Azure Monitor Reviews

We use this solution for recording the logs and generating dashboards using Azure broad view insights. It is a great solution.

The solution should have cross-connection or cross-communication between tech partners. For example, it should be able to read the logs in the database and GCP environment by enabling a couple of hooks to collect information from cloud vendors to Azure Insights.

We have been using this solution for two years.

It is a stable solution. 

Azure Monitor is scalable, and we have not encountered any issues.

We have used Microsoft support for one or two usages regarding our area integrations. We already have some education with Microsoft Azure, and I believe a couple of engineers from Microsoft work on the technical support.

It is a move-in powerful feature compared to other market-leading tools. It has the capability to not only monitor your applications but also deliver dashboards. We can pinpoint different areas for improvement and it provides the ability to identify precisely what dash metrics are failing. It is introspective on contextual logging and delivers good dashboards. This helps senior management manage, alert, debug and look at operational insights.

I use Azure Monitors and Azure monitoring to monitor our applications.

It is used for balancing how your servers are working and how your servers are responding to the end user in the form of your inputs and output responses, your gate input responses and post request, and how your server is working about the workload, et cetera. We can monitor all of this by using Azure monitoring tools. There are some application insights also that we can use to put in more detailed metrics as related to the logs and the failure of the servers, and downtime, et cetera.

We like the monitoring. We can look for the downtimes and look at the log to see whenever there is a crash and all the information around it.

It's very straightforward to set up.

The solution is stable.

You can scale the product.

The pricing is less than Dynatrace.

They need to work with other cloud providers - not just Azure. We'd like them to work with clouds such as GCP, AWS, and Alibaba, for example. 

I've used the solution for quite a long while, however, recently we moved from on-premise to the cloud. 

It's quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution is scalable.

I've never used technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be. 

We are moving our applications to Azure Web Apps.

Earlier we used Dynatrace, however, it was quite costly.

The solution is very straightforward. It's very easy to implement. 

We can use different services by Azure, such as virtual machines or Web Apps. These are all quite frequently deployed and it's not difficult. 

We handle the initial setup in-house. 

I'm not concerned about the pricing. Actually that is handled by a different team.

It is a pay-as-you-go service. We pay as needed.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. A centralized team handles that aspect.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate the product eight out of ten.

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.

My client used Azure Monitor to monitor the environment in Azure.

The feature that I found most valuable in Azure Monitor is its monitoring abilities. With Azure Monitor, you are able to monitor all of your cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard and create solution-specific alerts that can trigger an email to the team responsible for that specific solution.

The ability to customize is endless. The majority of the data used for creating alerts does not require any agent installed, like so many other monitoring tools.

Azure Monitor is a monitoring solution that you should not miss out on the second you move workflows, solutions, infrastructure, and much more onto the cloud.

Azure Monitor is a complex product because you can use it to monitor different things, and that could be an area for improvement. Having templates by Microsoft added to it is another area for improvement.

What I'd like to be added in the next release of Azure Monitor is an overview of best practices from Microsoft and what they'd recommend users to monitor.

Assigning an alert is another feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution. Currently, you can't assign an alert to anyone, if a server crashed and you need to assign that alert to a specific team, it's not possible.

Azure Monitor is a stable solution.

Azure Monitor is a scalable solution.

The initial setup for Azure Monitor is quite complex. If I would rate its setup from one to five, with one being complex and five being straightforward, I would rate it 1.5.

Azure Monitor is not too expensive. On a scale of one to five, with one being expensive and five being affordable and competitively priced, I'm giving the solution a four.

I have not used the technical support for Azure Monitor.

Azure Monitor relies more on your ability to collect data and make the correct queries, while on-premises solutions rely on an agent and have many templates to choose from.

Azure Monitor is a nice monitoring tool, particularly if you have the skills. I'm rating it nine out of ten, I can't give it a ten because there's still something missing in it.

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. 

We're using Azure Monitor end connection as a hybrid model where it's integrated into Dynatrace. Azure Monitor monitors the infrastructure of Azure within our cloud environment. It doesn't give you any explanations or anything like that. It's just metrics, just data. We've integrated this data into Dynatrace so that the Dynatrace system and AI can give accurate response times, performance on metrics, and things like that. 

Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that.

There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. 

It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier.

We have been using Azure Monitor for nine months.

It's pretty stable.

I haven't scaled it. We're still building things.

I didn't personally have to deal with them. I did contact them once or twice earlier on. It was okay. It seemed like the usual Microsoft kind of approach. You submit an email and all of your information, and then you get a response back the next day. I'm sure it would be better if you had a support plan, but I don't know that specifically.

There needs to be a better process or method to deploy and configure it. Currently, there's a lot of manual intervention. It is not really an out-of-the-box solution.

If you want to get help, you will have to pay for it. Otherwise, you just do it on your own. The problem with doing it on your own is that if you're not so familiar with it, then you have to first familiarize yourself with Azure and setting up different alerts, etc. You really don't get a whole lot of these complexities with Dynatrace.

I wasn't a part of Azure deployment. My area of focus is Application Performance Monitoring, and I was involved with that. For the rest of the Azure environment, there were several teams.

There is Azure Monitor, and then there is Azure Application Insights, which is a component of Azure. Azure Application Insights does similar things as Dynatrace, but just not as good as Dynatrace. There's a lot of manual configuration for Azure Monitor and Application Insights, which isn't there with Dynatrace.

I would rate Azure Monitor an eight out of ten. 

We use Azure Data Factory mainly, and we build our own ETR using Databricks. We are a services company, so depending on the requirement for the customer, we use all of Azure's products. We work with infrastructure deployment and want to monitor the health of our deployments.

The metrics and alerts in Azure Monitor allow us to set thresholds on the metrics and receive alerts, providing a good facility for monitoring.

Azure Monitor has metrics and alerts capabilities. It allows you to set thresholds on the metrics and receive alerts. This is an important feature for monitoring.

Azure Monitor could improve by adding capabilities for data observability and integrating more tightly with their data platform components.

I have been familiar with Azure Monitor for the last three to four years.

The technical support by Microsoft Azure is good, however, there is room for improvement in their overall competence.

Neutral

Previously, we used open-source tools before adopting Azure Monitor.

Using Azure Monitor is less of a hassle for existing Azure customers than procuring another product, even if the cost may be slightly higher. Avoiding additional bureaucracy is also easier when using Azure Monitor as part of the existing Azure suite.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.