Azure Monitor Reviews

Azure Monitor can be used to monitor on-prem servers. You can install the agent on a server on-premise and you can pull out whatever telemetry you want. Additionally, you can install it on servers that are on the public cloud. It's similar to hybrid solutions. However, it depends on the use case. If there's a server on-premise, you deploy the server in AWS or GCP. If the server is on Azure itself, then it plugs directly in which is a hybrid setup.

Azure Monitor can be used if you are trying to look for how all the applications are tied together, such as application mapping. It helps to know what ports are open, what services are running on certain servers as one. 

We are able to monitor CPU utilization for specific servers to determine if they are running specific types of workloads or high resource utilization type workloads. We use Azure Monitor to be able to see if the server gets to a certain threshold, such as 70 percent CPU utilization, then send an alert to the operation center or reliability center to go look at it. They could then expand or increase the CPU resource there to fix the issue. The tool is used for monitoring purposes.

Azure Monitor has helped our organization to have insights into issues and informs us before an issue becomes a very critical stage. It provides us a baseline on how to prevent serious issues in the future. You don't want it to get to 90 percent usage, if you catch it at 70 percent, it helps preserve the lifespan of that sever or allow your services to keep running efficiently or effectively. It keeps the availability of whatever service that you're running on that server, is in check. This is one of the most important parts of the service.

Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs.

Azure Monitor could improve the visualization aspect and integrate better with other third-party services.

I have been using Azure Monitor for approximately four years.

Azure Monitor is a stable solution.

The scalability of Azure Monitor is very good because it is on a public platform.

We have approximately 500 users using this solution. We are extensively using Azure Monitor and we are always adding to it.

The support we have received from Microsoft has been good. Depending on the issue you might be facing, they could respond within less than 24 hours during business hours.

The initial setup of Azure Monitor is straightforward. The process took us approximately one hour.

We did the implementation of Azure Monitor in-house.

The price of the solution is reasonable. 

I have evaluated Datadog before choosing Azure Monitor.

I rate Azure Monitor an eight out of ten.

I use the Azure Monitor in my company since it is a part of every solution we send to our customers. From a monitoring perspective, the use cases attached to the tool are enormous. Usually, my company uses it to monitor all Azure services that our customers use. My company also uses Azure Monitor if we want to monitor our customers' on-premises environment. In the case of any third-party cloud environment, my company suggests that customers have Azure Arc implemented in their environment. With it, they can monitor usage and monitoring while having one single dashboard for all their environments.

The solution's most valuable features are its ease of use and support for multiple environments. With the tool, the customer can have a single dashboard for all the environments.

The product should integrate well with other tools or clouds in the future, as it is one of the areas where the product currently has certain shortcomings.

I have experience with Azure Monitor.

It is a pretty stable solution.

It is a very scalable solution.

I am actively working with around 20 to 25 customers, and I know that the monitoring process is a part of every solution. As a part of our company's best practices, we provide a pitch associated with Azure Monitor to each and every customer.

The solution's technical support team is fast, knowledgeable, and customer-friendly.

I have experience with Azure Backup.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.

To have a simple monitoring system in place, I don't think it will take more than a day to enable it with the basic dashboards. If customers have a very unique requirement and need a dashboard of a specific type, then in such cases, it takes some time to develop the dashboard and publish the data. The deployment and time to create a dashboard can keep varying.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. The tool supports another cloud on-premises as well.

The product offers a pay-as-you-go model to users. The charges are to be paid according to the usage of the product.

Azure Monitor's integration capabilities make integrations very easy. The tool supports on-premises and other cloud environments.

I suggest that for each and every solution in place, one should have a monitoring tool because it is a crucial component of any solution.

I don't think that much about AI-related stuff when it comes to the tool since I don't think it would make much of a difference.

The value provided by the product stems from the fact that its customers can monitor their environment on a single dashboard and can look at areas like usage, triggers, and IOPS and CPU memory utilization. If there are any alerts, one can set certain triggers in the tool.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use Azure Monitor to monitor all the infrastructure that we have in the cloud.

Azure Monitor gives us the observability to check everything that we have in the cloud. We can set up some alarms to better manage what we have in the cloud.

Azure Monitor has a direct connection with the infrastructure in the cloud. It's like a built-in feature in public services.

It's really complex to retrieve or query the logs in Azure Monitor. They have another query language, and it's messy. It never works the first time. You have to check a little bit of queries. It's really hard to make queries in Azure Monitor.

I have been using Azure Monitor for five years.

We never had issues with the solution's stability. I rate Azure Monitor a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate Azure Monitor a nine out of ten for scalability. It's a cloud service, and we don't have any issues with it.

Azure Monitor's technical support overall is not perfect.

Neutral

We have seen a return on investment with Azure Monitor because it's a tool that's out of the box in the cloud.

Azure Monitor's pricing is tied to the services. The Azure Insight is a little bit expensive. It's a little expensive if you want to avail all the features.

I am using the on-cloud version of Azure Monitor.

If they are using the cloud, users can use Azure Monitor as the first tool because it already has integration with all the services. However, the query language that I use is really complex. So if users haven't built queries before, they will have several issues with it.

Even for technical people, they will have issues if they don't have experience using a query language. So if they are using Azure, they should use Azure Monitor initially. Later, they can improve the monitoring environment by applying some other tools.

Overall, I rate Azure Monitor a seven out of ten.

Azure Monitor helps monitor resources to get alerts on the usage or incident's generation. One can also use it to log the events in the event's hub or analyze them through Azure Log Analytics workspace and SIEM tools available to analyze your resource utilization.

The logs, analytics, alerts, and Azure Log Analytics workspace are valuable features in Azure Monitor.

Improvement is a continuous process, and Azure Monitor should keep improving the solution per the evolving trend and technologies. The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations.

I have been using the solution for more than four years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution but needs some improvement because of its policies.

Azure Monitor is useful at the enterprise level because it already has many resource monitoring solutions.

I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

Technical support is good and helpful as the services they provide us are based on the SLA we have with them.

The initial setup is easy. Those who opt for Azure Monitor should use it as per needs. For example, one can use it to monitor resources, administrative operations, or log events. The solution was deployed on the cloud.

My company is okay with the current pricing of the solution.

I recommend the product to those planning to use it. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for basically everything. For example, we use it for infrastructure, application and resource monitoring.

It has good troubleshooting features like automated troubleshooting. It is also a flexible solution and a low-cost product. It includes all the features that are required for multi-cloud and public cloud.

If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill. Sometimes, a lot of data is collected and stored, and we may get charged for that kind of storage which is an issue.

We have been using this solution for more than two years and are currently using the latest version. It is a cloud-based solution and deployed on public cloud. Our cloud provider is Microsoft Azure.

It's stable and constantly updated with new features and functionalities.

It is scalable and can scale to any size. Five people use this solution in our organization, primarily administrators, DevOps and security personnel. It requires about two to three people for deployment and maintenance. We have dedicated people from the monitoring team that do this. We plan to expand the number of users eventually.

The technical support is quite responsive. Microsoft support is pretty good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward and not complex. Deployment took a couple of days, and it was deployed in-house.

We have seen an ROI. It is a helpful tool and provides proactive information about the infrastructure.

We did not evaluate other options. Azure Monitor is one of the most non-native tools from Microsoft, and it's well-integrated.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. I recommend this solution to others. They should try Azure Monitor to see if it fits their requirements gradually. Additionally, there isn't a lot of upfront investment required to set it up.

The configuration could be improved in the next release because it takes a little time. However, they regularly update their scalability and features.

The most valuable features of Azure Monitor are the login analytics workspace and we can write any kind of custom queries in order to receive the data that is inserted into the login analytics workspace, diagnostic settings, et cetera.

Azure Monitor could improve network performance monitoring and make it more advanced.

I have been using Azure Monitor for more than two years.

I would rate the scalability of Azure Monitor a six out of ten.

It might be a case that there are certain services that are not available in other regions, but it's available in certain regions. You can face certain issues in one place and not another. You can't implement the same solution in all the regions. However, it might be a limitation of the cloud provider.

Technical support is good. In terms of supportability, Microsoft gives a good level of support if the company has a business account and an enterprise level of support. I believe that could be sufficient.

The initial setup of Azure Monitor was in the middle range of difficulty.

We did the implementation of this solution. We have automated everything using the infrastructure or provisioned.

There is a team required for the maintenance and support of the solution.

The cost of Azure Monitor application performance should be less expensive.

My advice would be if you can maintain the configurations that you have done, and if you have automated it, then Azure Monitor would be the best solution. The support is anyways good, but if you do not want to maintain the overhead of operations, then it should be outsourced.

I rate Azure Monitor a seven out of ten.

We use Azure Monitor as our alert system. We also use it for other types of measurement.

Currently, we use Power BI for our data visualization, and Azure Monitor is a very good fit with those cases. Another thing I like about the solution is that we can easily export the data, and the tool seamlessly works together with Datadog, though in terms of visualization in Azure Monitor, it's not as beautiful. It also doesn't have as many features as Power Bi, and this is why we were comparing it with Datadog.

We use Power BI because it has many features, so that's the main part we consider when selecting which tool to use. As for Datadog, people think of it as an application performance monitoring tool, rather than a data exporting tool, so they will still use Azure Monitor for exporting data. In some cases when the data analyst team needs some type of data, we can set that up for them on Azure Monitor, then consider using Datadog as a platform monitor.

Visualization in Azure Monitor needs improvement. Adding more features to it would also make the solution better.

My experience with Azure Monitor is six months.

Azure Monitor is a stable tool.

Azure Monitor is scalable, but the only downside to it is that it's not an out-of-the-box (OOTB) solution, so we cannot scale it to something outside of Azure ServiceNow. Currently, we use ServiceNow as a ticketing system, then use Datadog as the incident and alert system to trigger a ticket in ServiceNow, which we cannot do in Azure Monitor.

Azure Monitor is a low-priced solution.

We evaluated Datadog.

I was comparing Datadog and Azure Monitor. We had a POC for Datadog and we were trying to test it with the trial account for our current data solution in Azure, so we tried to measure the differences between the two solutions.

Now we use Azure Monitor for our alerts and other measurements, but not as an application performance monitoring tool, so we're considering Datadog for that purpose. They made the final decision to use Datadog for application performance monitoring.

We are not in the setup phase for Azure Monitor yet, because we're still doing a POC for visibility, so we still have no idea on whether it'll be complex or straightforward to set up the tool.

As we are very small, we have not had the chance to contact tech support for this solution, plus we have a dedicated team from Microsoft who handles our questions and issues. Currently, we don't have an issue on Azure Monitor, but have raised issues about other Microsoft solutions, and the Microsoft dedicated team have been very supportive.

My advice to others looking into implementing Azure Monitor is that if they're working on small-scale projects and their projects fit Azure, then Azure Monitor will be the best solution for them, particularly because it is low-priced. The tool is also good when building a solution, e.g. they won't need to explore outside of it, but if they're building a multi-cloud solution, and they have a mix of on-premises and cloud, my suggestion is for them to use Datadog.

I will rate Azure Monitor a seven out of ten, because this solution has two things that we don't like, e.g. it doesn't tell you what and how it happened. It just says: "Hey, that happened", and "Go and check it". This is the reason why I don't recommend Azure Monitor, e.g. it's not a very informative tool, so we don't use it for our root cause investigation.

We all use Microsoft in the company and we are customers of Azure Monitor. 

The product is very good for developers who want to integrate with Visual Studio. The solution provides an overview and high-level information on what hurdles to expect, and which endpoints have problems. 

If Azure Monitor wants to compete with other APM products in the industry, it has to stitch together the information and user flow. It also needs to provide all the information, as you get with Stock Trace, including details related to where the call came from and where the problem lies. That's what we'd like to see. With a solution like Dynatrace, you have a clear path and you know which calls were made before and after the problem, and where the issue occurred. That feature is lacking in Azure Monitor.

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution scales easily. It's not a big deal for Azure Monitor or any other APM product.

With Azure, implementation needs to be carried out in multiple places and you need to add other things to get the information and that's a tedious process. The Dynatrace setup is much easier. 

We made a comparison between Dynatrace on-prem and Azure Monitor as to what each solution offers. Azure is great for developers wanting to integrate with Visual Studio but when it provides Azure monitoring information on the dashboard there is a lot of Google analytics. When it comes to the application performance monitoring information, Azure gives you the overview or high-level information regarding issues and which endpoints have a problem, but it doesn't give you anything in-depth at the matter level.

It's important to know what your requirements are. If you're able to put best practices in place, and need to add SBKs and turn on profiling at the meter level to look into the details, then Azure Monitor can help. But if that's not something you need, Monitor might not be the best solution for you.

I rate the solution six out of 10.