Microsoft Azure Reviews

We use Microsoft Azure for different use cases. For example, we are hosting our corporate website on Azure. We are a software development company and we have hundreds of development and testing environments in Azure. Additionally, we use different Microsoft services, such as Office 365 and Azure Active Directory. A lot of our services are based on these technologies.

We are using Microsoft Azure because our organization uses a lot of Microsoft solutions. We have used Microsoft technology for a long time and we have internal engineers with great capability that understand the technology. This is why Azure is the best for us.

The quality of some components of Microsoft Azure is not that great. For example, Microsoft has not fixed issues in Microsoft Teams for many years. There are well-known issues that are submitted by customers two years ago and they still are not fixed.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for approximately four years.

Microsoft Azure is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have hundreds of users using this solution in my organization.

The technical support has been great.

We use Google GCP and AWS by Amazon.

The initial setup is not a problem it is similar to competitors, such as AWS.

The pricing of Microsoft Azure is not very flexible.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Azure an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure for our IDB. That is our primary use, but we also have a certain degree of MDM through Microsoft.

It does what it is supposed to do, and what we expected of it. That's the key benefit. Being cloud-based saves the provisioning aspect of an on-premises solution.

The support subscription models need improvement.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for a couple of years.

We are using the latest version.

Microsoft Azure is a stable solution.

As far as we have expanded it, it is scalable. It's a startup company, we haven't scaled it to a significant number of people yet.

We have between 100 and 150 people in our organization who use Microsoft Azure.

I don't think that we will expand our usage at the moment.

I have contacted technical support on one occasion. My biggest issue with the technical support of Microsoft is when we had an issue that was product-related and it was difficult to get support on the subscription level we were on. In order to try to get support, we were told that we needed to upgrade. It was quite frustrating that an issue with their product required an upgrade to get serviced when it was a failure that they were responsible for.

It's not a question of knowledge, the knowledge was there. Access to that knowledge and the subscription model they were trying to put in place was the issue.

I used to work for Oracle. My previous experience was with Oracle Enterprise Manager.

I wasn't present or involved at the time of installation. I came along later. I started with the company after that.

Licensing fees are paid monthly.

We are currently in the process of deploying Zabbix to cover our monitoring needs. We have used other monitoring products which come with certain components.

From my point of view, it would depend on the type of solution and everything they were trying to encompass. In our case, it made sense to go with Azure. I think that for other companies, I would recommend that it's a good solution, but that depends on what problem you are trying to solve. It also depends on what infrastructure is already in place, and whether you want to have a lot of disparate systems communicating, or whether you want to consolidate that to a specific vendor. But for the purposes of what we needed Azure to do, it does the job. However, we don't use all of the MS Apps functionality.

It does the job, but it doesn't wow me. I am pretty happy with it. I don't get overly excited about it, but I am not disappointed with it. I would rate Microsoft Azure a six out of ten.

We are customers of Microsoft and I'm the IT technical manager. 

The most valuable feature for me is the high level of availability and the 99% uptime of the system. I also appreciate the technical simplicity of the system in terms of implementation.

I'm currently based in the Philippines and the availability of services locally could be improved. Technically speaking, I'd like to see more flexibility in terms of storage or resource allocation. Resourcing is currently quite fixed so that if you want to move between level two and level three resources, or customize resources, you can't do that. The discrepancy in terms of costing is around $200. If they improved flexibility for selecting resources it would be easier for us to get the costing approved.

I've been using this solution for around two years. 

The solution is stable, one of the most reliable in the Philippines. The downside is that currently all the services are outside the country. Singapore and Hong Kong provide the closest service but we have laws that prohibit certain amounts of data residing in other countries. None of that affects stability. 

One of the key takes from using cloud services is scalability and flexibility. If a company hits some roadblocks financially, they can reduce infrastructure and also reduce what they use in the cloud lowering the cost. 

I've had several outages or major issues and I've had good experience with technical support. They resolved the problems in less than a day. The only downside is that in the Philippines you're dealing with the vendor and not Microsoft direct. I have two steps of support; if the vendor can't provide the support, then they escalate to Microsoft. 

The initial setup is quite simple. We currently have 20 users on the infrastructure side in addition to 20+ developers.

We have difficulty in getting the costing approved. We pay for a virtual machine and the resources currently implemented there, then we need a license from Microsoft Windows OS and the database itself. In our latest license purchase, the manager approved a monthly fee of around $2,000 for the resources we use. If you're going to the cloud, that's currently included in the cost and will be less if you have the software assurance from Microsoft; on-prem is more expensive.

The big takeaway on this product is the high availability of the system on cloud and reduction of on-prem costing. There are no concerns about the electrical doing some redundancy in between, cooling, purchasing, procurement of IT equipment. Instead of budgeting based on CAPEX, we're doing it from an OPEX point of view. One of the key takes for moving to the cloud is the cost. You can leverage with the cloud and let go of some things required to maintain a system on-prem, the kinds of things that alleviate some complexity in doing maintenance of the system. The solution is suitable for any size company. 

I highly recommend Microsoft Azure. Everyone knows Microsoft so the learning curve is easier. I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

It has multiple features that can be used from the start.

It is easy to use.

I would like to see support for the applications that are currently in place. Ideally, Microsoft Azure should be compatible with the applications that we are using in my environment.

I am not using Microsoft Azure, but I have been doing an assessment for the last five years.

I am using the latest version.

It's a stable product.

Microsoft Azure is a scalable solution.

I have not contacted technical support.

The installation is handled by another team. I was not involved in the installation of this solution.

As of now, there are no monthly or yearly subscription fees.

Definitely, I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

We don't use DevOps; we just use the Azure Cloud platform. The solution is primarily used for PaaS and FaaS.

The solution has been very stable.

We find the product to be scalable. 

The security network inside of the information on the network is very good.

Technical support, from what I understand, is quite helpful and we speak with them regularly.

There aren't really any issues with the product itself. For us, the problems are organizational and the processes inside the company, which uses Azure, aren't as clear. They need to define a good process and a good implementation strategy going forward. We only really have issues with what they want to do, and not the technology itself. Basically, the technology is not the problem. It is just the way we want to use it.

It would always be nice to have even more integration capabilities.

A company needs to have strong finance managers. It could cost a lot if you haven't got a finance function inside each company.

The installation process is complex. 

The pricing could always be better and a bit more standardized.

I've been using the solution for five years at this point. It's been a while. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. The performance is good. It's not buggy. there aren't glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The product has been very scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

At this time, I'm not sure exactly how many people are directly using the solution.

While I haven't personally used technical support, our company does have a technical account manager on the Azure side and we are coordinating each week to identify all the topics we need to address - including our disaster recovery plan, which is important to the company right now. 

We did not previously use a different solution before we chose to work with Azure. 

The installation process is not very straightforward. 

When you want to install with a higher level of security inside the infrastructure, nothing communicates. Therefore, engineering security and network engineers need to understand what they have to do exactly, and what the problem is. With Aure, there's a learning curve for installation. You need to work with it for at least one year before you get comfortable enough and are able to troubleshoot and configure everything relatively well.

The solution has the potential to be expensive if you as a company are not careful as to how you use it. 

I'm a customer and an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. For me, it's a perfect product and I enjoy its capabilities. 

I would recommend this solution to other users and organizations. 

I am a manager of a team and we will have approximately 18 applications that will be cloud-based using this solution.

One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Azure is the compatibility with all of our Windows applications and other Microsoft technologies.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for approximately one year.

The solution could improve the stability. However, this could be a configuration issue that we are not been trained.

There is good community support available.

I have previously used AWS and GCP.

Microsoft Azure is more expensive than other solutions, such as GCP. We have found that GCP offers more utilities at a very reasonable price. I think the reason we are having a discount is because of the bank contract we have.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate Microsoft Azure a seven out of ten.

We primarily use it for infrastructure and for some of its containers. It's very similar to AWS.

We moved to it as part of the initiative for the country to start using Azure services.

The solution offers many of the same features and has similar functionality to AWS.

The performance is good.

It's easy to use.

We find that it's stable. 

The solution scales quite well.

The solution is less mature than AWS. That said, it is catching up quickly.

The solution could always be cheaper. That way, it would be less expensive than AWS.

I've been dealing with the solution since 2016. It's been about five years or so. I've had some time to work with it a bit. 

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

We have found the scalability to be very good. If a company needs to expand, it can do so with ease. It's not a problem at all.

Technical support has been great. They are helpful and responsive. We are pleased with the level of attention we get if we need assistance. 

We have also used AWS. We use both of them right now and like them both. They are very similar tools. 

There isn't really an initial setup. it's on the cloud and subscription-based. 

The pricing is more or less the same as AWS. They are very competitive with each other. There isn't too much of a difference, price-wise. 

In our case, the solution doesn't have a license. It's subscription-only. However, you can buy your own license separately and install it on whatever system application you're using on Azure. This is the same in the case of AWS.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's a good solution with a lot of potential and we've been happy with its capabilities so far. 

Whether or not I would recommend it to other companies depends on the use case. If you have a specific use case for using the cloud in general, then likely it makes sense to go with Azure.

We primarily use the solution as a server for some applications. 

As a software data center, we can put some pretty cool applications running there.

The stability is very good. It's reliable. 

We have found the scalability to be good. 

The pricing is reasonable. It's not too expensive.

They develop so fast, it's hard to trace the technology. They have a lot of folders, for example, and it's hard to keep up with changes. 

The deployment was quite complex. It's not easy to implement. 

I've been using the solution for about a year or so. It hasn't been that long so far.

The stability of the product is very good. It doesn't have bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's been very reliable for the most part.

The solution scales well. If a company needs to scale it out, it can do so. It's not a problem at all. 

We haven't really used support so far. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The initial setup isn't exactly straightforward. The deployment is a complex process.

We're happy with the licensing pricing in general. It's not overly expensive. 

We have a business relationship with Microsoft.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been largely happy with its capabilities in general. 

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