Microsoft Azure Reviews

We use Microsoft Azure for many different services. For example, we use the Azure Boards for work and issue tracking. The Azure Repos is a place we store code, it is similar to a Git repository for us. Microsoft Azure has pipelines for the deployment of your applications across environments. There are different cloud services for different use cases in Microsoft Azure that I interact with on a daily basis.

Microsoft Azure has benefited our organization mostly because we moved all our infrastructure to the cloud. That has helped with cost optimization. We don't have to worry about operational maintenance for things such as patching or updates for any of the servers because everything is handled by the cloud itself. We are always using the latest version.

Microsoft Azure has hundred of services that they offer on the platform.

The Microsoft Azure platform in itself is very good. The documentation that is available I find very handy and the community behind it is helpful. If you have any problems or anything, you can easily reach Microsoft's community, and then there would be someone who would be willing to help. That's a very good plus point for Microsoft Azure.

There are times when using a service in Microsoft Azure can be confusing because you have four or five options that do similar operations. It would be helpful if there was a clear decision tree around those features. Microsoft does provide a lot of decision trees around a lot of their services, but it's not for everything.

This would be helpful for the users because sometimes it gets confusing what to use, what not to use. Then you start with something, and then after two months, you think you should have used something else. There are approximately 200 services and I have found this issue with approximately 10 of them.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for approximately seven years.

Microsoft Azure is stable, I did not encounter any issues or anything in the platform. The uptime is very good. 

When you design your solution, you can make sure that everything is accounted for in your design, such as all the options are there. Microsoft Azure in itself is rarely down. If there is a complete blackout it can happen, but normally no. It's very reliable.

The scalability of Microsoft Azure is unlimited. You never have to be concerned with scalability. You only have to pay for it and then the scaling is available for you.

I have approximately 50 to 100 people using this solution in my organization. I use the solution on a daily basis.

I have not needed to contact the technical to Microsoft in my current experience. In the past, I have contacted Microsoft once or twice, but the process is straightforward. You raise a ticket, and then Microsoft's people reach out to you.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure is very straightforward. You don't have to do any setup. You only have to sign up on the Microsoft Portal, and then you can start using it.

I did the implementation of Microsoft Azure myself.

There is not any maintenance required for this solution. If we build any solution on top of Microsoft Azure, then that's something that we have to take care of and maintain. The Microsoft Azure platform in itself does not need any maintenance from us.

Microsoft Azure is not expensive. You pay for what you use. If you are using it everything could be expensive.

We choose Microsoft Azure after doing the proper comparisons and proof of concepts. We did a complete pros and cons list for our vendor selection process.

I would highly recommend Microsoft Azure to others.

I would advise others that one of the most important points to make is to make sure that the security and governance of the platform have been thought of before you start building everything around it. Make sure you build your security framework and the governance framework around the platform that suits your company. Every company is different. Everyone will have different security and governance rules.

I rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

I was testing the integration capabilities. I deployed a simple solution with a front and back end with an SQL database. For the server-less solution, it was just to interact with the database. That's what kind of the load that I was testing. The use case was to integrate with the directory, authenticate, and then consume some of the services there.

One of the services that I found to be great is the connector. For example, the other day, I was creating an application for internal research. With that connector, it was really easy to integrate some services to interact with the connectors. The credential allows you to authenticate with the active directory. Then, with that authentication, you can have the assurance that the people who are consuming the application are the right ones.

I know there have been a lot of improvements and a lot of new services lately. I'm really not aware of all of them.

One thing which is great is that they give users hub integration. That's a strong aspect, which would be good for many people and clients and developers so that they have that integration right away.

I haven't checked the console for some time, however, compared to the AWS console, the interaction console of the web part, the web services, it's not so easy. That will be a good area to improve, which is to make the console for interaction with services a little easier.

Another point to improve could maybe be the pricing model or maybe the interaction with information. When you look for information in AWS, it's more straightforward and clear. It's hard to find that information on Azure.

I used the solution for maybe one month at the beginning of maybe March of this year. I was doing some tests with Microsoft Azure. I was deploying some services.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability is fine. However, it may be another thing to improve. I haven't look looked at it in some time, however, I remember at the beginning, I tried to research for the price, for rates, and things. I didn't find it easy to locate, which made it hard to gauge the cost of scaling. 

From my side, I don't plan to increase usage. Right now, I'm working for other clients, and with the solutions of the clients. For research purposes, I will do maybe one or two instances, just for testing. It's not a big deal.

While I've never needed technical assistance, my understanding is that it's pretty good.

It was not very difficult to set up the solution. In the beginning, it's a bit difficult to just find the services and things like that. They need a kind of list or something, something more visible. That would help. 

Our implementation was not too big. It took maybe two days. Another deployment we did took maybe three. I'm not really a complete expert. It might have taken a bit longer for me due to my lack of experience.

I did not use consultants or resellers for deployment. I did it myself. There wasn't too much pressure. I was doing the deployment more for research purposes. 

The price of the solution is unclear. it's hard to find the costs. 

The company I am working for is a Microsoft partner.

I'd advise potential new users to try to get as much information as possible about licensing and about the products that they are going to use. That will be good to have a very clear understanding of. Beyond that, it's not a problem to get started and go.

I'd rate the product at an eight out of ten.

Our current client is in the securities business, so we deal with a lot of trading data, like securities, holdings, etc. We evaluate the data quality of the daily file that comes from the current providers and transform that data using PowerPlay and Dashworks.

We're building cloud-based data warehouses by adapting on-premises data warehouses in MySQL Server. Initially, we migrated everything to the Azure SQL Data Warehouse to take advantage of all the MPP technology and stuff. In the process, we realized it was expensive for us, and we didn't need all that capacity, so we migrated that code to a simple Azure SQL database. We made it work from that point.

In our current project, we're using Power BI with Azure. We directly import data from that SQL database into Power BI using PowerPlay and ask the client architect to do some data engineering so we have serverless capacity in Azure. Right now, we are migrating to Azure Synapse, and we are actually in the process of doing a couple of PLCs with serverless capacity. Maybe we'll also use Databricks. 

Azure Data Lake is useful. We are in the process of populating the data lake for our current project. Also, we are directly importing for Power BI to using PowerPlay.

There is room for improvement on a couple of Azure services. One that comes to mind is Data Factory. Microsoft has improved a lot of Data Factory's capabilities, so maybe it's now possible to make a green custom database within Azure and Data Factory. 

I think it would be good to keep making progress on giving users the ability to do action calls on Data Factory. Right now, it's mostly local. Perhaps Microsoft could add the ability to put some calls in the workflow. Airflow is a good example. You might say, "Why not just use Airflow?" And maybe you could use that, but I think it would be better if all these things were possible with Data Factory. 

We've been working with Azure for a couple of years. I work for a tech consultancy, so we're not tied to just one project. We work with one client for a year or so, and then we work with another client the next year. Mostly we build data warehouses with SQL using Microsoft Synapse. We also do some things with Power BI and PowerPlay.

Azure is stable. We've never had any problems. 

When you work on the cloud, it's a straightforward process. You start on a PLC and start adding more components like maybe some security with a private network and so on. It's effortless for us to scale by adding additional components. Scalability depends on the service you're going to use. For example, if you are going to change from a SQL database to another database or another inter-processing ending, it's not going to be that easy. It happens with all providers. 

It is easy to set up Azure. For deployment and maintenance, we have a team of five or six people consisting of one tech leader, three developers, and one QA.

Azure's pricing could be more competitive. Some clients mentioned that they are considering switching to AWS because of the price. And AWS can provide you with the instant capacity called SpotLink. 

I rate Microsoft Azure eight out of 10. It's okay for all the use cases we've had so far. If you are going to do it on your own, make sure you read the documentation. All the information is there. Microsoft documentation is good. But if you don't want to take on that burden of reading documentation and so on, you can contact support. They'll know better than you. This is crucial because of the cost. If you choose the wrong services, you could waste a lot of money. 

Our primary use case is mostly for deploying services where we do not have the local infrastructure like hardware, or where it's not necessary for us to have the knowledge about how to set up a certain service. We just want to use it without concerns regarding running the service, backup, availability, etc. That's the reason we pay Microsoft the money for its Azure services, so we can just go ahead and use the product. Some of the services they've rendered have become business critical for the company, so we're using the solution on a daily basis. 

I like the reliability of the solution and the ease of provisional services which can be a click and go. I also like the broad diversity of services that are being offered.

I find that in many cases it's more expensive than AWS, and for no good reason. The pricing itself is also quite difficult to comprehend, it's not easy to know the total cost and not worth checking the calculator because the outcome is going to be totally different anyhow. I also find it difficult that they are specific to x86 and x64 machines, I haven't found any ARM-based virtual machine images that I could run in my IP test lab, which would be a great boost for productivity because I could run the internal pipeline in the cloud and would not have to divert to locally installed devices. 

If they want to be serious with IT devices then they should find a way of deploying ARM-based devices to Azure, to get more freedom of choice with virtual machines and services. It would be hardware virtual machine image offerings to other platforms, not only PC-based or x86-based. It would make my life much easier. 

I've been using this solution for four and a half years. 

There are some glitches but it's a pretty solid solution. 

It's a scalable solution. 

Overall, I'm quite satisfied with the technical support. There were different expectations about what I had understood from the description of the support offered and what the architects of Microsoft meant to deploy. Some of the documentation for Azure is sketchy enough to leave room for questions and that had to be sorted out with support, which is not a fault that the support guys should have to concern themselves with. If the documentation is not clear and the cloud device goes, then there's clearly room for improvement.

The start was far easier than we expected it to be, but the complexity caught up with us half a year later also. It got more complex as we went along. We carried out the deployment ourselves. I'm a very experienced administrator, I know a lot about concepts of data centers. I know how they work, I know how to set them up. This is just another data center, it's just that it's not mine.

We found it difficult to train our regular Windows admins to dive into Azure things, so it's important to get the right people or the project is doomed. There are too many people who don't really want to get to grips with the cloud. I would also suggest not starting from a fully regulated basis. We have our deployment fully integrated with Azure Active Directory, which can be quite a hindrance when it comes to just playing around with things. It's essential to give people developer accounts where they can just play around, break things, work through them, like a little lab. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We use Microsoft Azure in two places. The first use case involves the Chatbot framework, and we've been using that for 18 months. This is what we predominately use it for.

Our second use involves hosting some of our critical applications. It allows us to address some of our human resource use cases in the area of policy queries, as well as some backend actions.

The automated connectors to some of our critical enterprise systems are an important feature. These are very large, critical, global HCM systems.

The library of predefined use cases is very helpful and we found the HR use case that we needed within it.

There are improvements needed from a roadmap standpoint. Some of the roadmap items that they typically publish don't move at the same pace.

The predominant area in need of improvement is support.

Microsoft needs to continue working on out-of-the-box connectors to contemporary products in the market, specific to different verticals such as finance and HR. Investing in this would be helpful because it means deploying solutions faster. We've had challenges in terms of having to custom-build some of it and at the same time, the roadmap contains more connectors.

We have been using Microsoft Azure for the past 18 months.

This is definitely a stable platform. I haven't seen issues in that respect.

Azure is a scalable platform. We have more than 10,000 people in the organization that use it from an application standpoint. The end-users could be managers or other employees in a variety of roles.

Our in-house administration team has fewer than 40 people that work with it.

At the moment, we have no plans to increase our usage.

The primary support needs to be improved. I would rate them as moderate because from a technical and service guarantee perspective, they are pretty good. However, when it comes to new roadmap items or handling requests, or adding new activities, they are moderate.

This is the first such solution that we put into place.

The initial setup is pretty much straightforward.

Our initial deployment took between six and eight weeks. This period had more to do with our setup being compliant with some of the features on Azure. 

We worked with the Microsoft consulting team during the deployment.

The team was knowledgeable but there were some areas that they could have done better. For example, we had issues with our enrollment and some of our IT requirements at the organizational level. We could have perhaps used some architecting skills.

For permanent maintenance, so we have a hybrid model when it comes to maintenance. We've outsourced some of it, and that really comes from a fixed contract so we don't control the number of people that work on it.

Internally, we have two people; one who manages the services, and the other one is more of an administrator.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Microsoft Azure is to first, very clearly agree on the terms of deployment. Second, get the initial design and prototypes for your specific implementation vetted and signed off at an early stage because this will help with security clearances and data privacy clearances. These were the two major learning points for us.

In summary, this is a good platform but there are several areas for improvement.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

In general, we use Azure for financial services.

Azure helps us take a few things to the market predictably and robustly. It gives us the speed and predictability to build something in a short time. The cost can sometimes be clumsier, but I believe it is similar to other cloud providers. These are the main advantages, but the price is one factor that has really bothered our clients.

Azure's Data Lake services are decent. I like AKS, and API Management is relatively straightforward to use. The security and SIEM options Azure offers are good. All the infrastructure services are easy to use and set up. 

In terms of adoption, one issue we face is providing training for users who are new to Azure and want to try some features out. There are some methods by which the organization has to allot some budget to them, but it has to be apart from the developer endpoints. It's difficult for them to try out something new. It would be nice if Azure had an evaluation period of 30, 60, or 90 days, so people could try out a few things and learn.

That is one challenging area, but this is a problem with all cloud providers, not just Azure. Some free subscriptions are available, but they are for the cloud platform as a whole rather than just a single service. For example, say I don't have a trial subscription, but I want to try something new like Azure AKS for 30 days to learn and to try out. 

It's hard to say what Azure could add. There are a few specific requirements that clients raise based on business needs. In general, I don't think there is any particular feature I can recommend.

I've been using Azure for about four or five years.

Azure has had some issues on and off, but that was a couple of years back, and now it seems okay. Sometimes the performance of the cloud degrades, but there are workarounds. 

We mainly use AKS, which is pretty scalable, so I don't see any issue there. Azure's scalability is relative, so it depends on the client and the solution. Most of our clients are B2B, so they don't have many users. However, we provide a retail banking solution that involves hundreds of transactions per hour. Azure can handle up to a hundred transactions per second can be supported, so I think it's okay.

We talk to Microsoft support often.

Azure setup is pretty straightforward and we mostly handle it in-house. However, it depends upon the complexity of the use case, how we are deploying, and the kind of application we are building. The build and deployment times depend on how we structure our packaging. 

Azure is expensive, but that depends upon who you ask. It probably wouldn't be considered a significant expense for a large corporation, but it's costly for smaller enterprises or startups.

Pricing is one area where Azure has room for improvement. There should be some due consideration. Azure has solved some issues with pricing from the development team's standpoint, but it is still quite costly. They should also offer a trial period for the individual platform solutions. I think that would be pretty handy for the developers.

I rate Azure eight out of 10. I would recommend it. I don't see any challenges from a technology standpoint.

Azure is a big world with potential things that we have to check and learn. We have Azure as the data analytics, artificial intelligence, and much more. I work with technology like Microsoft, Symantec, and with Azure connectivity online, like SaaS.

We are integrators for AWS and Azure.

I don't know the exact number of users because we work with different customers. So one customer is only servicing one, another customer has probably 300, another customer has probably 500. We have different customers with a different number of users that use this technology.

With the Azure solution, you can get more value from your cloud investment no matter what your future goals are. It depends on your level of familiarity with the cloud you are using or with your computing. Azure helps you with every stage of the cloud. When you start using Azure, you don't even buy it. It's just a simple sign-in and a free account, and you get free services. It's a great way to get into that kind of technology. That's why I've been using this solution for almost eight years.

They have a feature from the network, the communication, so the firewall is the most communication that we can find when we try to work with the Azure platform. Perhaps it's our environment, and that not all the customers are familiar with how to work with cloud technologies. For that reason, it's the most communication that we can find. I am in the Azure service sales, and that is one of the features that can help you to stay informed and take any action in the area that you found a thing generated for.

It has a personalized dashboard for service issues. You can check the Azure service help, and you can find any issue that you have in your platform. It's a safe point to check when you have an issue, so you can manage the issue and learn how to track that issue, and you can more effectively execute plans that you have to scale or that you have to put in action using Azure bots.

They have free coursework that you can check on the website, and a free update that you can find for SQL server security. We are more familiar with Azure, so maybe we have to wait a couple of years to get more familiar with AWS.

Something that could be added to the solution is the use of deep learning, which is going to grow in the near future.

We are waiting for a new version, a new RFID for Azure Virtual Desktop AD 1, or Virtual Live Desktop AD 1. It really needs a whole new platform, because I think their platform has the best opportunity to offer features like HORIZONT.

I have been using this solution for eight years.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

My advice is to just read and keep in touch. The technology is something that I have to read about every day, keep in touch with, study, take courses, and take certifications. So, currently, the best advice I can give to anyone is to keep updated.

Every time you check online you can find a new feature from Azure. The world of Azure is so big, so there is plenty of information that you can find, check, and test.

We are resellers. We use Microsoft to provide a service to our customers.

We offer SaaS software for the marketplace. 

We offer SaaS software for the B2B marketplace and provide solutions to our customers through public cloud infrastructure.

We have yet to explore this solution and what it has to offer because we are still in the transformation phase from Amazon to Azure.

It could be more open to external solutions.

Integration with other ecosystems would be beneficial. During this transitional period, this is our primary concern. For example, when we offer solutions to our customers, we must connect to their IT ecosystem, which we are unable to do in some cases.

A good strategy would be to include a feature for integrating with external ecosystems.

We would also like to improve the security.

We switched from Amazon to Azure six months ago.

In the short time that we have been using this solution, it appears to be stable enough for our needs.

We work with 50 companies that use this solution on a daily basis.

We have no issues with the technical support. It's fine.

We needed to find someone who could help us. It depends on the support contract you have with Microsoft. 

The standard level of support was obviously insufficient for us, and we had to resort to a more advanced level of support for partners who had complex technical questions. This meant that there would be some additional support costs, but everything would be fine once you made that decision.

We use Auth0, which is an IAM-based solution.

We are using an identification solution provided by a cloud provider. We are based on Azure. We work with a Microsoft Azure infrastructure, and we use the solution provided by Microsoft to authenticate the users.

It is easy to install.

It took us a few months to deploy. I did not take a lot of time to move to Azure but moving to another infrastructure using microservice takes longer.

We are coming from a moderate approach to installation and going for a modular one that is based on microservices.

To be able to manage the microservices, we made some modifications.

The length of time it took to complete the implementation was primarily due to changes we made to the infrastructure that was required for our customers.

We have a dedicated team of ten people who will deploy and manage the infrastructure.

We have a separate Dev team for the application itself.

Customers pay for our software and use our solution as a service through monthly payments. They don't pay the licensing fee directly to Microsoft.

We provide a solution as a service to our customers. They pay us for our services, which are based on Microsoft.

We would recommend this solution to others who are considering using it.

I would rate Microsoft Azure an eight out of ten.