Microsoft Azure DevOps Reviews

As for room for improvement, more features need to be added to the classic pipeline. The build and release pipelines are present, but there has not been much improvement there.

Apart from that, the reporting structure could be provided as well. Depending on how the company is using the technology, there may be other Microsoft tools that are better so that the integration and reporting will be easier.

I've been using Microsoft Azure DevOps for almost five or six years.

It is stable, and we have had no issues with it.

It is scalable.

I would rate this solution at eight on a scale from one to ten.

I use it to, for example, build applications. Not just Subnet - also Java or in OGS. I deploy Windows applications and also mobile applications with Visual Studio App Center and Azure DevOps.

Azure services like serverless technology make it quicker and faster to deploy .NET applications, for example. Similarly, the Azure Portal is faster to put in services, for example, with specific functionality. These kinds of features are faster to deploy and to put in functionalities that are specific, which is great.

I like the Azure keyboard. Keyboard permits use, for example, connection streams in secret, in a safe manner. 

Sometimes I use also Azure SQL Database cloud, the serverless functionality. It's also very attractive because you can use something like a GP, like the protection of the data on the cloud. You can put a lot of information there, maybe not with banks, however, with other kinds of clients. 

The ability to have cognitive services is good. For example, I use a lot of Azure DevOps, for example, Cloud, Azure DevOps Cloud, and analytics views with, for example, Power BI on-premise if you have Power BI as a service. There is a lot of pipeline potential with Azure DevOps deploying, for example, Containers, to Kubernetes, Azure Kubernetes Service, and also a lot of Azure Container repositories and Azure Container instances. This is great for quickly deploying SonarQube in a container. These kinds of things are very attractive.

It's a pretty problem-free solution.

When we don't have some permissions, we have to research how to get them. It's not obvious. For example, deploying in order to do the connections, we need permissions for quotes or quotas. A specific quota might depend on an account. Sometimes we don't have the kind of support we need to work things out easily.

When you deploy in Yaml Pilot, for example, you need to note in Yaml how to associate the piling, the release with the word items. We need more information about how this is possible and more flexibility to make it happen. 

My organization is a Microsoft partner.

I have Microsoft certifications. I always develop in Visual Studio, .NET, or Core, and now I work with Azure DevOps and also in Azure Portal.

I deployed in a hybrid environment as the clients have a lot of things on-premises. For example, the databases I use, for example, Redgate, plus Azure DevOps, or Apex with Azure DevOps, to deploy databases. In some cases, a lot of banks prefer their data on-premise. In other cases, I deploy to Azure App Services, for example, in the cloud. Also, I see things with Amazon Web Services and telephone, like multi-cloud.

I would rate the solution at a ten out of ten as it never gives me any problems. 

We use DevOps for backlogs and work items. We divide our releases into many sprints to keep our development on time, and we use DevOps to manage tasks for development or business teams.

DevOps is easy to use because we can arrange each task in a project and follow up with the testing, development, and business teams. We manage everything through this.

I want DevOps to have more automated reminders about tasks that don't need management. We don't have reminders, so a project manager must track the tasks. It's not automatic.

We've been using Azure DevOps for three years. 

DevOps is stable. 

DevOps is scalable. About 70 people use the solution on average. 

Another team handles the implementation, so I wasn't involved. I'm on the business team. Two engineers are responsible for deploying and managing DevOps. 

We pay for a yearly license. 

I rate Azure DevOps eight out of 10. I prefer Jira, but both solutions are very nice. 

Our only use case with DevOps was for integration with ReadyAPI.

The most valuable feature is that we can run integrations with DevOps. From a QA perspective and a testing perspective, we can run those tests and integrate automation tools. Then we can run those tests as part of the deployment process. Every time we are deploying something, it automatically runs all the tests.

Something that could be improved is the initial setup with the integration of ReadyAPI.

I used this solution for six months.

Stability is fine. I was getting some errors, but that was due to my side of things.

Scalability is fine.

I would rate this solution 6 out of 10.

I did have some issues due to our organization, but it would be different for everyone. My advice is to reach out to support if you have any problems.

We primarily use the solution for our internal development and we have some clients that require some consulting around some DevOps functionality.

We use the product for the development process for the repository, for the tracking of the tasks in the boards, and for the pipeline for CINCD.

The test plan is one feature that we are exploring more right now. This is a great feature that we want to deeper into.

We have a solid base. We can do everything with DevOps.

It is possible to add third-party extensions to increase the usability of the product.

The initial setup is very simple. 

We have found the solution to be scalable.

The solution, for the most part, is stable. 

Some things, like project management, tasks, progress, and having work progress views, require us to use some external tools or to create our own internal tools. These are not native to DevOps. It would be ideal if, instead of searching for third-party solutions, they had these feature sets or capabilities included under DevOps. They need to expand the solution's offering.

While I have used the solution for two years, the company has some personnel that have used it for longer. Our development team may have used it for four or five years. 

The product is stable. We had some regional degradations a few months ago, however, it wasn't too much. For the most part, it's reliable and there aren't bugs or glitches. 

The solution is scalable. If we need to expand it we can do so. 

We've never had to contact technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they would be, as I've never dealt with them directly. 

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. It is not difficult or complex. 

We use the online version. We don't have to deploy the tool. We don't have to put in a lot of effort as we already have the pipelines in the TFS. We just move it to Azure DevOps. 

I'm a solution provider. I sell Azure DevOps and I have a client that was looking to analyze some differences between Jira and Azure DevOps. Therefore, I have evaluated Jira a bit for them.

We are both a reseller and a partner of Microsoft.

We always use the latest version of the solution. 

I would recommend this product to other companies and users. If a company or a team doesn't know how to work with Azure DevOps, the advice I would give is to find someone that knows the tool and do a POC first to make sure you understand everything a bit better before diving right in. 

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for project management and delivery.

It is easy to use.

We are able to generate many different types of reports from Azure. It connects well to PowerBI. 

The performance is good.

They could have more reporting features added to the dashboard. There are certain features, and reporting that can only be used in PowerBI, but not directly in DevOps. 

We would like to have the same calculated reports that can be accessed in PowerBI, available in Microsoft Azure DevOps. 

We have been using Microsoft Azure DevOps for the last two and a half years.

Microsoft Azure DevOps is a stable product.

It is easy to scale. We have approximately 250 employees in our organization who use this solution.

We have contacted technical support. They provided us with a fast resolution.

We are using Azure, and TFS now. We are also planning to migrate to AWS as well.

The installation was easy.

We have an IT team of four to manage and deploy this solution.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps an eight out of ten.

I work as a DevOps Engineer. I use this solution as an end-user.

I definitely like the pipelines and the ease of management once you're in an enterprise. 

The controlling security, the ease of access, the free plans, and the developer plans.

I also like the licensing structure in general.

I would like there to be more seamless integration with GitHub. 

Azure DevOps seems to be targeted towards enterprises and GitHub is the ugly sister, so to speak, that you come about in the enterprise. 

There is no real interaction between the products, which is a real shame since they are both developed by Microsoft. 

Definitely, there should be more integration between GitHub and Azure DevOps.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure DevOps for a couple of years, ever since they changed their name from Visual Studio Team Services.

Microsoft Azure DevOps is definitely stable.

I have experience with Azure Bicep and Paraform.

The initial setup is quite easy.

The licensing structure is good.

Definitely, I would recommend this solution. I would still look into your team goals and what tools you already know. 

GitHub is more community-driven, with more modules that are easy to access. 

Azure DevOps is more integrated with Azure as a platform, and that is important to consider when you consider DevOps in general or Azure DevOps.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I primarily use the solution for more of an end-to-end pipeline. 

The integration with the full end-to-end suite is great. The integration between the Kanban all the way through, including the traceability all the way through to the other end is very useful. You're able to test and you have your repositories and the ability to integrate with pipelines. 

There are great automation tools. 

The solution is very stable.

The scalability is quite good.

Individually, the components and not quite as good as others in the market. For example, the DevOps test plan isn't quite as good as a Micro Focus ALM QC. That said, when you integrate it into that entire pipeline, it's better.

Microsoft initiates changes so quickly, it's hard to keep up. It would be helpful if there was more documentation and more training to go with all of the changes. Chris:

With Microsoft, I would prefer to have more test plans. It's very difficult to find individual test plan module training.

The solution is quite stable. It's pretty reliable. there aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is very scalable. It's easy to expand.

I've had no problems with technical support, however, I'll get put in the fast-track programs. I always get very fast responses. 

I also use Micro Focus. For older style waterfall projects, it's best to go with Micro Focus probably, barring pricing and other consideration. However, in an agile environment, a Microsoft Azure-based product such as DevOps is great due to the pipeline and the whole integration end-to-end is just better.

I'm also familiar with Jira, which has better features in various areas. The problem is it moves so fast and new versions are always coming out and it can be hard to keep up.

I'm an implementor. I work with a variety of clients. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. It's great for agile and we've been pretty happy with it as an end-to-end solution. 

If you're moving into an agile CI/CD, DevOps is the way to go. If you're still thinking about old manual start testing, Micro Focus is probably the way to go. That said, more standalone manual testing is better supported by Micro Focus.