solutions that seem to be okay as well. Windows, for example, has a good protocol. There's also AWS, but it's just on the cloud.