Microsoft Azure DevOps Reviews

There are many valuable features including dashboards, sprints, queries, pipelines, artifacts, and the cover repository.

I would like to see improvement in the metrics and the dependencies. I would also like to see the option to define the dependencies within all teams in the same project. We have a team level, a program level, and a portfolio level. For the metrics portion, I would like to see some drag-and-drop features for the dashboards that would make it possible to aggregate data from the different teams.

The plugin for the iteration walls can also use improvement as it does not work well.

I have been using the solution for three years.

It is stable. Whenever there has been an issue the solution slowed down but there was never any data loss.

The solution appears to be scalable.

I am not familiar with the initial setup.

The implementation was done in-house.

The cost is reasonable. For the basic license, it is around five euros per month. 

I rate the solution nine out of ten.

If someone is considering developing and deploying the infrastructure in this solution, then using this tool is perfect because it's fully integrated with the pipelines and with a server core repository. When you are building infrastructure, then you are able to use the same tool to deploy the server, deploy infrastructure, and all within a few minutes. This gives you access to the same tool, task management, dashboards, pipelines, and the server core repository. So everything you need to develop a server is integrated into the same tool.

We use Microsoft Azure DevOps for CICD, and to organize it in order to visualize the ongoing work.

It allows you to save time while also providing a governance visualization of ongoing activities and transparency.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it saves time.

The price could be reduced. It is expensive, especially when it comes to infrastructure.

The integration could be better. Being more technology-agnostic through ease of integration would be beneficial. Once you start working for Microsoft, you are frequently tied to Microsoft.

I have been using Microsoft Azure DevOps for the last ten years.

Microsoft Azure DevOps is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure DevOps is scalable.

I would say the technical support is fine, but I have not had any trouble with the solution.

I have some experience using Jira.

It is very expensive in comparison to others.

As the cost structure is per user, I would recommend paying the cost structure based on the amount of data you use rather than the number of users.

I have recently researched Jira, Microsoft DevOps, TFS, and Micro Focus.

Mostly, because of the pricing, I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps a seven out of ten.

We manage the full scope of all our projects on Azure DevOps, including all of our kits, bags, and user storage. DevOps encompasses the CI/CD process of every build as well as the customer requirements, QA, and deployment.

Compared to JIRA, I think Azure DevOps is missing some management elements, like some reporting features. It would be helpful if some things were clearer when we're adding attributes. For instance, sometimes we want to add some categories or attributes, and it's not so easy.

I've been using DevOps for approximately four years.

Azure DevOps is mostly stable.

We've used Microsoft support but for .NET Core or Azure DevOps.

Installing Azure DevOps is pretty straightforward at the installation or admin stage. Deployment time depends on the service on my side, so it's mostly very fast.

It's a great product for the CI/CD process, but DevOps lacks some features for project management, guide, user story, etc., so it's far from perfect. Compared to monday.com, JIRA, or others, they have some work to do.

It is for all the DevOps functions, such as managing the deployment of the code to the production environment. 

It is good for the purpose it is designed for. It is good for maintaining a repository of application code, creating pipelines for deploying the code, building the code, and deploying the code. It can be easily used by developers. There are no issues.

Reporting could be better. We would like to see how many applications are onboarded in DevOps and in which phase they are. We would like to know for how many applications only the repository is done, but we have not yet done the build pipeline or deploy pipeline. Currently, there is no such report. We have to figure it out ourselves. There is no way to check how many applications are completing their build pipelines, how many applications are completing their deploy pipeline, how many are ready to use, and how many pipelines are working.

I have been using this solution for more than two years.

It is stable. It is also good performance-wise. There are no issues.

We have more than 800 developers who are using this solution, and this is only a portion of the company. Across the company, there are many groups, and we have more than 2,00,000 employees. We are using DevOps across many customer projects and environments, and more than 50% of our projects are on DevOps.

Their support is good.

It is a cloud solution, and there is no installation. You just start using it.

We have one or two admins per project for deployment and maintenance.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others. They can go ahead and use it.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

We have separate DevOps processes for different teams. We're implementing agile processes, so we have cells for each product, and each cell has its own DevOps process. This means we have a DevOps process in GitHub, GitLab, and another tool. We have lots of costs and can't share experience between teams.

The idea was to unify everything in one product to ensure that we standardize DevOps practices on the same tool to have better knowledge and expertise and focus on a specific tool.

We had a lack of governance over DevOps processes, so we had some quality issues in the end when we released the software products. DevOps has helped to resolve those issues.

Azure DevOps' collaborative features are good, and it integrates well with other tools in the software development process, like quality testing, documentation, and agile development. 

I think Azure DevOps could improve the traceability or business intelligence about the execution of DevOps processes. 

I've been using DevOps for three years.

Azure DevOps is scalable. 

We have good people with a lot of experience in DevOps, so it's not complex for us. The most significant difficulty in adopting the tool was changing our past processes to move to the standardization model we defined with Microsoft DevOps.

We have a yearly agreement with Microsoft to cover the different companies.

I rate Azure DevOps nine out of 10. I would give it a perfect 10 if Microsoft offered personalized support. Sometimes we call Microsoft with requests, and it would be nice to have personalized processes with our specialized services.

We have two different approaches for products. One is to support products that we provide our customers. The other is creating a digital transformation strategy for new products. We are using DevOps in the latest products, and in the future, we are going to grow with support for products we have produced in the digital transformation. This is part of our roadmap to implement DevOps in all the processes in every technological area of our companies.

The purpose is for development and testing from the vendor side. Our company works as a vendor, client, and implementation partner. The vendor provides the product, and we make sure that it's implemented correctly for the client. The vendor uses it for the development and tracking of the requirement and the test cases, executions, and building storage.

My access to these tools is very limited because the DevOps pipeline and DevOps is mainly used by the engineering team of development, but the QA is also part of it. Once those people are established, then we are the extended hands or extended part of that for usage. Once they have the stories and features, they start the test cases and link on it. From that point, we just take it forward and once they have a code pull, then we would pull it and build it and deploy it into some QA enrollment.

There are around 20 people using DevOps in my company.

The best tool would be Azure DevOps. There are other tools with AWS and Google, but since Microsoft has solutions for everything, it's easier because it's all their tools. We may be using different tools in order to achieve all those things because they may not have an operating system or a pipeline, so maybe we are using some of the bill tools. In order to achieve DevOps, you may be using a set of different tools and connecting it. In Microsoft Azure DevOps, you have a one shop to get everything.

There isn't a requirement traceability matrix format. In ALM, we have a centralized repository of all the requirements in one place. But in DevOps, it works like a product requirement. In ALM we have the centralized repository of requirements where you can go and see the requirement coverage and discovery and so forth. But in DevOps, it has stories and test cases. Once that project is over, nobody is going back into that requirement. It's a good tool for development activity, tracking and getting all those metrics. If they can build up a requirement traceability matrix, then it would be great.

I haven't seen any issues with stability.

The scalability of DevOps is good.

We haven't had any issues with technical support. Whatever issues we've had, they were solved.

I didn't see any complexity in the setup because everything is from Microsoft. The development tools and operation tools are coming from one shop, Microsoft, so it's easy to connect, plug in, and establish all those things. For Google Cloud or AWS, it's different because they use different tools in order to achieve what Microsoft is trying to achieve. For example, the CI/CD Pipeline.

Even in ALM or in the DevOps tool, it's initially a one-time setup.

I don't know the pricing of DevOps. It would be much cheaper than ALM because ALM came out as a software product initially. Now they are moving into a cloud and subscription model. In that case, Microsoft is coming from Azure and the cloud and DevOps and software as a service, so it would be much cheaper, but the catch would be that they are trying to get money on all sides, like an operating system, Microsoft Office, or Microsoft Azure DevOps. 

The good part is that it's a complete package, but at the same time, once you've gone with them, you don't have much leverage to split out into some other activities because everything is interconnected and entwined by that time, and it would be like a monopoly. It won't be good if you try to split out at a later point in time because everything is connected—all our Microsoft products like operating systems, OfficeSuite, MS Teams, Azure DevOps, etc.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

We're doing a full continuous integration (CI), continuous delivery (CD), continuous testing (CT), security, delivery, and monitoring.

We're currently using TFS 2013, TFS 2017, Azure DevOps Server 2019 update one, and Azure DevOps services, which is the SaaS cloud platform. I manage all of these.

It is deployed on Azure DevOps Server and Azure Services' private cloud.

They have been lately adding features to the services on a regular basis. Every two weeks, they are adding functionality to Azure DevOps Services to match it with what Azure DevOps Server or on-prem would offer. So, we continue to get more robust functionality.

My favorite right now is that they are starting to open up the API availability within Azure DevOps Services. 

Another thing that I like about Azure DevOps is that you can use it with any of the products that are on the market. You can integrate it with Jenkins and other open-source products to complete that fully functional CI, CD, CT, CM, and CS pipeline. It continues to enhance. 

We are currently in the process of moving all of our on-prem to the cloud platform. We are trying to make that move and host the majority of our DevOps services in the cloud because the cloud is where most of the things are going nowadays. However, the process of this transfer is not straightforward, and it could be a lot easier. Microsoft hasn't provided the maturity for migration tools. It could be a lot easier in that respect.

I want to see them continue to advance the API capabilities. They could add some more robust functionality to the administrative layer within ADO services. There are a lot of configuration elements that you need to take care of at the organization level and the project configuration level from an administrative capacity. When you're dealing with process templates and things of that nature, you have to do them all manually. Being able to automate some of that using scripts or API functionality would be really nice.

I have been using this solution for about nine years.

It has actually been pretty stable. Some of the early gen ones were not so stable. Before Microsoft started communicating with the end-users, they would make changes in the middle of the workday, which was a bit frustrating because things would change, which would impact the end customers because they weren't expecting that change. Microsoft wouldn't communicate with tenant administrators and tenant owners, but now, Microsoft has gotten a lot better about articulating their roadmap and communicating when those kinds of changes are coming down the pipeline. We are now able to communicate that out to our tenants and the end-users working within our projects. There is a lot better communication in that respect, which makes it easier for us to make customers aware of what might be coming, what is going to cause changes for them, what are the timeframes in which those things are going to hit their views, and what to expect from those things and additional functionalities.

For the cloud, it has been really good. For on-prem too, it is easy enough to scale out. TFS also has always been pretty easy to scale out.

In terms of the number of users, currently, we're in a transition because we were just acquired by another company. So, we're leaving our parent company, and we're going to a new company. The numbers that I have are in flux. Our current numbers are at about 600 for just our existing or old company. I've been asked to stop onboarding my users and projects until we move our current organization into our new operational tenant in the new company, but I'm projecting that we'll have between 2,000 to 4,000 people.

I use it all the time. They're very good when you get to the right queue. So, when it is working, it is great. I would rate them a nine and a half out of ten because I always think people have room for improvement, but they've been very good and supportive.

It works great for us especially now because we've kind of been divested from our old company to our new company. When we were with our old company, it was a little bit mired because of the way our enterprise architecture was. My requests didn't go to a North American team. It went to an EU team, and then I had to work within EU hours to get support, whereas I am in North America. That was a little tricky. Our old parent company was parented in the UK, Ireland, and Scotland.

I've used other solutions in tandem, and I have been an administrator for them. For example, I've used Jira and Confluence products, which is Atlassian. I've also used Remedy, but I'm not sure if they're still in the project management. I have also managed HP Performance Center and Tricentis. I've actually been administrating these for the last two years for this company.

I also use UCD, which is another very similar product. It does a lot of the same things and is also agnostic, just like Azure DevOps. You can use both of these with any of the products that are on the market.  

It is pretty straightforward on the administrative side, but I've been working with this technology for a long time. It really falls in line with the majority of Microsoft products. If you're familiar with the Microsoft stack, it follows their pretty standard setup. You go through a similar process. It is just about knowing the nuances that Microsoft has when you're doing a farm configuration or a farm setup and the recommended prerequisites before you get started.

If we're talking about new end-users who are going from an older version of TFS to Azure DevOps Server or Azure DevOps Services, there is going to be a bit of a delta because the technology is different. There is a slight learning curve. Of course, it has got fancier bells and whistles and a jazzier user interface. It has softer edges and things have moved from left to right. Things that you found on the left side have again moved back over to the right side for administrative or usability functions. Your security elements and the things that you used to see on the left side have again switched back to the right side. These are the kinds of nuances about which you would need to educate your end-users. You need to get them used to the boards and how to use those. If your company is transitioning from a CMI model to an Agile model, it is going to be very important for the folks who are administrating your projects and your project managers to know how to configure the projects themselves, how to use Teams, and how to use permissions. Security becomes even more important because a lot of that really influences how you see the information within your project, and how you manage your boards, your sprints, and the work items that you allocate to your scrums or sprint users.

As you're going through different stages of your project, you have your pipelines and repos where your more development-centric users are going to be. I try to allocate out two different kinds of users that we're going to have and target them when I'm educating my folks. You have a kind of power user, and you have your regular contributor user. It is important to make this distinction because there are folks who are going to be doing basic or just regular contributor work. They will just contribute to the work items that are on a board or within a sprint. You're also going to have users who need to be slightly elevated, which is going to be that basic plus test plan. You need to understand how those affect your subscription and billing towards that subscription and how to manage that when they're not actively using it. You need to monitor this and enroll them back to a stakeholder so that you're not constantly incurring costs against your pay-as-you-go subscription costs. Everything is pay-as-you-go once you get into the cloud.

I would ask those who are looking into implementing Microsoft Azure DevOps if they are already on the Microsoft stack of products. If they are, I would highly recommend them to use Azure DevOps Services or Azure DevOps, because they're already paying for that as part of their E-agreement. So, they should take full advantage of that because it is part of their licensing agreements. They should exploit what they're paying for because they are already paying a lot of money for Microsoft products.

Both UCD and ADO are the best products in the current DevOps space right now. They're both agnostic, and you can plug and play and integrate them with the majority of the tools in the market. You can integrate them with Jenkins and other open-source products, and open-source is where everything is going when you move to the cloud. Having that flexibility and viability within your company and business, no matter whether you're a small or large company, is a huge benefit. That will allow you to be flexible and deliver to on-prem or container.

Microsoft is extremely flexible, and they are listening to feedback and hearing what customers are saying. I've worked with Microsoft for almost 20 years now, but I took kind of a two-year sabbatical. Most of that time, I was developing out their SharePoint Online O365 platform. I stepped away for two years and then I transitioned over to DevOps because they really weren't taking feedback that was being provided by customers, and they were ignoring the customer experience, but their new CEO has kind of refocused Microsoft's outlook on the customer experience and is putting the priority back where it needs to be. They're doing a much better job in terms of incorporating feedback. They're continuing to advance and advent their product, and they are keeping ahead of and staying in touch with what technology is doing from a CI/CD pipeline perspective. This is why I am looking forward to continuing to use them.

I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps a nine out of ten.

We are using it for the source-code repository, automated bill process, very limited automated testing, and tracking trouble tickets or feature requests. We are using its latest version.

The automated bill feature is most valuable. As with most software developers, I can build code on my machine, but if one of my coworkers can't build the same code on theirs, there are always issues in trying to track it down. The automated bill process makes it a lot easier to track down where the issues are and find out what bugs aren't being included for whatever reason.

They should expand it from just a PC, software, or server development platform to other kinds of software or engineering systems so that it is not necessarily built around a normal PC with a server.

I would like to see the ability to write my own scripts in my own compiled program or online. Right now, there are things that you can do in the user interface, but you can't do them programmatically and vice versa. I want to see them both. If I can do it in a script, I should be able to do it from the user interface, and if I can do it in the user interface, I should be able to do it in a script.

I have been using this solution for a total of four years.

From what we've used it for so far, I have not seen any problems.

We're using perhaps 10% of what it is capable of doing. It is far more capable than what we are using right now. With further experimentation and training, I'll probably go from 10% utilization of its capabilities to about 50% or 60% in the next couple of months. We'll never use 100% of what it is capable of doing, but it should handle 95% of everything we need to do. We can always write our own plugins to handle the side things that we need.

Scalability is not really applicable with the code that we write, but the build times and things like that typically take under 15 seconds before we get our responses back. So, it works extremely well.

In terms of the number of users, there are six of us who are software developers. Some of the managers might also partially use the reporting capabilities.

I haven't called them up.

I've used JIRA and a number of different systems going back almost 20 years. We were doing our development using Microsoft tools, and it just made sense to use what they integrate with. Azure DevOps is the perfect environment because we're using Microsoft technology for other stuff. It is always going to have slight favoritism towards the other Microsoft tools.

The basic setup works very quickly, but there are so many things and options.

We did it ourselves, which is one of the problems. We don't know what we're doing.

I don't know what we pay, but I do know what I've seen online. If we switched to JIRA, we will basically have to double our costs because we still have to pay for the DevOps licensing. We're probably spending $100 a month on it. It has only standard licensing fees.

It is a really complicated product. All DevOps stuff is complicated. The advice that I would give to anybody doing DevOps is to have a goal in mind of what you want to do. Then the product will do what you wanted it to do. 

I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps a four out of ten because I don't know it enough to rate it.