Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio Reviews

Our use cases  involve customer segmentation for targeted marketing, where I use machine learning to identify potential customers interested in a new product. Another is a recommendation system on our company website, where I use machine learning to suggest additional products to customers based on their browsing or purchase history. Lastly, there is pricing estimation, where I use machine learning to predict the price of an item or article.

The features of Azure Machine Learning Studio that I find most valuable depend on the type of model I'm working with. For integration, knowing halfway indicators is crucial to assess model performance. For classification models, the confusion matrix is important for evaluation, while for regression models, statistical tests like the provision statistics are valuable.

One area where Azure Machine Learning Studio could improve is its user interface structure. Simplifying the initial information presented upon first use could make it more accessible, especially for users with limited technical skills. Providing only essential information upfront would enhance the user experience and reduce complexity.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio for three years.

I would rate the stability of the solution at a six out of ten. Improving stability involves finding people with the right skills to handle problems that arise. While stability depends on how well the solution is installed, ongoing efforts are needed to address issues and refine the system. We are working step by step to identify and solve problems, but there's room to find more comprehensive solutions as they come up.

I would rate the scalability of Azure Machine Learning Studio at about a seven out of ten. While it offers high scalability, it can be challenging for less technical users and may encounter issues with defects and industrial licensing, particularly in logistics projects.

At our company, we use Azure Machine Learning Studio daily.

Before Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio, we used on-premises solutions. We made the switch to Azure Machine Learning and the cloud to modernize our projects and leverage the benefits of cloud computing.

I use Azure Machine Learning Studio for predictive modeling in my project. I follow a workflow that involves selecting data, preprocessing it, training models, and deploying them. The Studio's tools cover all these steps, making it convenient for me to build and deploy predictive models.

In a specific scenario, I used Azure Machine Learning Studio for data preprocessing by creating new variables. This involved tasks like transforming variable types or combining multiple variables to create new ones. Additionally, I employed cross-validation techniques, such as k-fold validation, to assess model performance and select appropriate metrics for evaluation.

The most important aspect of my machine learning projects is the quality of the data. It is crucial to determine whether the data can provide meaningful information relevant to the project's use case, regardless of the specific tools or features used.

The drag-and-drop interface of Azure Machine Learning Studio has greatly improved my workflow. It is easy to use and increases productivity by allowing quick experimentation and visualization of data pipelines. This feature enables me to iterate rapidly and efficiently, especially for small projects or presentations.

I would rate the performance of the solution at an eight out of ten for my team. However, our data volume is not the largest. While I believe our performance is strong, other companies might rate it lower due to different circumstances.

My advice for someone considering installing Azure Machine Learning Studio is that it is user-friendly, especially for technical users. You can easily upload data and analyze it with the examples provided. The drag-and-drop interface makes it intuitive, and upgrading to this tool for data analysis is a good idea.

Overall, I would rate Azure Machine Learning Studio as a nine out of ten.

We have data from our business, and we want to make AI models. The question is how we want to use those models in our business. That's what we're going to do next year.

The product is well organized. The thing is how we will get the models to work within our code. We have some suggestions there, but we want to gain more experience and be ready to answer that because we are currently working on this and don't have all the answers yet.

The tool is well organized. What I am very happy about is the ease of deploying new resources. You can easily create your pipeline within minutes.

One problem I experience is that switching between multiple accounts can be difficult. I don't think there are any major issues. Mostly, the biggest challenge is to identify business solutions to this. 

The tool should keep on updating new algorithms and not stay static. 

I have been working with the product for ten years. 

I rate Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio's stability as nine out of ten. 

I rate the solution's scalability a ten out of ten. I am the single user of Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio. 

We haven't had any experience with the tool's support because we didn't use it. We are mature developers and don't need it at this time. We don't have any complex business needs.

The tool's deployment time depends on the resource you will deploy. Some resources are deployed within minutes, while others may take more than 15-20 minutes. I have deployed mostly web applications, REST APIs, and databases.

We're trying to provide robust solutions to our customers, which previously involved multiple steps. Now, we're going to provide it in one step. That is our benefit because the customer will get a final solution, not a solution in steps. We will formalize and streamline them to align with our new solutions.

We pay only the Azure costs for what we use, which involves some subscription costs. But essentially, you pay for what you use. There are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We are trying to find some commercial value. I have learned how to use it, and we will integrate it into the project. That's our next goal.

I rate Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio a ten out of ten. If you want to use it, get the certifications, and then work on some projects to gain more experience.

We use Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio to generate predictive sales analytics and determine customer behavior.

Through the solution's customer data analysis, we conduct customer data experiments, test hypotheses, and develop sales strategies.

The solution is integrated with our Microsoft Azure tenant, and we don't have to go anywhere else outside the tenant. The solution's data pipelines are easier to configure, and the solution provides a range of tools and libraries we can access.

It would be great if the solution integrated Microsoft Copilot, its AI helper.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio for one year.

The solution's stability depends on the fragility of libraries and the availability of services. Sometimes, the demand is very high in the public cloud, and performance and availability issues have occurred.

I rate the solution a six out of ten for stability.

Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is a very scalable solution. Three people are using the solution in our organization.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for scalability.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

The solution’s deployment takes one hour.

There is a lack of certainty with the solution's pricing. The risk is the pricing is high without you necessarily knowing. The workload drives the solution's pricing. If you give it a lot to do, it will cost a lot of money. It's about committing to how much you want to pay for. You don't necessarily know what you'll get for the price level that you agree.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

Before choosing the solution, we evaluated Databricks. We chose Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio to get as close to the Microsoft pattern as possible. We have a Microsoft first policy, and therefore, unless there's a reason not to use Microsoft, we choose Microsoft.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio to other users. I would also ask users to compare the solution with Microsoft Fabric, which is a collection of components to put a workflow together end to end.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our projects. We're currently adopting it for a competitive, new initiative. We create a lot of products related to AI inside the organization as needed for business cases and different business deals. We use it for data extraction and language processing. 

They've been helpful with hands-on experience.

It's easy to use.

The deployment is fast.

The interface has been very good so far. 

It has good configurations. 

It's stable.

The solution scales well.

There have been issues with environmental creation. It can take a lot of time. The speed of deployment should be faster, as should testing. 

We've been using the solution for about six months. It is fairly new. 

It is a stable solution. It's reliable. I'd rate its stability ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. I'd rate it ten out of ten. 

We have 10 to 15 users as of now on the product.

We use it often. 

We can deploy the solution within ten minutes. 

There is a team that handles the deployment. 

We don't have to really worry about maintenance; we're still in the process of adoption.

Our team handles the deployment in-house. 

We are customers and end users.

We're using the latest version f the solution. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for sales forcasting and for creating a pipeline in Azure. We are publishing the pipeline from Azure DevOps, and through the AML endpoint so that the pipeline will run one after the other models. These predictions will be stored and we can visualize everything. 

The designer and notebooks are great. We like the pipelines we are able to deploy and the process is very simple.

The visualizations are great. It makes it very easy to understand which model is working and why.

The setup is simple. 

It is stable and reliable.

I have had no trouble scaling.

Technical support is good. 

The solution cannot connect to private block storage. It does not allow this connection, which is a pain point. The confidential data needs to be removed from the block, and that becomes a security issue. 

In Azure Databricks, how we are promoting the models could be easier. The UI in Daabricks is a bit easier. We'd like ML Studio to be streamlined. 

I've used the solution for about two and a half years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good. 

The solution can scale. I haven't used Azure Kubernetes services yet. However, I haven't had issues with scaling so far. 

We have around ten to 20 people on our project using the solution. Many users use it in our company - not just on my team.

I've reached out to technical support. They have SLAs in place that help us to troubleshoot issues. Even critical issues get sorted out quickly. We're using premium Microsoft technical support. 

We also use Databricks. In Databricks, there is no designer module to design pipelines. There are other features available. 

They do behave in the same way; however, in Databricks, I do need to do more configurations and a bit more work with it. Still, it allows me to connect to private blocks, which I cannot do in this product. It also requires me to run job clusters separately. 

Security-wise, Databricks is more secure. 

This is easy to deploy. I did not fid the process to be overly complex. 

The solution has a higher price. I'd rate it three out of ten in terms of affordability. 

I am an end user. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'm pretty happy with its capabilities. 

I usually order a machine for training my models. I build the machine myself to include various images for working with Python or IR. I upload my data and scripts to the cloud and run the training process.

I'm beginning to learn about Databricks, which is a framework that works on Azure, AWS, and GCP. It has more power than the Azure main infrastructure, so I'm starting to explore it for things such as training models. I like all the features that Azure's main infrastructure provides, so I don't have a preferred feature. I think many people will move to Azure Databricks in the future.

The price of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for almost three years.

I don't have much experience with production environments since they are usually managed by DevOps rather than me when I deploy my work. However, I believe the solution is stable.

The solution is really scalable.

Microsoft has great technical support, which is really beneficial.

The initial setup depends on the developer's knowledge of machine learning models as to whether it is easy or difficult. With a good understanding of these models, then we can get to work quickly in the environment. With 20 years of experience in IT, making applications on legacy platforms and non-web platforms, I have found that Azure has a very good implementation. The platform is so comprehensive that it doesn't matter what kind of work we do, we can find the tools needed to get the job done. In comparison to what I was doing five years ago, Azure is a great platform and I really enjoy working with it.

We should allocate up to 12 percent of our project time to deployment. Depending on the complexity of the solution, we should expect to spend more time on deployment.

Some of our implementations are in-house and others are not. 

The solution cost is high.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I began using Azure three months ago, connecting my local Visual Code environment with the actual environment. This was a major improvement for me, as I can now work and run experiments on my local computer. I'm really pleased with how comfortable I am using Azure on all platforms.

The solution requires a minimum of one developer for maintenance. We need a DevOps developer and the tech lead to define the scope of the problems to be solved. The tech lead will provide guidance and oversight, while the DevOps developer will be responsible for implementing the solutions.

I enjoy working and have no difficulty in recommending Azure Machine Learning Studio to others, however, I recognize that there are many implementations utilizing AWS. AWS is a formidable competitor, so it is essential to be familiar with both solutions. Unfortunately, I have missed out on opportunities because I am not situated in the US. The environment is excellent, however, the large American market and the companies therein rely heavily on our work. This requires me to stay apprised of current developments, such as the widespread adoption of AWS, and learn how to use alternative platforms.

In terms of what I found most valuable in Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio, I especially love the designer because you can just drag and drop items there and apply the logic that's already available with the designer. I love that I can use the libraries in Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio, so I don't have to search for the algorithms and all the relevant libraries because I can see them directly on the designer just by dragging and dropping. Though there's a bit of work during data cleansing, that's normal and can't be avoided. At least it's easy to find the relevant algorithm, apply that algorithm to the data, then get the desired output through Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio.

I also like the API feature of the solution which is readily available for me to expose the output to any consuming application, so that takes out a lot of headache. Otherwise, I have to have a developer who knows the API, and I have to have an API app, so all that is completely taken care of by the Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio designer. With the solution, I can concentrate on how to improve the data quality to get quality recommendations, so  this lets me concentrate on my job rather than focusing on the regular development of APIs or the pipelines, in particular, the data pipelines pulling the data from other sources. All the data is taken care of and you can also concentrate on other required auxiliary activities rather than just concentrating on machine learning.

As for the areas for improvement in Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio, I've provided feedback to Microsoft. My company is a Gold Partner of Microsoft, so I provided my feedback in another forum. Right now, it is the number of algorithms available in the designer that has to be improved, though I'm sure Microsoft does it regularly.

When you take a use case approach, Microsoft has done that in a lot of places, but not on the Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio designer. When I say use case basis, I meant recommending a product or recommending similar products, so if Microsoft can list out use cases and give me a template, it will save me a lot of time and a lot of work because I don't have to scratch my head on which algorithm is better, and I can go with what's recommended by Microsoft.

I'm sure that isn't a big task for the Microsoft team who must have seen thousands of use cases already, so out of that experience if the team can come up with a standard template, I'm sure it'll help a lot of organizations cut down on the development time, as well as going with the best industry-standard algorithms rather than experimenting with mine.

What I'd like to see in the next version of Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio, apart from the use case template, is the improvement of the availability of libraries. Microsoft should also upgrade the Python versions because the old version of Python is still supported and it takes time for Microsoft to upgrade the support for Python. The pace of upgrading Python versions of Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio and making those libraries available should be sped up or increased.

I've been working with Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio for nearly two years now.

Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is a stable solution. My company is already using it in production. At least customers use the recommendations from Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio in production, so the solution is quite stable, at least in cases developed by my company.

Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is a solution that's easy to scale. It's pretty easy because it is hosted on Kubernetes, and there is an option in the portal where I can simply move my plan from standard to enterprise. The solution also has an automatic scaling option available because it is on Kubernetes, so it can scale automatically. I'm seeing that it's quite scalable. This has nothing to do with availability because it just runs in the background, and it is not customer-facing, but the output is customer-facing, so availability is a different case, but in terms of scalability, Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is scalable.

The technical support team for Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio was pretty good, though I had to tailor the answers to my requirement, but would rate support a four out of five. Most of the questions my company had, more or less, the support team already experienced, so the team had answers readily available which means there wasn't a need to do a lot of R&D, so getting answers from technical support didn't take a lot of time.

In terms of setting up Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio, initially, when my company started, the documentation wasn't so good, but now it has improved. Provisioning the solution only takes a few clicks, so it's no big deal, but setting up the pipelines because no enterprise will have a single environment, you'll have to create multiple pre-production and end production environments, so moving my latest changes to the next environment was a bit of a challenge.

Many terminologies are now in the market such as DevSecOps, and MLOps, so that MLOps documentation was available initially, but it wasn't very explanatory, but now, there's a lot of improvement in the MLOps documentation and that will help me move and propagate my changes from one environment to another.

Microsoft has made improvements into the tutorials, especially on MLOps. Finding MLOps experts in the market was also very tough initially, so my company was trying to learn on the job and do it, so it took some thinking and time, but it's still good because you can learn on the job and do it, but you won't always have the luxury of time to learn it.

In terms of pricing, for any cloud solution, you should know the tricks of the trade and how to use it, otherwise, you'll end up paying a lot of money irrespective of the cloud provider, so at least for Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio pricing versus AWS, I would rate it three out of five, with one being the most expensive, and five being the cheapest. It could be cheaper, but you also have to be careful when choosing the plans, for example, consider the architecture and a lot of other factors before choosing your plan, if you don't want to end up paying more. If your cloud provider has an optimizer that seems to be available in every provider, that would keep alerting you in terms of resources not being used as much, then that would help you with budgeting.

We evaluated quite a lot of options. We compared Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio against Google Cloud and AWS solutions, and there were several others available in the market. I'm trying to recollect the names which we compared the solution with. We did the benchmarking, but we went with Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio because our clients and their data were on Azure, though that doesn't necessarily make you go with the solution. After all, you can pull the data from any other cloud as well. For our use case, however, we found many of the things were readily available and the learning curve for Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio compared to others was better and easier. We didn't have to search for experts in the market to hire them because we could have our in-house team learn and deliver the solution on the job.

Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is a cloud-native solution. It's completely cloud-based.

My company has eight users of Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio.

My rating for Microsoft Azure Machine Learning Studio is seven out of ten.

The use cases of this product are primarily for the BFSI; digitization and building machine learning models that provide recommendations for creating analytical insights from extracted data. We also do Jupyter Notebook authoring. We are partners with Microsoft and I'm a practice director.  

The product enables quick data preparation and data processing pipeline as well as modeling work and it's all part of Azure Machine Learning. It also gives us an idea of what machine learning model is good to use because the hyperparameter tuning is done automatically which saves us time and effort. 

Auto email and the studio are great features. 

It's not that easy to master the program, it requires some specific learning. If we want to extend the program to include inexperienced users, it can take some time for them to learn the solution. It would be nice if they added GPU solutions. Most of the solutions coming out now are video analytics or edge computing-based and Azure should have that focus.  

We haven't had any issues with stability. 

We haven't faced any challenges with scalability. If there are any issues, our Microsoft infract team pitches in but we haven't had any serious problems. We have around 25 to 30 customers accessing this solution. Maintenance is straightforward and doesn't require more than one person. 

Customer support is very good, they are prompt and helpful in solving problems. 

Positive

Our switch to AMLS was an organic development that came from the needs of our customers and was based on the quick time to develop and the pre-built machine learning models that the solution has.

The initial setup is straightforward with deployment time depending on the environment. It depends on how many machine learning models we need to develop, the type of resources, the different sources, data volumes, etc. 

We don't deal with licensing, that is something our customers are responsible for.  My understanding is that the cost is $50 for the digitization of 1,000 pages. I think it should be reduced to somewhere between $20 to $30 per 1,000 pages so that we can make a better offer to our customers. 

I believe Azure Machine Learning has a very good pre-built model which enables quick development of solutions, particularly text analytics and cognitive-based solutions. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

I use it for forecasting solutions, and building, deploying, and managing machine learning models.

One of the notable advantages is that it offers both a visual designer, which is user-friendly, and an advanced coding option. As designers, we have the flexibility to leverage end-to-end features without having to code everything manually. Additionally, the platform provides convenient options for managing email operations. I appreciate the extensible AI feature; it effortlessly generates a report even in the absence of explicit report instructions.

There's room for improvement in terms of binding the integration with Azure DevOps. I find the process somewhat intricate, especially when connecting to the issue-tracking system. Numerous steps and configurations need to be set up before effectively utilizing Azure DevOps. When it comes to the Home Office Machine Learning suite, I believe it would be more beneficial if there were shared capabilities for internet projects.

I have been working with it for one year.

The stability is impeccable. I would rate it ten out of ten.

I would rate its scalability capabilities nine out of ten. Ten users utilize it on a daily basis.

I'm dissatisfied with the technical support; they failed to offer the correct solution. I would rate their expertise four out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was fairly straightforward. I would rate it seven out of ten.

The deployment was completed within a week by following the guidebook. The in-house implementation was done by one individual. Maintenance is handled by a single individual who monitors the logs.

Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

We use the solution to develop prompt flows.

The solution facilitates our production. Instead of running a lot of hard code, I just put my prompt flow in Machine Learning Studio, which takes care of the job.

The product must improve its documentation.

I have been using the solution for six months.

I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten.

Five people use the product in our organization. I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten.

The deployment is quite easy. It takes a few minutes. I rate the ease of deployment a seven out of ten.

We have already implemented some pipelines on Azure, but it's not similar to what Machine Learning Studio offers. People who want to start using the product must read the box. Some things are not easy to implement. We are only using Azure. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.