Microsoft Azure Reviews

I mainly use Azure for data analytics and implementation.

The best feature is it's easy to integrate with other Microsoft solutions.

Compared with other cloud solution providers, Microsoft is not good at local support.

I've been working with Azure for almost five years.

Azure's stability is ok, but there are issues sometimes. I'd rate its stability as seven or eight out of ten.

Azure is scalable.

Microsoft isn't good at local support.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Azure is cheaper than solutions from other cloud vendors like AWS or Google.

I prefer Azure to AWS or Google because it's cheaper and its ecosystem is better integrated. I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

Microsoft Azure is essentially an IaaS solution, we use the DMs and everything in that.

Microsoft Azure is primarily an Infrastructure as a Service product.

We are satisfied with this solution.

We have not had any issues with the performance, or the stability.

It's more user-friendly than AWS.

I have only been using it for a month, so I'm still learning about the various options that are available. They have a lot of options, but I won't be able to comment unless I use it or explore it properly. Everything is fine, but I'm still learning.

The license price could be lower. If there is anything else, I will not know unless I explore.

I have just started working with Microsoft Azure. I have been working with it for one month. I got my trial subscription and started working with it.

Microsoft Azure is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure is a scalable product.

I use it for my own personal use.

I contacted technical support a while ago. They were also helpful. I only had one question about the file quarantine and file locking options, and they were very helpful. They have a support team that responds fairly well.

For remote work, we have been using Microsoft Teams.

We are also using McAfee Proxy, as well as Box.

We are also using Amazon AWS. 

I've only recently begun working with AWS. I started but then stopped because I didn't like the user interface. 

AWS is used and preferred by a large number of customers, but I am more comfortable working on Azure rather than AWS. This is a personal preference.

The initial configuration is straightforward. We only need an email ID and we can sign up in a matter of minutes.

We can complete the installation on our own.

Pricing is determined by how much you can use and how much you want to use it.

It's not on a per-user basis; it's on a per subscription basis. It is dependent on how much you use. It has a metering system. If you use a service, you will have to pay for it. You do not have to pay if you do not use any of the services. That's how it works.

The licensing fees could be cheaper.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are considering using it.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a ten out of ten.

Most of our Customers do not want to have a single Cloud Service Provider (CSP) and have been adopting a Multi Cloud or a Hybrid Cloud scenario. We have addressed client requirements and have adopted CSP depending on the use case. We have worked with Azure and have provided niche solution such as Government Commercial Cloud, Healthcare Cloud etc.

We have deployed multiple solutions into Microsoft Azure. In most of the cases we augment our Application monitoring "in-house" developed tool to monitor things like garbage collection, IIS queuing. If these attributes and parameters could be included as part of the Azure Monitor it would be great.

Using Microsoft Azure for approximately three years.

Microsoft Azure is a stable solution.

The design of Microsoft Azure is for it to be scalable and it is scalable.

I have not contacted the support from Microsoft Azure. We support the solution ourselves. We have Azure architect experts who are on our payroll. We have experience since we have been working on the stack for almost two and a half years.

Neutral

We use all different types of CSP, such as Amazon AWS and Google Cloud.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure is complex.

I rate the initial setup of Microsoft Azure a four out of five.

Yes. We have a in-house Cloud CoE, that ensures the changes introduced by CSPs i.e. update on the new services that are provisioned as well as the periodic commercials impacts for the Services being consumed across all CSPs - Amazon AWS and Google Cloud

All the cloud service providers(CSP) are more or less have the same services. The use case for the cloud would need the sustainment of tiering storage. We don't see a big discrepancy when it comes to Microsoft Azure, but there are pros and cons.

I rate Microsoft Azure a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is mostly for deploying services where we do not have the local infrastructure like hardware, or where it's not necessary for us to have the knowledge about how to set up a certain service. We just want to use it without concerns regarding running the service, backup, availability, etc. That's the reason we pay Microsoft the money for its Azure services, so we can just go ahead and use the product. Some of the services they've rendered have become business critical for the company, so we're using the solution on a daily basis. 

I like the reliability of the solution and the ease of provisional services which can be a click and go. I also like the broad diversity of services that are being offered.

I find that in many cases it's more expensive than AWS, and for no good reason. The pricing itself is also quite difficult to comprehend, it's not easy to know the total cost and not worth checking the calculator because the outcome is going to be totally different anyhow. I also find it difficult that they are specific to x86 and x64 machines, I haven't found any ARM-based virtual machine images that I could run in my IP test lab, which would be a great boost for productivity because I could run the internal pipeline in the cloud and would not have to divert to locally installed devices. 

If they want to be serious with IT devices then they should find a way of deploying ARM-based devices to Azure, to get more freedom of choice with virtual machines and services. It would be hardware virtual machine image offerings to other platforms, not only PC-based or x86-based. It would make my life much easier. 

I've been using this solution for four and a half years. 

There are some glitches but it's a pretty solid solution. 

It's a scalable solution. 

Overall, I'm quite satisfied with the technical support. There were different expectations about what I had understood from the description of the support offered and what the architects of Microsoft meant to deploy. Some of the documentation for Azure is sketchy enough to leave room for questions and that had to be sorted out with support, which is not a fault that the support guys should have to concern themselves with. If the documentation is not clear and the cloud device goes, then there's clearly room for improvement.

The start was far easier than we expected it to be, but the complexity caught up with us half a year later also. It got more complex as we went along. We carried out the deployment ourselves. I'm a very experienced administrator, I know a lot about concepts of data centers. I know how they work, I know how to set them up. This is just another data center, it's just that it's not mine.

We found it difficult to train our regular Windows admins to dive into Azure things, so it's important to get the right people or the project is doomed. There are too many people who don't really want to get to grips with the cloud. I would also suggest not starting from a fully regulated basis. We have our deployment fully integrated with Azure Active Directory, which can be quite a hindrance when it comes to just playing around with things. It's essential to give people developer accounts where they can just play around, break things, work through them, like a little lab. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the limitless possibilities of the infrastructure. 

The documentation is out of date. It needs to be improved and modernized. 

Technical support needs improvement. 

I would like to see more flexibility surrounding what framework you can use for machine learning model creation.

I've been using the solution for three years. 

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

The solution scales well. A company can expand it as necessary.

We have around 100 consultants using the solution. 

They do not seem to have enough technical support staff. Sometimes you have to contact them using email. You get the answer maybe three weeks after that email. It's available, however, it's not enough, and it's not very fast.

In terms of the initial implementation, how difficult or easy it is depends on the services. The most common deployments are pretty clear and it's pretty simple, however, in some cases, it's very difficult.

The deployments can be fast. For the simplest ones, five minutes is enough. However, sometimes when you are trying to use a specific service, for example, the cloud solution, it could take days or weeks just to get it available.

We have had a partner support us with the implementation. 

We pay a licensing fee on a yearly basis. I don't have details in terms of the exact costs. Sometimes there are extra costs here and there. 

We're a partner.

Inside the cloud, I have experience using different kinds of products like databases products virtual machines, etc.

I'd advise new users to prepare for certification. The most basic one is fine. Companies should preview the solution before they start any project.

I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Azure is entirely our current cloud computing product in which the team is engaged. We are using the stack for development and application logs, and audit perception from the application. We are using the log services.

The main benefit of Microsoft Azure is that it is cloud-based. We are using Microsoft Visual Studio for our code and it is tightly integrated with Microsoft Azure. Additionally, the solution is user-friendly.

The dashboard of Microsoft Azure could be better.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for approximately two years.

Microsoft Azure is very stable.

I have found the scalability of Microsoft Azure very good.

We have approximately 60 users using this solution, we have plans to increase usage to 100 users.

I have not contacted the support from Microsoft directly. However, we have a consultant from Microsoft providing us support when needed.

We have a six-person DevOps team that does the maintenance and support of Microsoft Azure.

The price of  Microsoft Azure is reasonable.

I would highly recommend this solution to others. There are still unexplored areas of this solution.

I rate Microsoft Azure an eight out of ten.

We, as consultants of Azure, have used the SQL storage accounts, Databricks for computing models, and Data Factory for ETLs. 

The Azure Portal has an advantage in terms of UX making buying resources or downgrading is really easier to understand. AWS has micro, smaller functionalities whereas Azure has more end-to-end focus which makes it easier saving you time and money.

The integration pipeline could be a bit more broad in terms of applications.

Additionally, some companies require third parties to develop on their cloud. it would be interesting to see if it would be possible to provide another company with restricted access to their analytical tech stack.

I have used the solution for the past three years.

The solution is stable.

There is potential for scalability but that becomes more complex the more packaged the product is.

I have never used support personally but I have heard that it is good.

The initial setup was straightforward - one fifth of the work in comparison to AWS. It took about three months in total.

My experience is in development and architecture of technology. This includes experience with cloud, cloud maintenance, and multi-cloud. I am certified in Azure Fundamentals. My company is a partner reseller of Microsoft Azure. In our organization, we have approximately 1000 people using this solution and we have plans to increase our usage in the future.

The product brings a lot of value to our business and customers.

The microservices and analytics of Azure are good areas that could be improved.

Microsoft Azure has technology compatible with OpenShift from backtrack, but I would like it if they could evaluate another vendor of technology of microservices like Rancher to integrate with.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for two years.

Azure stability is good.

Technical support is good. However, Microsoft provides support tools that you can refer to that usually resolve the issues before needing to contact support. 

The initial setup of Azure is complex. It took almost 6 months to deploy the solution.

We pay a monthly licensing cost.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a 10 out of 10.