Microsoft Azure Reviews

We primarily use email accounts and SharePoint. We want to use AI and OCR services, but we don’t have many use cases.

It is a good solution. I can get all the tools under one roof.

There's a complexity involved in getting the subscriptions provisioned. There are too many complications. Without IT knowledge, we cannot subscribe and work. The product is not user-friendly. All the services must be available in one place so that I can get the services that I need at the right time.

I have been using the solution for one year.

The tool’s stability is good.

The product is scalable. Around 30 people use the solution in our organization. We are trying to get projects from Europe and North America. Once it is done, we'll be scaling up.

The setup is straightforward and easy. Since I know about infrastructure and IT, it took me around one week to set it up. Non-IT people might struggle with the setup.

The return on investment is good. Since everything is in the cloud, we save a lot on infrastructure and server costs. It is very helpful to the client, and it is very useful for us.

I pay for a yearly subscription. Compared to other service providers, the product’s pricing is normal.

I evaluated other options, but I chose Microsoft because it is a little bit easier. We can get it right away.

We are into data management. We deal with data consumption and data validation. So, we must use many virtual and storage solutions to process the data. We use the clients’ solution. I am into IT. I have a bit of knowledge of the infrastructure. If we need to scale up, we might need some training. I would recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use Microsoft Teams for collaboration with different teams and parties, creating channels for both internal and external communication. In addition, we leverage Power Apps within Microsoft Office to develop workflows and automation tools.

Azure has enhanced our organization's ability to scale applications on demand by providing flexible scalability options tailored to each application's needs. Depending on the application hosted in Azure, we can scale up resources to handle increased requests or scale down during periods of lower demand.

One feature I like in Microsoft Azure is its ability to host and run applications on virtual machines. It is a basic yet crucial capability for our team. 

One area where Microsoft Azure could improve is in offering a broader range of pre-built plugins and tools compared to AWS. While Azure excels in certain capabilities like text-to-voice and voice-to-text, it may lack robust support for handling diverse languages effectively, such as local dialects or combinations of languages like Chinese and English. Enhancing flexibility and language support could make Azure more competitive in diverse global markets like Singapore and the Philippines. Additionally, a feature I would like to see added to Azure in the future is support for a native graph database technology. While AWS offers Neptune for graph databases, Azure currently lacks a similar offering.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure for almost two years.

We have not faced any stability issues with Microsoft Azure.

Microsoft Azure is highly scalable, which makes it easy to adjust resources based on demand. It is mature in terms of scalability and offers seamless scalability features. We have over 200 users utilizing the solution across various teams and departments.

Microsoft's technical support is a bit costly, but it is worth it for the quality assistance they provide. I would rate the support as an eight out of ten.

Positive

Generally, the time it takes to deploy and configure a solution in Azure can vary depending on the specific requirements and complexity of the deployment. It could range from a few hours to a few days, but it ultimately depends on factors like the size of the application, the number of resources being deployed, and any custom configurations needed.

We utilize Azure for disaster recovery and business continuity, particularly for our graph database application. While our primary system is hosted on AWS, we have implemented a backup and disaster recovery strategy using Azure. In the event of any disruptions or failures, Azure serves as a reliable fallback, ensuring minimal downtime and data loss.

While we don't create workflows directly in Azure, we benefit from its auto-scaling feature, which adjusts resources based on demand. Plus, Azure integrates well with tools like Control M for workflow automation, making our processes more efficient.

Integrating Azure with other Microsoft solutions like Active Directory and Office 365 is seamless and straightforward, enhancing our business processes. However, we also need to integrate Azure with external systems like Jira and GitLab. While Azure excels in Microsoft product integration, we are exploring ways to streamline integration with non-Microsoft products, which is an area where Microsoft can improve.

For those considering Azure, it is crucial to understand that Microsoft offers a comprehensive ecosystem of products and services. Azure is a top choice for cloud computing needs, especially when already using Microsoft products. It seamlessly integrates with other Microsoft solutions, providing a cohesive experience. So, if you are already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem, Azure is worth considering for your cloud computing needs.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure as a seven out of ten.

We primarily use Microsoft Azure for data storage on the server. Additionally, we leverage Power Automate for process automation tasks. Some of our processes benefit from AI and ML capabilities, such as image processing and recognition. Specifically, we utilize the product for its Translation APIs, including language translation functionality.

We validate customer videos and speech in real-time by utilizing language translation services and image processing. This involves converting speech to text and vice versa in real-time. Customers record videos where they speak predefined text. We capture the image and speech, convert it to text, and compare it with the standardized text. Automating this process makes validation much easier compared to manual methods. On the Azure side, we primarily utilize its data storage and processing capabilities. Additionally, we leverage its AI/ML features, along with its automation capabilities.

Improving transparency in billing is crucial for us. Understanding how billing works only becomes clear once we start using the services. A more accurate billing calculator would help us anticipate costs associated with using specific services.

I have been using the product for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

Scalability is a key factor, so we opt for Microsoft Azure. Being a Microsoft product, we trust its scalability. Thus far, we haven't encountered any issues related to transaction processing or other scalability concerns. I rate it a seven out of ten since we are not running enterprise workloads. My company has 50 users. The usage of these use cases will increase as our business grows because they are directly related to serving the end consumer. Therefore, we anticipate a significant rise in usage over time.

Improvement is needed in the support process, especially for smaller and medium-sized customers who may not have existing support plans with Microsoft. Accessing support for these customers can be cumbersome, requiring additional payments before assistance is available. It is not clear when you buy the product. You will learn about additional support payments when you start using it. 

The tools' support is in multiple places, which can be complex for customers. It needs to be in one place. 

Neutral

I rate the tool's deployment an eight out of ten. It can be deployed in two to three hours. 

Microsoft Azure's pricing is reasonable. We pay around 5000 dollars per annum. 

We evaluated Google Cloud, IBM Cloud, and AWS. 

We don't face many challenges with compliance and security. We rely on Azure Stack and adhere to the security standards they implement. Compared to AWS, we find it much simpler and easier to achieve interoperability and integration when using Microsoft Azure. You must ensure you have the right competency before using the product. It can become complicated if you don't have the right person to manage it. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We have deployed our enterprise application on Microsoft Azure and we are using it for our day-to-day operations and management of that application. The application has millions of users, mainly from the EMEA region, and serves our clients as well as our internal users.

Previously, we had legacy applications hosted on-premises, and that setup was very limiting for our users. When we migrated our application to Microsoft Azure, users gained the flexibility to access the application from anywhere and at any time.

The benefit from the business perspective is that with a large user base, the users are very happy. The feedback from our end-users is that there are no issues in accessing the application. It can be opened anywhere. Also, the timely updates and the security features make it very effective in protecting against vulnerabilities, security threats, and any third-party attacks. Users feel very secure when using our application.

The solution is very 

• reliable
• scalable
• secure.

The scalability is the most unique feature. Whenever our user count is high, and utilization of our application results in high use of resources, Microsoft Azure automatically scales our application so that users can access it without any issues or errors. Microsoft Azure gives you the flexibility to scale your applications up and down at any moment. It is quite easy and impressive.

Additional features that we have found to be very useful are the data security and capacity management.

Azure also provides features such as storage, computing, and networking in the cloud. It offers a wide range of services, such as financial analytics, Azure Data Factory, and Azure Firewalls, and these help our application to run smoothly.

The built-in Microsoft Firewall secures our application in a very unique way.

We have been using Microsoft Azure for more than three years.

The stability is perfect. We have found no issues yet when using Microsoft Azure.

Our concurrent user count is more than 1,000. Our users include product owners and project managers, as well as our consulting and marketing teams. It is used 24/7.

We plan to increase our usage of the Microsoft Azure platform. Our project requirements are quite large as we are now moving to data analytics and big-data analytics. We need to procure services from Microsoft like financial analytics and Power BI.

Customer services and support should be improved. If a user faces challenges in accessing Microsoft Azure, the support team takes time—it could be 24 to 48 hours—to resolve them. We need solutions in four to five hours. And there are business-critical issues where we need an immediate resolution.

Otherwise, the technical support is good. They are understandable and they are familiar with the product.

Positive

We did not have a previous cloud-based solution. We had legacy applications on-premises.

The initial setup is quite easy. Azure's consulting and business team is very effective and helpful. They helped us understand the product's features. They provided us with a clear roadmap for migrating our application to Microsoft Azure, for the services they offer, and for how the business could be run successfully.

The deployment took about three months. Our implementation strategy was simply to work with the vendor.

We initially assigned five to six people for the end-to-end deployment. After the initial implementation, when the Microsoft team left, we needed some resources who could handle the management of the Microsoft Azure platform. Those resources are in place in case our application goes down or there are issues that require them to directly contact the Microsoft team. But all the support and security updates are managed by Microsoft.

Microsoft has its own solution architects and consulting team to help you. That makes it easy as it doesn't involve third-party integrators and saves us the money we would be charged for third-party services.

We have definitely seen a return on investment because our previous, on-premises, legacy application was very limited for our users and clients. Since migrating to Azure, we have clear visibility into our application and users can use it from any location. Our return on investment has been very positive.

The pricing and licensing are quite good. We had no issues with them because they were clear about the pricing, subscription, the number of users, and how much the charges would be per month. 

Pricing depends on the services you are using from Microsoft Azure. Also, some services are only deployed in the U.S. region, while others are available in the Asia-Pacific region.

We evaluated AWS and GCP, but Azure's features and services matched our requirements better.

AWS had similar options, but their prices were higher, and they didn't have the same regional availability. The bandwidth and the data-processing charges were quite high with AWS, compared to Azure.

I highly recommend this solution to any prospective buyer. If you are using other Microsoft applications like Microsoft 365, Power BI, Data Factory, or Azure Migrate, you will definitely find it useful. Azure is fully integrated with other Microsoft applications, as well, including Microsoft Office, Microsoft Project, and Microsoft SQL Server. Microsoft Azure is an all-in-one solution.

We are feeling very secure hosting our application on Microsoft Azure because Microsoft is a global giant and provides excellent solutions and services.

We deploy all of our projects in Microsoft Azure. We are a startup company. We have been since the beginning deploying our code in Azure cloud. We are actively using the full capabilities of two cloud services.

The application services are the most valuable in Microsoft Azure. I'm not using them directly but I am using the function and the web applications. I don't need to pay a lot for the maintenance. I do not need to have a DevOps employee. 

I am familiar with Google, and everything I was doing was in Google. I had to control my back proxies and do my own configuration files. With Microsoft Azure, it is all easy.

The documentation can be outdated and is not as clear in Microsoft Azure as it is in AWS or Google.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for approximately four years.

The solution is stable. 

It's easy to monitor, there's no problem with the code in their development. We had some stability issues, it was not the fault of Microsoft Azure, but it was the mistakes of the developers. It was easy to monitor it in Azure.

Microsoft Azure is highly scalable.

On only one web application I created with one service plan I can connect 10  projects. Imagine one machine can run 10 projects at the same time because whatever the project has more requests or demands, it will scale its machines and auto-scale down. This is why it makes it affordable. I can control which project is demanding more computing power or storage power.

We have approximately 50 people using this solution in my organization. It is mainly back and front developers.

We are drastically increasing our usage because last year we were running 13 projects, and now 19 projects. In 2022 we are trying to double our team.

The support could improve. For example, Python is needed for Microsoft Azure,  and the lack of documentation for the community is a problem. If you are a Python developer Microsoft Azure released an update to Python at the end of May 2021. Theoretically, I can use it with Python, but if I have a problem I need to call a Microsoft engineer to solve it. It takes some time. However, I did receive very good support from the Microsoft engineers to make my system production-ready, but language support for Python and other languages is coming late.

I have used other solutions, such as Google and AWS.

When comparing these solutions to Microsoft Azure, AWS has better documentation, Google's cognitive services, and predictions give better results, and Microsoft Azure has the best UI. If you want to reach the database of Google, there is no such SQL manager UI. Microsoft Azure UI is easy to use and has great tools.

The deployment's easy and the pipelines are easy from the Azure DevOps, everything is integrated and it has good security. The overall setup is extremely easy.

We have a team in London that is maintaining the solution. We have 450 backend developers at this site and approximately five people are looking after all the maintenance and admin roles. We have database and developers administrators that are giving access to the people for the production maintenance. 

I am very happy with the solution.

Thanks to the training I have received from Microsoft Azure, which cost £60,000, I'm up-skilling all my team for the certification, databases, and machine learning tool. Every month I'm receiving approximately £1,000 from the training credit for the up-skilling.

It is simple to start with Microsoft Azure if you know the application life cycle. You can try so many things without any cost because of the serverless system. You will not be charged for any request at the beginning. For example, you are creating a function application in Azure the first 10,000 requests are free. It is great because you can anyone a developer to test anything.

They're not using very heavy machine learning systems, the system is generally cheap. For example, they are giving a free month trial and a developer can't finish it personally if they do not use a large computing machine.

At the moment they are adding new features faster than I expected. For example, they have Python support but five years ago there wasn't any Python support. They were slow at the beginning but now it updates very quickly. For example, the community services for the low code, no code power platforms, and the power platforms.

I spoke to my developers, machine learning engineer, data engineer, and data scientists and told them please use the auto ML or the community services better. As a London business user site team, we can create all the virtual agents and AI builders with the no code platform for the machine learning models for the power applications. The auto ML is very powerful and you don't need to be an expert in machine learning.

I rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

In any general use case, if we want to run any application on our own virtual machines, that's Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). If we want to use a readily available managed service in Azure, like Azure Storage, Azure Security Center, or Logic Apps, those are Platform as a Service (PaaS) offerings.

This is because they're provided on the platform, and they manage them. We can run our data and applications on them. If we're using a complete application as a service provided by vendors, like Office 365 (including the email service), that's considered Function as a Service (FaaS) because we're not configuring anything on our end – we're just using it.

I'm involved in all kinds of services, whether it's IaaS, PaaS, or SaaS. It depends on the specific customer requirement.

We implemented Azure for our infrastructure needs. Our core components include virtual machines, virtual networks, network security groups (NSGs), load balancers, public IPs, and private IPs. For private endpoints, those are more specific to Platform as a Service (PaaS) offerings.

Additionally, we utilize a hub network with a firewall, DNS server, and Active Directory server (AD). This aligns with the enterprise landing zone concept, where a connectivity subscription with a hub network that includes a firewall, DNS, AD, Azure Monitor, etc., would be implemented.

These shared services reside in the hub network if we have on-premises servers or other large assets running in Azure.

For management purposes, we have a separate subscription – the management subscription – which includes Log Analytics workspace and other data monitoring tools. Finally, the landing zone itself would house our workloads and applications.

We rely on many security features to manage our Azure cloud environment. It's a kind of framework we follow. First, there's posture management with compliance by following specific regulations. Then, for specific services, mainly Azure Defender and Azure Sentinel are important. They use the latest threat intelligence to identify threats and vulnerabilities. 

On top of that, there are policies to ensure your security posture is maintained, followed by firewalls, Azure Defender, and Azure Sentinel for threat intelligence and response.

All these services are managed services and they are auto-scalable.

In Azure, there are so many things. Especially when dealing with different regions. Suppose we are far from a region and using it over the internet, then probably more Edge Zones in nearby cities would help. This would give easier access with no delay or latency.

Right now, the problem in many remote areas is they may have low-bandwidth internet connections. This can make it difficult to access large services that require more bandwidth to download data and such. So, if the service were closer, it would be faster to access. At least they could access it easily.

Again, there are many other suggestions from a technical perspective on different services. But this is just from a user's perspective, and user demographics can create challenges. Other users with very good access might not have latency or other issues, but they might have operational challenges.

For example, let's say ExpressRoute. It's very expensive and mainly available for enterprise customers. Suppose individual users want that kind of dedicated connectivity over a service provider like Airtel or Vodafone and have an ExpressRoute from their phone, but is there any availability for a lower-cost option?

Because it's very expensive as well, if there were any such services available at a lower cost, then that would really help customers, especially SMBs, to have more consistent and reliable applications.

The main improvement I expect is capacity improvement. For example, live streaming applications require a lot of backend computing power. During events like football matches, millions of requests can occur per second. Existing services might not be sufficient to handle this. 

We need to know the maximum scalability based on data center capacity limitations. In some cases, we have to deny customer requests due to insufficient capacity. So, improved scalability is a key area for development, and I'm sure other cloud providers face similar challenges.

There are a lot of services already in Azure, but from a regular user's perspective, improvements can be made to specific services and features. For example, in Kubernetes, initially, it was limited. You could only create a Kubernetes cluster in one subnet. 

If all the IPs in that subnet were used, you couldn't expand that subscription. That was an issue, but it's been addressed. Now, you can increase the number of nodes by creating a new node pool in the same cluster with additional subnets. Improvements like this feature-based approach can be applied to many services. 

Another key area for improvement is the Azure load balancer. Currently, it only supports virtual machines (VMs) running in the same virtual network (vNet) on the backend. 

They should definitely support machines or IPs running on-premises (prem) or in other Azure VNets. GCP and AWS already support that. So, Azure Load Balancer should support that as well because being able to provide support is a very basic requirement or a valid request from any customer. These kinds of feature requests can be improved from a cloud service provider's perspective.

I have been using Azure storage for five to six years. 

It is a stable solution because it depends on the workload you expect. Based on that data, you can configure how many users it can handle.

Managed services are definitely more efficient than IaaS and offer a performance-centric approach.

It is a scalable solution because it depends on how the user manages it. But any services we choose in Azure are inherently scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. Nothing is truly complex unless your solution or requirement itself is complex.

The deployment time depends on my requirements. Suppose a customer needs a very small environment, like two or three cluster machines with a standard load balancer on top, running their application on those VMs. It would hardly take 30 to 45 minutes to create the virtual machines (VMs), create a load balancer, allocate a public IP address, and set up a virtual network (vNet). 

At the very beginning, we had to create a subscription. Within the subscription, you'll create a resource group. And within the resource group, we'll be creating a virtual network. Inside the virtual network, we'll deploy the VMs, a load balancer, a public IP, and a network security group (NSG).

Additionally, if I want to make it more secure, I can create a firewall as well. So, all of these together should be deployable within an hour.

The number of people like developers required for the deployment depends on your environment. For instance, if you use an IaaS solution, you'll need more resources on your end to manage it. 

But with a PaaS service, you'll need fewer people because the cloud service provider manages half of it. With a SaaS solution, you don't need anyone to manage it – the cloud service provider handles the entire application. You just use it. 

So, it depends on the solution type. Therefore, more complex solutions require more resources to manage.

When we decide to increase capacity, we always consider the ROI and look at the projections for the next three to five years. Big investment decisions are only made based on that. 

Similarly, any customer considering adopting a service in Azure, like Azure SQL Database or Logic Apps, will first look at the return on investment. They'll consider how much they're investing in these services, how many users will be using them, and how much money they'll make from them. 

If it's not profitable based on their expectations or KPIs, they obviously won't add those services. So, it depends on the customer's specific requirements and expectations. We recommend the best possible services for their needs.

Azure licensing costs. We always compare licensing to the ROI.  Azure costing can be multi-layered. Increased capacity depends on your requirements and any contracts you have. On top of that, there's a separate cost for the licenses of the applications and operating systems you install in that capacity. 

So, as long as you're using the existing capacity, you won't be charged extra for that. However, if you increase capacity, you'll only be charged for the services you use on that additional capacity, not for the capacity itself. 

This depends on specific guarantees made in contracts that can last from two to eight years. These guarantees ensure investment has a return on investment. So, in that case, you wouldn't be charged for the additional capacity, just the services used on it.

Capacity increases based on customer requests are very rare, typically only for extremely high-volume scenarios. For example, millions of requests per second would require a service capacity increase beyond standard rates. Otherwise, we usually have enough capacity in different data centers across various regions.

Generally, most services and their licensing – it's that straightforward.

I would rate Azure an eight out of ten for managed services and IaaS a seven out of ten.

While I can advise, many factors influence decision-making. For example, if we invest in a ten-million-dollar data center capacity improvement, we need to see the return on investment within a one to three-year timeframe. If not profitable, such a large investment wouldn't be justifiable. 

Alternatively, customers could sign a five-year contract guaranteeing capacity usage and payment if we invest in the upgrade. These are the parameters that define decision-making in such situations.

Microsoft Azure has enabled the organization to set up efficient cloud infrastructure at cost-friendly rates. 

It has a DR backup system that keeps data under safe storage for future recovery in case of any disaster. The Azure virtual machine has been the game changer in the implementation of reliable cloud computing services. 

It allows quick connection and can successfully integrate with cloud applications to enhance better workflows. It integrates Web Application Firewall which has firm security features for monitoring data flow and can easily prevent SQL injection in web apps. 

The URL-based routing system enhances precise routing protocol based on authorized ERL paths.

The platform has stabilized the enterprise backend servers with session affinities that enhance reliable feedback to client requests. 

The dynamic data management system has prevented various ransomware attacks that could lead to data loss. Azure keeps our data programs under 24/7 surveillance to ensure no critical errors can affect the entire workflow. 

The seamless integrations enhance excellent services from Microsoft Azure. We have fully complied with international data policies from the set of data models that are authorized by Zure.

Azure storage has exceptional scalability that gives the organization expandable space for storing data under secure cloud servers. The user-friendly interface enhances quick setup procedures and efficient task management, saving time and resources. 

The robust encryption services increase the confidence of tech users. The drag-and-drop features save time from the low code environment. 

Azure SQL Database has a serverless database that can integrate easily with APIs. Azure disk storage has multiple user cases that enable each team to select size and performance based on user requirements.

The pricing criteria can be improved with broken-down terms that can be understood easily. 

There are rare cases of time-consuming technical issues. The Azure team can devise efficient and streamlined procedures for dealing with critical technicalities that can affect workflows. 

Integrating the system with third-party platforms not connected to the Microsoft system is not easy. 

Maintenance is sometimes hectic due to poor cloud and on-premise server integrations. 

The overall performance has been excellent, and I can recommend Microsoft Azure to other enterprises.

I've used the solution for two years.

It is highly scalable.

I am impressed by the storage services and security configurations.

The support team offers reliable services.

Positive

I have not used any alternative product.

The setup was straightforward.

Implementation took place through the vendor team.

We've witnessed an ROI of 55%.

The setup procedure was simple and the cost is relatively friendly.

I have not evaluated any other platforms.

I am impressed by the performance.

We use the solution for hosting business applications and the test environment.

The compliance is really good. It provides visibility of our top risks and recommendations on how to close them. Sentinel is really good from a security standpoint. The product provides a host of security tools. We deploy and configure everything ourselves. So far, we have not had any issues related to Azure.

The solution must improve its pricing.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

I rate the stability of the tool a nine and a half out of ten.

The tool is highly scalable, depending on the design. I've not had any issues. We have to factor in cost and design. About 2000 people use the solution in our organization. It is extensively used in our organization. Based on business growth, we might increase the number of users.

We had some technical issues. The support team was ready to support us once we raised a ticket. They responded in a reasonable time and escalated the issue when necessary.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. The information is readily available, and there are many local partners who are extremely supportive. Deployment is just a matter of getting the login set up. It was pretty fast.

Our in-house team had been trained to deploy the tool, so they knew what to do. We have a few trained cloud admins who can manage the product. There are a lot of automation options, so they don't need a big crowd to work with it.

The product has a good ROI. It depends on how we handle the cost based on resource creation and the data we build based on our setup.

We have a licensing option from our partner in which the solution is bundled up with a whole host of other services. There are no additional costs associated with the product.

It is one of the best tools in the market. It's a very good cloud service. It has a lot of good security options. The reporting options are also good. The on-premise AD is fantastic. The tool gives us flexibility in deployment. If we get the design wrong, that's not Azure’s problem. It's our problem. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.