Azure Container Registry Reviews

I currently deploy the application to facilitate CI/CD processes. I'm in the process of identifying and setting it up.

The continuity screen is a valuable feature. What I initially attempted was deploying an application directly into the company's infrastructure, specifically using the agent mobility infrastructure. However, I've now shifted my approach to utilizing a deposit fee. This change will enable me to conduct operational CI/CD testing.

I haven't delved deep into the details, and I cannot add anything as of now, but they can improve their scalability.

I have been working with Azure Container Registry for some time. 

It is stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

It is scalable. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We used Azure Container Registry because I discussed it with AWS, and while it's developer-friendly, in my research, I've noticed that Azure seems to be the more prominent solution in the market. This preference is due to its cost-effectiveness and the familiarity many have with the platform.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took one day.

I would rate the pricing a four out of ten.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We use Azure Container Registry to store our container images and the solution that we build for automation.

Azure Container Registry is an easy-to-install, easy-to-configure, and easy-to-deploy solution. The solution requires minimal overhead. To manage our own Azure Container Registry, we go to Azure, create a registry for us, and start publishing the images.

The way Azure RBAC is configured, our oldest access control, allows us to leverage that so that no one can push it, and we can use it in our solution. I used Azure Container Registry with my Azure Batch job to run the tagging solution.

I have been using Azure Container Registry for six months.

I rate Azure Container Registry ten out of ten for stability.

It is good enough to store all the images we need, and we can create as many container registries as we need.

I rate Azure Container Registry ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup is easy. On a scale from one to ten, where one is easy and ten is difficult, I rate the solution a one out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

You need to know how containers and docker images work when interacting with and installing Azure Container Registry.

Azure Container Registry can be deployed within two to three minutes.

I would recommend Azure Container Registry to other users because it has good security features.

Overall, I rate Azure Container Registry a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for image processing. We store and manage images. You can utilize the tools to recognize and organize images. For example, you have an image and gather two more images, each with different versions and tagging system. You should filter different variations of these images. Based on the algorithm, you can generate multiple images and then deploy them using Docker for testing or in AKS. We should know how to create and tag the image as part of microservices.

You can access the Azure Container Registry and store container images. You can also see the versioning history and other details about your images.

The solution could provide more integration.

I have been using Azure Container Registry for three years.

The GUI and interface are good, and we can navigate easily, but it has the typical Azure interface.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

You can buy a license and set up another Azure Container Registry when you want to have a more image repository.

We deploy to AKS as a service. Once deployed, people generally access Kubernetes indirectly through ACR. People don't directly access ACR. There is no problem with multiple users accessing ACR.

We have 1000 users using this solution.

The initial setup is straightforward. You should create an ACR and then configure communication between ACR and ACS.

Deployment takes a maximum of five minutes to push to ACR. Once the docker build is running and the Docker file is fine. Then, you must go to the login page here and put the image.

We have a one-year or two-year contract. We can extend it to a ten-year contract because it is a stable application. We have our images ready, with which we want to focus on the customer. We are using and maintaining them. ACR even supports some kind of complex work.

For this application, we have a team of technical people who are very available and are working on the application. We have two technical engineers. We currently don't have multiple capabilities, but we have already trained the team on ACR and Docker and are training some of them on AKS. They are now building applications.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

It's a container repository. It's like a Docker hub. With it, you can post the image of the container right there.

We can use these images in an ECR on Kubernetes, which has been quite useful to the organization. 

It's great for storing images on containers.

The solution has no areas that need improvement. 

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

I'd rate the stability zero out of ten. 

I'd rate the scalability zero out of ten.

Technical support has been very helpful and responsive. 

Positive

We have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

There isn't a specific version associated with the product.

I'd advise potential users to just give it a try.

I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

Our primary use case for the solution is storing Docker images on Azure Container Registry, and we deploy it on cloud.

The solution has helped minimize time by ensuring there is no vulnerability. If there is any vulnerability in the Docker image, the build fails and does not allow it to deploy to a production environment.

The scanning of Docker images is the most valuable feature.

It's not an open source, and we pay per hour to Microsoft Azure.

We have been using the solution for six months.

The solution is stable. I rate it as eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable, and ten users currently utilize it in our organization. I rate the scalability as eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward, and you have to take the service directly from Microsoft Azure Service from Azure Portal. A third party completed the deployment.

I rate the solution as eight out of ten. Regarding advice, if you create an account in Azure Portal, there is a $200 free credit for the new user, and they can use this $200 free credit and practice an ACRA case later.

I'm a cloud infrastructure consultant and we have a partnership with Azure.

We use ACR as a registry to store images and these images can be pulled by k8s do deploy applications 

I like that the solution has encryption and can make use of access keys for security, what they call panic identity. The feature provides secure duplication and also provides the option for service webhooks - it's very useful. Container Registry is a good, private platform. The quick start option gives a step-by-step guide on how to move images to and from your containers. The solution is user-friendly and there's plenty of documentation to help guide you through. It's great that images can be deployed from the Container Registry direct to an Azure Web application. From inside the Container Registry repositories, you can deploy images directly to a fresh web app. It reduces redundancy and the stress of leaving the current page of the Container Registry and going to a web app container to create a new web app. It can be done from the container registries dialogue space which I like. Replications is a very nice feature, although it requires you to upgrade to a premium SKU.

I don't have many issues with the solution but I would like it if the access keys could be stored in a master key vault. If they could be hashed and the value of that hash stored in the key vault so that it's not visible on the portal, would be a helpful addition. 

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution is stable. 

I haven't yet needed to scale significantly. I currently have about 8 repositories on the Container Registry and haven't had any problems. I think it's a scalable product.

All the steps involved with this product have been quite easy for me to deal with and I've never needed to make contact with customer service. 

Positive

The initial setup is very easy. I deploy for clients so it was easy for me to implement it within our organization. 

Pricing is flexible; you can choose the basic, standard, or a premium license based on your needs. I think it's quite flexible because you can choose the option that falls within your budget. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

I am a DevOps consultant. I provide the architecture, assessments, and optimization of the services that we use to build a better infrastructure, and other services.

We are basically using Azure Container Registry for a project that we have in the healthcare domain. There, we use the container registry and as well as Azure DevOps, apart from the Azure Cloud and the built release pipeline, along with this container registry and the self-hosted server. 

I would say that this allows us to build, store, and manage the container images and the artifact in the private registry that Azure provides. 

It's a managed container registry that we don't need to configure or set up within our premises. It's all in the cloud. The login and the portal id where we can store that information, and the containers. 

We can also see a list of images located in the repository. For example, I can pull any Docker image using the Docker command. I can then store that image within the repository, within this Docker Registry Container.

I don't have to go to the Docker Hub or any other hub. This is one of the safest private repositories over the cloud that I have, that I can use.

This is one of the most beneficial solutions to be used over the cloud.

One of the benefits of this solution is that it's private and secure. It's easy to use, it's fast, and it's scalable. 

We can have that OCA format that we can use and it's a multi-tenant service, which we use for the endpoint data that we have. 

We can automate container builds for testing and other purposes, and we can use the CLI (command-line interface) to interact with the registry. 

We can manage Windows and Linux containers within a single registry. We don't have to create multiple container registries, different images, and containers. 

These are the benefits of having the Container Registry and we can use the Webhook as well, for security purposes and for pushing the container image using the CI/CD pipeline. 

These are the benefits we get using the Container Registry.

This solution has multiple features and I can't really say that I can rely on, or that there is only one feature or one that I love more. 

The app services and the DC/OS and the KS, also the service tiers that they are providing, security using the logins, images, artifacts, and many more.

The task of pushing and deploying images that we use in the containers is very good.

It's very secure and it uses authentication.

Security, the deployment pipelines, and the developers are using the ACR task instead of using other third-party products.

It's difficult to find areas of improvement. I have always found it to be better than any CI/CD pipeline.

The deployment is an area that needs improvement, as it can take some time to deploy.

It's very stable because it has security integration as well.

It's integrated with the echo security, which helps the developmental production life cycle controls, in the container application that we use.

It's very efficient and stable to use.

This solution is scalable.

I'm not using it that extensively. I have a 40/50GB of data that I am storing using the container images. That hasn't cost me very much, I am using it in a very optimal way.

I have not contacted technical support. We haven't needed it yet.

Previously, I used open-source only. 

I never used the AWS (Amazon Web Services) providing the ECR, the elastic container Registry. It's a bit expensive compared to Azure. I am certified, but I haven't used that.

Cons of an open-source product are that it has limited security features, that I am looking for without replication. It doesn't have the access key features and the policies which are positive with ACR.

The initial setup is straightforward for me. It was not complex.

I didn't find it to be difficult in setting up the ACR with the Docker containers that we were using.

It took time to deploy this containerization and the application. For example, when creating the ACR and you click to deploy it and create the replication, it takes some time to create the replication.

I feel that It took more than thirty minutes to complete the deployment.

My initial strategy was to secure the images that we use for the microservices and the web services for production. I didn't want to include any other repository. I just wanted to have a secure ability instead of creating my own or using the open-source repository.

That was my initial purpose because it provides the access key and the web host, which other third-party open-sourced solutions are not providing. This allows us to use the active directory to access the services.

The solution doesn't require any further maintenance post-deployment.

It gives me exposure and learning in this technology. Apart from that, it's the client who is paying me to manage and service the infrastructure. 

Azure is a bit expensive.

Overall, this solution is very beneficial. If my infrastructure or our services are within the Azure Cloud, and if I'm using the ECR, it's very helpful to maintain the images that we use for the web services or the microservices for the ATS and the dockers. We don't have to maintain those images for other third parties or other repositories.

It's very good and for those who don't use it, you must look into it, and just go for it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I mainly use Container Registry to containerize applications and ship/deploy them.

The most valuable feature is that it's easy to download, install and manage.

The security, dashboards, and monitoring system could be improved.

I've been using this solution for two years.

I've had no issues with stability.

The initial setup was easy.

We used an in-house team to implement.

Container Registry is reasonably priced.

I would rate Container Registry seven out of ten.