Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

I am using Microsoft Azure App Service for running web applications.

The most beneficial aspect of Microsoft Azure App Service is its automated DevOps deployment, which includes configurations that ensure secure connections to key vault and database resources.

Extended uptime and improved speed would be beneficial for both development purposes and the free tier of the service. Currently, the uptime is limited to a few hours per day, which could be increased to provide more continuous and efficient usage.

I used Microsoft Azure App Service within the last 12 months.

Microsoft Azure App Service is highly stable.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.

The solution is scalable. 

We have approximately 20 people using the solution.

Microsoft Azure App Service offers multiple tiers that can be scaled out as per the specific requirements of the developer or team. Choosing the appropriate tier depends on the performance and load requirements of the website.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

Often, the team responsible for supporting a particular solution may have biases towards it and may encourage customers to use it, even if it may not be the optimal solution for their needs. Additionally, the support attempt to upsell solutions that are not desired.

I rate the support of Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

I have previously used WebLogic, Tomcat, Red Hat, and JBoss. There are a lot of application servers, which we used to run on-premise. We switched from these solutions to a cloud offering. Many companies are moving to the cloud.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure App Service is straightforward and easy. It is helpful to read the documentation. It takes a few minutes to deploy.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

One person is able to do the deployment.

We received a return on investment using  Microsoft Azure App Service.

As you move up the license tiers it becomes expensive.

I rate the price of  Microsoft Azure App Service a seven out of ten.

The solution requires one person for maintenance. Some of their responsibilities are updating the code and deploying the web app.

If you need to quickly set up and run an application without incurring any setup costs, this is the way to go. With this approach, you don't need to install or run anything on-premise. Simply create the application and start using it - the setup process is straightforward and fast.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.

We are using Microsoft Azure App Service in systems, such as government, credit loan, and app services.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure App Service is autoscaling and resource grouping. Additionally, the integration works well, it is easy to do.

Microsoft Azure App Service has a lot of complexity because there are a lot of options and functionality. It is simple to become confused, there are many technical elements to learn before you can utilize the solution. If they could make the solution easier to use it would be a benefit. 

In an upcoming release, mobile device usage could be a better experience.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for approximately five years.

The solution is highly stable.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.

With all the deployments we have in many companies there are only a few users that use it.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure App Service a nine out of ten.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure App Service is simple. 

The price of the support could improve. It is expensive.

I rate the price from Microsoft Azure App Service a one out of ten.

I did compare this solution with Amazon AWS and Amazon and Amazon EC2. They are all comparable solutions. What stands out the most in Microsoft Azure App Service is the speed. Selecting the best solution will also depend on the use case.

We utilize Azure Cosmos DB, which has a distinct architecture compared to other services. Initially, we were concerned about the high costs associated with it since every document incurs charges due to Azure's containerization of every collection. However, we discovered that running it in a single container eliminates this cost.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is hosting web applications which can be Linux or Windows-based. Microsoft Azure App Service is a multi-tenant environment where customers can load and run the application. It is similar to a platform as a service.

The most valuable feature is the ability to scale the application. It scales dynamically and comes with two features. If you can find a fabulous feature in the Azure Functions app, it allows you to scale, so you don't need to worry about manually scaling or setting any scaling parameters. Then it automatically does the scaling on its own.

The other feature comes with VNet integration. So we can connect the Microsoft Azure App Service to a VNet so that it can privately communicate with other resources within Azure with a private IP. It also comes with the CDN feature, which can automatically load in some of your configuration files and use it instead of going back to storage to pick that up. It also has awesome features like backup, so you don't need to set up a recovery service, as it automatically does that. So you can back up the existing state of your application in case of any loss. In a nutshell, it has dynamic tools.

The outbound connectivity is not great but can be improved because, on virtual machines, the Microsoft Azure App Service uses four or five outbound IPs. So basically, if you want to communicate with an external source, you can use outbound IPs. For example, you must whitelist the outbound IP when communicating with an SQL database externally. However, because it's a multi-tenant environment and other customer applications are being shared on a skills tab, there are always limitations in the smart port. So each customer has a particular allocated smart port, which they should exhaust. It helps to work with the code. Regardless of features like a firewall where they have a hub and an environment they have features like a front door which can increase the smart port's limits to about 64,000. Hence, it will be good to have one IP without needing to add any other infrastructure.

Additionally, they can improve scaling the typical environment in terms of scalability. I believe the limit for the multi-tenant environment is about 20 to 30 maximum on the PV3. So if they can increase that, other than having these significant scaling limits for the Microsoft Azure App Service environment, which is about 200, that will also help.

Also, dedicating one outbound IP for App Service will go a long way.

We have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

They have a good support team. We don't think the front-end support is of concern because the front end has to talk to the internal respective application engineering team. Sometimes the core platform issues may take about two months or more. They can answer your queries, and they can help you do investigations.

Additionally, depending on your support package, if you have a premium plan, you get the best because you have support engineers who are intelligent. But you get different services with the pro-direct support plan. There's miscommunication between the front end and the application engineering team. I think that's something that they need to improve. On a premium plan, you get excellent support. I rate support for pro-direct a six out of ten and premium support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. You can set it up through the portal, a template, or Terraform. It integrates with other features like Docker so if you have your image in Docker Hub or ECR, you can select the image, and it pulls those images in and runs your application.

It has many features, and other deployment methods like Bitbucket, FTP, DevOps, and GitLab can integrate these things into Microsoft Azure App Service. It is easy to set up because you don't need to start building servers. We also don't need to complete any maintenance. 

The price of this solution is competitive. It works as an App Service plan so you can have multiple App Services that are part of a plan. So, for example, you can have about 10 App Services in an App Service plan. It's like a VM, where you have different applications running and you are not charged for all of the applications. However, you are being charged for the plan, so I think it's worth having that setup. At the same time, you need to plan how your costs will be and their ranges of variations. As we call it, SKU is where you can easily factor in so it is okay in terms of price.

One of the best products is the Functions app, which comes with serverless computing in the sense that it gives you about a million transactions for free every month. That is one of the cheapest. So you don't need to worry about how long your function triggers, just that if it scales more than that and performs more transactions, you get charged for it. The exact cost depends on the SKUs.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is for hosting web apps so people can deploy this application and host it on an app service.

We have found the scalability feature most valuable. When you host an application on Microsoft Azure App Service and have a lot of users, there are times that there will be high traffic. High traffic is when many people try to access the Microsoft Azure App Service simultaneously. So Microsoft Azure App Service can scale up to meet the demand of those trying to access it. It has been at approximately 98% availability, and if any maintenance is required, it will notify you. You can find an alternative solution and use multiple instances to mitigate the downtime.

For now, I don't think there are any improvements to highlight.

We have been using this solution for approximately a year and a half.

We have had a fun experience with customer service and support, but sometimes customer service and support can be challenging. However, all the challenges we face are related to technology.

There are two options for setting up the CLI shop and the portal. In terms of the portal, you can easily create an app service from the Azure portal. Some people are comfortable using the CLI shop, and some don't like going to the portal and creating the app service. I believe Azure did very well in that aspect.

The pricing is quite fair because of its scalability. Before you choose the type of plan you want, you should look at the workloads that the apps have and what your organization needs. For example, if you have minimal traffic, you can use the basic plan. There's a plan for every type of workload which determines the subscription cost.

I rate this solution nine out of ten. The solution is good. If somebody is considering using Microsoft Azure App Service, it is the best because it's easy to use, and there's a plan for every type of workload. Some features can give you certificates for the domain. If you already have an existing domain, you can bring it in to do it from Azure. Additionally, you can buy your domain and bind it to Azure, but if you already have an existing third-party domain, you can also use it with Azure.

One use case was to host the Azure Bot logic code. The Bot logic was hosted on an App Service instance. The other use case was a POC where we were lifting and shifting a monolithic application, a .NET monolithic application, onto the cloud.

The most valuable feature is that it's an ideal solution when it comes to lifting and shifting monolithic applications from on-premises to Azure Cloud. It allows for a quick shift into the cloud without having to analyze and design very specific infrastructure and services for monolithic applications hosted primarily on-premises. Let's say that the team does not want to really redesign monoliths in a microservices-based application and that they want to make a quick move towards adopting the cloud tech stack. Then, Microsoft Azure App Service is probably the best option.

In terms of room for improvement, ease of deployment would be an area that needs some focus. Azure does provide out-of-the-box deployment features, but I found that deploying to an App Service instance can be better in terms of more tools that could be available to perform a deployment.

I've been using this solution since 2020.

It is deployed on a virtual network on Azure.

It is stable, but it really depends on the workload that is being shifted and the base service plan that is selected. Because though it is a platform as a service, you do have the option to design a service plan that is adequate for your applications, performance needs, and overall traffic that hits your applications. In terms of it being a platform-as-a-service feature, it is quite stable.

It is scalable. The user base for the Bot service application was about 400 to 500 users worldwide.

The technical support is average, and I would give them a six out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy and can be done quickly depending on the number of applications being deployed. A single application should not take more than a couple of minutes to deploy.

The cost depends on the App Service plan that you choose. There are a number of tiers available.

If you have a standard enterprise application, for example, for the sake of simplicity, a single server with 50 requests per second, trying to do a lift and shift to App Service is probably a good idea. Bot framework solutions generally tend to use App Service for custom Bot logic, for hosting the custom Bots and the custom logic for Bots. App Service is probably a bit easier in terms of implementation compared to that of other options.

However, for high performance applications that have a heavy load on them and are expected to perform at a certain level of response time, a pure lift and shift to App Service will not work well. You would probably need to choose a higher tier of App Service with a good App Service plan with a certain number of underlying host servers that are servicing it.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure App Service at six on a scale from one to ten.

We use this solution in a very large number of areas, such as for functional apps, web apps, to trigger HTTP requests, for web API integration. This solution has a vast array of features.

The feature I find most valuable is the 'Diagnose and Solve problem' function. This not only allows us to fix a problem, but also to generate analytics on why the issue occurred.

I also find the application insight feature to be essential for use in our production environment.

I would like to see some improvement in the UI/UX design, to make navigation of this solution more user friendly. For example, it could contain more explicit information on each of the features.

There should also be some development on the architectural flow of this product, to show application dependencies across the network. This would help with fixing issues that may impact other areas.

We have been using this solution for four years.

We have found this to be a fairly stable solution so far.

This is an easily scalable solution.

The technical support for this product is very good, with SLA's provided for when issues are raised. There is also a lot of online support available through the Microsoft community pages, forums, and downloadable guides.

Positive

The initial setup of this solution isn't complex, but it is time consuming. There is a lot of documentation to go through before implementing this solution, to ensure that it is fit for purpose once deployed.

The pricing for this solution is set in tiers, with the overall cost depending on the features that are required. I would advise organizations to have a detailed look at the functions they need, to ensure that they are in the correct pricing tier.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have used App Services to integrate a lot of solutions, to bring content from a different domain or maybe a different data source. 

We were using a lot of Microsoft Azure services to build. We were also leveraged to deploy non-SAP solutions like Python Machine Learning IOTs, using these App Services to bring solutions into SAP.

We were doing one POC for one of the last customers where we had to integrate mobile solutions and IoT. We were using App Services to build those IOT components, retrieve data, and integrate with SAP.

We were using some temperature readings for our supply chain logistics company. Once we read temperatures, we'll push it to the App Service, and App Service will internally push it to the digital twins. From there, we get the events and consume those events into a function, and then whatever the functions read will be pushed into the DB.

The best feature is the latency is significantly less. The functions which are provided in this App Services app work very fast, and there are no latencies that we see. The realistic data allow us to configure analytics on top of it, and it is very fast.

It is easy to set up.

The cost is reasonable.

We've found the product to be stable. 

Recently, we have used some scheduling and event management. From an IoT use case perspective, we're all good, however, we should have additional plugins.

We started using the solution in 2021.

It is stable so far. We have not received any challenges during our implementation. 

Azure was very fast in doing scalability from a user management perspective. Whenever you add a new user, it automatically aligns, and then the license gets adjusted automatically.

We have a few thousand users. Pretty much everyone uses it. 

We began using the solution due to the fact that digitalization is becoming normal now, and we have to integrate a lot of non-SAP solutions. App Services gives a lot of flexibility for us to bring data from any data source and push it to enterprise services, which we want to consume.

The solution is easy to set up. It's very easy. it's not complex at all. 

It only takes about a week to deploy a bare-bones product. To have an end-to-end solution, it only takes 20 to 30 days. 

From a licensing cost perspective, Microsoft Azure, compared to other cloud services providers, is competitive and reasonable from an implementation point of view.

The Azure license is based on usage. It's pay as you. We pay for what we consume. 

We are partners with Microsoft.

I'm not sure what version of the solution we're using. 

I'd advise users to try out the product.

I would rate it eight out of ten. It is flexible and easy to use. Configuring and deploying are also quick and easy. 

We’ve used the solution for deploying several applications. We use it for testing purposes. It’s used for testing web apps and developing some proof of concepts.

It's easy to deploy web apps through Common Line or Visual Studio Editor, which is useful as I can deploy container solutions.

It is scalable.

The solution overall is very good.

The implementation process is easy. It’s also fast.

It’s stable.

There are no issues with the solution. I’m happy with the product.

We’ve been using the solution for three years.

It's a stable solution if you select the standard sizing. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze.

The solution can scale well.

Technical support is rapid and extremely helpful. Whenever I have questions, they provide feedback very fast.

The product is straightforward to set up and quick to deploy.

I’m using the free version of the solution. I do not pay for licensing.

I’m using the latest version of the solution. I’m an end-user of the product.

I’d recommend this solution. You can start to use App Service immediately. You only need to have a subscription. If you would like to test App Service, then you only need to deploy in a free sizing version, and you can get going.

I’d rate the solution ten out of ten.

We use Azure App Service for both app development and deployment. Sometimes, we use it for testing, and we also have several products running in production on the platform.

One valuable feature of Azure App Service for us is its integration with Azure DevOps, which we heavily rely on in our development process. It is user-friendly once you understand how it works, although getting to that point can be a challenge. Additionally, Azure App Service offers excellent integration with Microsoft infrastructure and developer solutions.

In terms of improvement, the technical support could be better.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure App Service for almost six years.

We have faced reliability issues due to configuration issues on our end, not the technology itself. While Azure App Service provides information on problems, sometimes it is not sufficient, and resolving issues can be time-consuming.

In terms of scalability, we haven't encountered any issues with Azure App Service. 

The support I have received, mostly from individuals in India, hasn't been very helpful. They tend to send long emails with lots of links, which often don't directly address my specific issue. This can be frustrating and time-consuming, as it doesn't efficiently solve the problem at hand. Azure App Service might offer better support with higher-priced plans, but those might be too costly for smaller external companies like ours. I would rate the support as a three out of ten.

Negative

I have used SolarWinds along with Azure App Service for web application development.

Installing Azure App Service has been challenging at times. Whether deploying through Azure pipelines or directly from Azure, the process can be time-consuming due to configuration complexities. We have encountered instances where resolving issues took days or even two to three weeks to complete the deployment.

Microsoft offers various pricing plans and licensing options, which initially seem reasonable, especially for small companies like ours. However, as we grow, the pricing can become less flexible. We pay for Azure monthly, while some licenses, like the Action Pack, are paid annually.

Overall, I would rate Azure App Service as an eight out of ten. It is a good tool but could be more user-friendly.

One of our reasons to use the product is its cloud service. Our usage is mainly on the cloud and we like the benefits that we can get from the cloud. You can easily do the literal shift of your application easily. You can jump into the cloud very quickly. 

If you are not using the product properly, then it can cost you a lot of money. Hence, you need to make sure that you choose the services wisely. You need to make sure that you have a budget and have some alerts associated with it. The tool's cost can easily go high if you don't consider these things properly. You need to review your existing subscription.  

I have been working with the product for more than two years. 

The product is quite stable. 

The solution is scalable both vertical and horizontal. You should be specific about the Linux or Windows environment. 

The tool's support is good. Sometimes, you need to make sure of the people who are supporting you. Microsoft support can get delayed easily. You need to be in regular contact with the account managers of your account on the Microsoft side so that you can escalate things. Typically, we don't use support and use it only for production issues which require urgency. 

Neutral

The tool's setup is easy since there is a lot of free documentation from Microsoft available. You need to be part of the training as well. The tool's deployment is super quick and gets completed in five minutes. 

The solution is worth its money. 

I would rate the product's pricing a five out of ten and is subscription based. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. I would advise people to go with the trial version since you can use most of the functionality in the trial version.