Microsoft Azure Logic Apps Reviews

We use the product for internal data transfers. It has replaced Data Factory in our organization because of the complexity of the data transfers.

The tool’s biggest benefit is the access we have to other Azure products. We can use all the Azure services directly. I like the product. It is the best choice for use cases involving Azure products.

The visual tool that is used to build integration is quite old. It’s really hard to see all the different models at the same time. It must be modernized, and better support must be provided for the visual tool. The tool must provide support for OpenAPI. We create connectors out of some OpenAPI documentation, but they are really old versions.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The solution is stable. It is as stable as Azure.

The tool is not easily scalable. If we want to run it on a dedicated server, it requires an extra server or virtual machine in the background, which is costly. Two people in our company are using the tool. We rarely need to maintain the solution. We conduct maintenance procedures once every three months.

The technical support could be better. The documentation is not optimum. The documentation training and tutorials are minimal and quite old.

The initial setup took some time. We had to create all the resources in Azure. It was done manually three years ago. We took around one and a half days to set everything up. The solution is cloud-based.

The ROI is really high. Having all the different Azure services integrated directly into the tool is handy.

The product is quite cheap. However, when the use cases get bigger, it gets more costly. We would need to have our own server in the background at some point, which would be very costly. It’s cheap if the use cases are low.

If someone has really good use cases in Azure, they should use Logic Apps to transfer data. Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

I use the solution in my company as a part of the centralized landscape where we have it for the internal connectivity before any traffic comes in, so we use it for a safe API management gateway. Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is the main tool for API management. It is used to manage our main workflow.

The reason for using the tool is that our company has not restricted itself to one tool. We have an integration board that decides based on the use cases because we have multiple technologies. Earlier, MuleSoft was used, and now we have Azure and OpenText, depending on the use case. If the use case involves file mover, then we move that piece of integration to file mover part. If there are any workflows or any processing required, any business logic is involved, and if there is any real-time stuff involved, then we go for Microsoft Azure Logic Apps. If there is a batch processing part, we go for real-time services again within Microsoft.

In MuleSoft, some set views help in transformation, which is very user-friendly and easy to use. In Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, we use Liquid templates, and I feel it can be improved as it does not support all the features that our company wants to use during any complex mapping when we might have to go for custom coding.

I have been using the tool for a year.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Depending on the kind of scalability that my company wants, I would say that that product supports any kind of scalability feature. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

There are more than 50 end users or developers of the tool.

There are some delays in response from the solution's technical support. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

From a development point of view, MuleSoft is good, but from what I know I would say that it is costly. MuleSoft is pretty much easier for new developers to onboard because you can quickly learn and start using it. In Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, there is not much need for any grooming if someone wants to efficiently work on the tool.

The product's initial setup phase is something that I don't think is complex because once we start using it, it becomes simple. If the user, our developer, is doing it for the first time, then he or she might need to understand the architecture in terms of closing and those things. Otherwise, it is simple. We have two types of deployments there, containers and no servers thing, where we have an App Service plan similar to the vCores concept we have in MuleSoft.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

Compared to the prices of Mulesoft, the price of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is low.

I am not much aware of the infrastructure part because I am from the development side. The other team has taken care of the infrastructure part.

Right now, as I said, we are into Azure Integration Services, so we use services like Logic Apps, Azure Functions, and Service Bus for messaging. Different services are used for different purposes depending on different use cases.

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is quite similar to NetApp. It does most of the functionality in terms of process transformations and connectors or where we connect to the end systems. We have all out-of-the-box connectors to connect to any system, like SAP or whichever systems are available.

Critical functions of the tool are associated with the workflow area. The tool helps in fulfilling our company's requirements.

There is AI available for the tool, but I haven't used the solution.

Under some conditions, we can recommend the tool to other users or if someone wants to upgrade from an existing Microsoft legacy migration to App Logic since we can reuse much of the functionality of the other tool in it. I would recommend the tool to others. If you are starting from scratch, then we can go with MuleSoft, provided some other factors are good.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We mostly work with Power Automate, but we do have some experience with Logic Apps. For example, if a user makes a request and we need to process their data, we can easily develop an Azure Logic App for that. 

Sometimes, we combine Power Automate and Logic Apps. For example, a user wants to view specific data and sends a request. We can easily collect that data using Azure, along with a combination of Power Automate and Logic Apps where appropriate. We use Power Automate for external interactions and have it call Logic Apps within our application.

A customer registers on our platform. We perform a lot of validation. We call services from different applications to validate the user's identity, PAN number, and other information against government records. 

We apply a sequence of business logic to validate the customer before registering them for the application.

When we initially built the registration system for our application, we used Power Apps and Power Automate to perform the validation. We call different services through Power Automate to validate the input given by the user.

Currently, we use web services, SQL connectors, and a self-connector. We choose the connector based on where we are getting the data from.

Moreover, the visual design experience wasn't complex. It was easier, as usual. The overall experience is good. The user interface and everything are very intuitive, and we were able to easily consume all those services.

Logic Apps helped reduce complexity or development time. For example, if we get documents in the form of images, we can use Logic Apps to extract information from those images. This simplifies our efforts compared to originally using Microsoft APIs to do the same task.

The only thing is, sometimes, when we need a specific connector, it requires an enterprise or paid version. If it were possible to provide the most commonly used connectors for pulling data from different sources free of cost, that would be really nice.

For every connector, we have to pay. The cost factor is a problem. For every good connector, we're paying twice – once for the SQL Server connector and again for other data source connectors. It would be concerning if I had to pay for every connector I need. Microsoft can do something about that.

I have been using it for two years. 

It's stable if the deployed application has proper resources.

We can scale the application as and when required. There are ways to scale when there are more rules. From a scalability point of view, it's easy to configure, and we can scale the application as needed.

We have around more than 1000 end users. We have several applications working together. During each process, we pull data from different applications, and those are very well integrated with both Azure services and Power Automate. We've also been using UiPath for certain operations.

So, Logic Apps support our needs for scaling workflows or applications.

The customer service and support are good. 

The initial setup is not complex. It was intuitive and straightforward. 

The deployment process is pretty straightforward. We just publish it, and it's easy, similar to how our Power Apps applications are deployed to production.

Deployment doesn't require many resources. We had a DevOps team taking care of it. We have 15+ taking care of it who collaborated with the development team to take care of it. 

It is worth it to use it. The product does a good job. 

For cloud, Logic Apps are good. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I always encourage people to use Logic Apps if the environment with Azure native because the development time is drastically reduced. 

Therefore, I always encourage people to explore Power Apps and Power Automate instead of going with native mobile application development or React Native application development.

At our company, we validate certain configurations of the Microsoft Azure Logic Apps based on the security posture and some other factors. We check how Microsoft Azure Logic Apps are deployed and whether the configuration of the solution is appropriate as per the customer needs of our organization. At our company, we also check if Microsoft Azure Logic Apps are being configured as per the standard policies. 

Our organization oversees the architecture and provides consultation on whether the configuration of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is correct and what changes or updates are needed. The use cases of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps depend upon the application design. In our company, we overview the architecture and check the functionality. Our organization checks whether the configurations and settings of the apps using Microsoft Azure Logic Apps are properly designed or not. 

For instance, suppose there is a Logic App that is used in one of the applications, and there is a diagnostic setting. For the aforementioned app, at our company, we need to check whether the workflow, runtime and diagnostic events are logged properly. As part of the app properties, our company often check whether a connection stream is being used and whether it's summoned by the Azure Key Vault or not. 

The Logic App's designer is one of the vital features of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps. The workflows and API connections are quite systematic using the solution, and designs can be easily implemented. The Logic App's designer is automated and easy to use. 

The product should integrate more APIs for embedding the overall solution with Azure functions. The API connections with different cloud versions should be easier to use. 

I have been using Microsoft Azure Logic Apps for a couple of years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. Stability-wise, our company hasn't faced any issues with the solution. 

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. The solution is highly scalable. In our company, as architects, we believe all cloud environments should be flexible and scalable, like Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, so that the product can be scaled up or down according to varying projects and cost factors. 

There are numerous internal and external users of the solution in our organization. In our company most of the customers for Microsoft Azure Logic Apps are enterprise businesses. 

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps has numerous useful documents and a resourceful knowledge base from Microsoft. In our company, we have solved multiple issues by only using the documentation from the product's vendor. 

I would rate the initial setup a seven out of ten. At our company, we deploy the solution, both on-prem and on the cloud, for internal and external customers based on the project and requirements. UAT and fine-tuning might be needed as part of the deployment process of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps; the complete deployment takes around five to ten working days. 

For deployment, a concept-building initiative is first taken to understand the client's requirement, and then the designing step arrives to decide where the logic app fits in and identify its purpose.

After the aforementioned deployment steps, the deployment phase arrives, during which the product can be tested with dummy datasets. The UAT is then performed in the staging environment, and once the architects feel confident about the solution, the UAT setup is moved to production.  

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. 

The Logic App's designer feature of the solution assists you in implementing a workflow effortlessly. The designer feature allows a drag-and-drop interface with easy function creation to implement a workflow. At our company review, architects go through the workflows to obtain a fair idea of the app's parameters, including what is being called or how it's called and the data fetching or sending details. 

I would rate Microsoft Azure Logic Apps as eight out of ten. While automation is prevailing across the globe with the advent of AI, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps can help maintain security and efficiency. Overall, the product is fast, safe and reliable, with security controls and flexibility.

We never deter our organization's customers from using Microsoft Azure Logic Apps due to its efficiency. I would definitely recommend the product to other users. In approximately eight out of ten projects in our organization, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps are used. 

We use Azure Logic Apps for orchestration and as a workflow engine. It's more about building and managing workflows. For instance, the tool can create a single integration that aggregates data from various sources. This capability is one advantage Azure has over solutions like MuleSoft.

One special aspect of Azure Logic Apps is its easy integration of various applications, especially when connectors are already available. For instance, there are connectors for database applications and systems like SAP. You can drag and drop the connectors to complete your integration quickly.

An area for improvement for Azure Logic Apps could be enhancing its ability to handle large datasets. When dealing with extensive data, we often have to use Azure Data Factory, which is mostly limited to scheduled jobs.

When we contact support, there is often a delay in resolving issues. They do not match MuleSoft's level of support.

Neutral

I can't provide specific details on the return on investment from Azure Logic Apps, as we haven't used it extensively in our projects. However, I can mention that it does offer the potential for a quicker setup of integrations due to its wide range of available connectors. If you're working with applications that have connectors within the solution, the process of building and deploying integrations can be faster. 

We often use Azure Functions to create integrations, perhaps even more than Azure Logic Apps, mainly due to technical considerations. We choose which component to use based on its suitability for the task and the specific technical requirements. For instance, Azure Logic Apps might not be the best choice for transforming large datasets, like moving 200-300 megabytes from the cloud. Instead, it was easier to handle this using Azure Functions. With Azure Functions, we could transform data from XML and then cache it. 

I would recommend Azure Logic Apps, especially for small organizations looking to expand their integration capabilities over time. With Azure Logic Apps, you pay for what you use, allowing you to scale your investment alongside your integration needs. Starting at as little as 100 dollars a month, you can gradually increase your investment as your integration matures.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

With Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, we can orchestrate and pull event-based triggers. We can use the solution to schedule a workflow based on any new record inserted into our database.

The solution's best feature is that it is compatible with the cloud and has many connectors and third-party adapters. You can connect it with almost every system.

We have lots of other systems. When we raised a complaint with Microsoft, they asked us not to use the solution for a particular purpose. We wanted to use Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, but we faced a timeout. We had a call with Microsoft regarding one of the issues. The support person with whom I was discussing was also not very comfortable with that question.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Logic Apps for the last one year.

We are working on the same technology in our company. Approximately 40 to 50 people on our team use Microsoft Azure Logic Apps.

The solution's customer support depends on the type of partner you are. If you are a gold partner, they will reply immediately. However, if you have a lower level of collaboration with Microsoft, they will take some time. The technical support team does fix issues, but they take time.

The initial setup of the solution would be a bit difficult if you are using CI/CD. CI/CD, container integration, and container deployment are one-time processes. Setting them up once makes the rest of the deployment easier. If you don't do it initially, you have to copy and paste, which will take time. I suggest you invest time in creating a CI/CD to avoid the later dependencies or consequences of not using CI/CD.

You will be charged too much if you are unaware of the solution's cost. Initially, when I was doing my development and POCs, one day, I forgot to close the connection or the artifact I created. The next morning, I learned that INR 40,000 had been deducted from my credit card.

Some companies use the solution for monetary benefits. Other companies upgrade their technology to compete with other technologies. In my current organization, everything is working fine, but they must also upgrade their technology. They were not saving money with the tool but had to upgrade themselves in technology.

You should be aware of the solution's configuration. You don't have to write any code, even for your basic work needs. However, you do have to configure some things and be aware of the triggers and actions. There is also a lot of help available on Google and YouTube to do it.

We have to write the code in such a manner that the next person who is using it or visiting that particular code should be aware. If you don't write properly what type of work you are doing inside a particular code, it'll be very difficult to identify what you have done. If I pick one particular action, the action should be very clear about what I'm doing in that action.

Otherwise, it will be very messy. If you use the default naming structure, it will be like one, two, or three variables. If you do not write the proper name of that variable, it'll be very difficult to identify what type of work you were doing inside that scope, function, or action.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Azure comes into the picture when the client is already using Azure and they are migrating PeopleSoft to the Oracle XCM Cloud. They wanted to utilize the existing system, as they already have Azure as a middleware. Thus, they preferred to continue with Azure rather than adopt another platform. In this scenario, we used Azure Logic Apps to transform their requests and facilitate the interaction within their cloud journey from PeopleSoft to Oracle and vice versa. 

We employed Azure Logic Apps as middleware since the client was already utilizing Azure for various platforms. We used Azure Logic Apps for integration purposes, including calling REST services, short services, transferring DB calls, and handling data load into tables based on the design. Most of our clients are already using Azure, and they tend to choose it for cost considerations as they already have licensing for Azure or AWS. So we seek solutions that can be cost-effective while integrating with other SaaS services like Oracle SaaS. That's how we handle integration in such scenarios.

There are many good features of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, and that's why customers are using it. For instance, we have SaaS event processing, timer-based processing, data ingestion, and business process automation. 

Another essential feature is ISE (Integration Service Environment) for content-based routing, data transformation, and enrichment. These capabilities address various business use cases effectively. Azure Logic Apps provide the functionality required to achieve these scenarios.

In terms of improvement, it would be helpful to have more descriptive documentation. Since we work in a hybrid cloud model with Azure, AWS, and Oracle, there are instances where we need to interact between different platforms, like Oracle to AWS features, Oracle to Azure, or Azure to Oracle. In such cases, the information available is often limited, and we need to refer to different documentation sources like Azure's API documents or others. 

It would be beneficial to have scenario-based documentation that helps us understand the integration process more easily. For example, one of my team members had to work on integrating with Azure Blob for data storage. We had to call the Azure REST APIs for that, but the documentation was not clear, making it a bit complicated. We tried multiple REST services, performed trial and error, and eventually got it working. However, having a proper and detailed explanation document would have made it much smoother. Instead of providing everything in one place, having some standard use case documents would be helpful.

I have been working with it for around three years.

The solution is stable. Its stability depends on Azure's cloud services. Our cloud solution is stable. However, the stability of specific scenarios and solutions provided to the client depends on the architecture design. 

From an application point of view, as a cloud service provider, it is stable. To achieve the goals and requirements, it mostly depends on the design of the architect who is working on the solution. The solution's stability relies on the solution architect's design.

It is a scalable solution. It is not difficult to scale. We have worked with good-sized companies, including large enterprises. Some of our reputed customers are from the US and UK.

The customer service and support are good. But everything has its limitations. For example, being more responsive and providing clearer documentation would be helpful. Standard documents are fine, but in certain situations, when facing specific errors or issues, partners or consumers expect customized solutions rather than just links to existing documents. 

If a customer encounters an error while using the cloud services and developing something for their client, they would prefer tailored solutions to resolve it rather than generic URLs to past documents. This is a challenge for all cloud service providers, including Azure, AWS, and Oracle. Improving in these areas would be beneficial and greatly help the users.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. Generally, most cloud platforms provide easy installations. The cloud service provider itself takes care of most of the tasks. It's not challenging.

Deployment does not take much time. It can be done within hours. For deployment, one to two persons are enough. It depends on the number of integrations and the complexity of the plan. 

However, deployment is not a one-go task. We don't deploy 80 applications at once. It's done in a concurrent manner. We develop one, go through testing and business testing, and then migrate it to production. So, on average, one to two persons are sufficient for deployment. 

For maintenance, on average, if we have ten applications running with ten integrations in the environment, we generally follow the 30:1 rule for monitoring purposes. Maintenance is again conditional, depending on the number of integrations, changes, tasks, deployment time, SLAs, and other factors. But for monitoring, one person can handle monitoring of around thirty integrations.

The pricing is not expensive. I would say it's quite reasonable and average. It's on a yearly basis. Our client has a yearly licensing.

If you are using Oracle SaaS, it's a good decision to use Oracle Integration Cloud (Oracle Pass) for better compatibility. Otherwise, other platforms like Azure Logic Apps can also be used. But when it comes to Oracle-to-Oracle interactions, it's easier and more convenient since it's the same vendor-to-vendor interaction, ensuring security and responsiveness.

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is a good solution. It's easy to use, and it's stable. It's not very challenging. If you prefer programming over drag-and-drop solutions, then Azure Logic Apps would be a suitable option for you.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company for some of our internal projects. We have some workflows defined for which we felt Microsoft Azure Logic Apps would be the best suited because it requires an approval process. Once the approval is given, some keys are given to the users, and those are temporary keys, after which Microsoft Azure Logic Apps makes sure that after a certain period of time, maybe a few days, those keys are removed from the system.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the entire workflow that we get. We can keep it in suspended motion. We can restart it, resume Microsoft Azure Logic Apps again, and build it easily. There are multiple instances in which the same Microsoft Azure Logic Apps can run.

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is good for certain types of workloads, but it doesn't offer many customization options. Considering the current features of the tool, one area I could think of is probably a spot where you can run some kind of script, a task that will just run a script since if it is provided in the tool, one can do much more than what one does currently.

In the future, I would like the product to provide a particular task for running scripts.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Logic Apps for four years. I am an end-user of the tool.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

My company hasn't really tried out the scalability part associated with the product.

The product can be recommended for businesses depending on their use cases and the company's size. If it fits your use case, you can use it. If it doesn't, it doesn't matter whether it's the company's smaller, medium, or large.

I don't remember contacting the solution's technical support team.

The product's initial setup phase is simple.

The solution is deployed on the cloud-based model.

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is a little bit expensive, and that is why you use it only for certain types of scenarios.

My company did not test the integration capabilities of the product since we did not have to deal with such use cases.

I haven't used any AI feature with Microsoft Azure Logic Apps.

I can recommend the product to others.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.