Azure Stack Reviews

We're using the latest version.

It's deployed on the cloud, mainly as a Kubernetes container.

It's more reliable, secure, and easy to deploy. It's much more stable as a platform.

There's Azure SQL Database on the cloud for small loads, but now they're moving to Synapse, which has a combination of the storage plus the analytics. 

I've been using this solution for more than six years.

It's stable. We haven't had any significant down times, because now you have redundancy across networks. We have not come across any situation where any disruptions have occurred, at least on the cloud connectivity.

It's absolutely scalable. We haven't had any challenges with scalability.

We had some issues, and we directly raised a defect bug to them so they could sort it out. I haven't heard teams complaining about that. I don't see any challenge right now because the stack is much stabler, easier, and we haven't needed to reach out.

Positive

Both AWS and Azure are the best in the world right now. 

It all depends on what our customers need, so we use both.

One or two people are needed to maintain this solution.

I would rate the pricing 4 out of 5. It could be lower.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

The solution meets customers' regulatory requirements. Scalability allows for tasks such as transferring data and accessing local files.

The solution could be cheaper.

I have been using Azure Stack as a partner for five years.

The solution is scalable.

Azure changed premier support to unified support, which involves allocating tickets to multiple engineers and discussing the problem multiple times. The resolution time for issues is not satisfactory.

There is free support available, but it comes with limitations. The unified support package is free whereas the enterprise support can be costly.

Neutral

There are various implementations available. There are no issues with these implementations. Initially, Azure Stack was complex around five or six years ago. Nowadays, setting up Azure Stack is much simpler, and there are no problems with integrations, similar to other Microsoft products. For example, products like Azure Monitor, Microsoft Sentinel, and others may encounter issues, but Microsoft's R&D is effective in developing solutions for them.

ROI varies with each and every customer, but by average it is at the end of second year.

The product is a bit expensive, but you got a reliable solution. You pay upfront for the hardware. You can opt to pay as you go or reserve it, similar to purchasing any software licence.

You need the applications. It's like an extended cloud in your data centre. You can access all the local applications and transfer files between the two clouds seamlessly.

When it comes to security, we're talking about the shared responsibility features between the cloud provider and your on-premises data centre. It's like protecting all parts of the security—from users to servers to files—all aspects of data security. It's akin to having an on-premises data environment, so you must implement roles, DDoS protection, and other security components to secure the environment as well as the public cloud itself. Moving to the cloud doesn't automatically guarantee security; the cloud provider only provides an SLA. You have to implement all the necessary security components.

The product might be a bit complex for non technical people.

I can recommend Azure Stack to others but they should be aware of the technical and security aspects. They should have engineers capable of resolving issues, rather than solely relying on Microsoft support.

The main weakness of Azure Stack lies in its cost. Its value for money is good, offering numerous benefits for the client.

Overall, I rate the solution a out of ten.

We primarily utilize Azure Stack for hybrid cloud deployments, mainly for scaling up compute resources quickly when needed. This involves spinning up instances on the public cloud, specifically Azure, to manage workloads distributed across on-premises and the public cloud. Additionally, we employ Azure Stack for certain floor-based or edge computing solutions, particularly in locations such as factories, to store, maintain, and support specific operations.

Azure Stack serves a crucial role in our hybrid cloud strategy because we can't place all our data in the public cloud for various reasons. One key use case for Azure Stack is data localization, especially in countries like Australia and Denmark where strict data regulations are in place. For applications and data that cannot leave the country, we rely on Azure Stack to maintain and manage them locally. Meanwhile, for other workloads, we leverage the public cloud, predominantly Azure, to meet our requirements.

One of the features I really appreciate is the Hybrid Cloud Extension UI. It simplifies the management of workloads across on-premises, public cloud, and edge locations through a single interface. This functionality streamlines the management process for me. Another aspect I find valuable is the consistency Azure Stack offers. It provides a uniform experience, from service names to user interface, whether I'm working in the cloud, on-premises, or at the edge. This consistency is crucial in managing various deployment scenarios. Lastly, Azure Stack's ability to function in isolated or remote areas, such as factory and plant locations with limited network connectivity, is highly valuable. This synced operation capability ensures smooth operations even in challenging environments.

One aspect that I consider a drawback is the cost associated with Azure Stack, as its deployment expenses tend to be on the higher side compared to other solutions. Another significant challenge is integration, especially with third-party products. While Azure Stack seamlessly integrates with Microsoft's own tools and platforms, there is room for improvement in its compatibility with third-party solutions. Lastly, although updating and patching Azure Stack is more straightforward than in older Windows versions, there is still room for enhancement in the upgrade and patch management process.

I have been using the solution for more than 18 months.

It is definitely stable and I would rate it nine or eight out of ten.

It's a bit complex to scale and I would rate it a seven out of ten.

The customer service is good. 

Positive

The reason we lean towards Azure Stack over competitors is that it offers strong integration with the public cloud, specifically Azure. Many of our clients use Microsoft 365, and this leads to a significant presence of Azure workloads. Additionally, a substantial portion of our servers run on Windows. These factors make Azure Stack a favorable choice for us. When comparing it to Nutanix, Azure Stack stands out in terms of its integration with the public cloud and, in some cases, cost-effectiveness.

The initial setup is moderate, not extremely simple but not very complex. It is hybrid but depends on the requirements of the client. The percentage of workloads on Azure Stack varies across our customers, ranging from ten percent to sixty percent. We opt for Azure Stack as a hybrid solution when a customer has some workloads on the public cloud. Typically, we set up Azure Stack in an on-premises data center and migrate workloads from existing environments, such as VMware or Hyper-V, to Azure Stack. 

However, if the workloads are primarily for the public cloud, we migrate them directly to the public cloud. The choice between Azure Stack and public cloud migration depends on various factors, including connectivity, compliance, costs, and other specific requirements. In essence, our Azure Stack environments are hybrid, with around thirty to forty percent of workloads residing on-premises and the remaining fifty to sixty percent in the public cloud.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

The pricing falls in the middle. It serves as a mediator between being expensive and being affordable, but it's not exactly cheap either. I would rate it a six out of ten.

I would overall rate it an eight out of ten. 

I use a lot of services in Azure.  I have worked with completely isolated environments, building infrastructure from scratch using Terraform, Chef, Puppet, and other such tools.

The Platform as a Service (Paas) environment is the most valuable feature.

The Web App service is very valuable.

It is helpful from a security point of view because we can create our own isolated, private environments that contain virtual networks, and we can put security rules in place. We can also specify application rules, which is something that is also useful.

There are a lot of services in Azure that are not stable.

Azure Messaging services are in need of improvement.

I would like to see better monitoring capability, as we have in Dynatrace and other APM tools. The functionality is there, but it is not as detailed as it is in other tools.

I have about three years of experience with Azure, on and off.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Azure Stack is to start looking into DevOps early. There are a lot of things that can be done using the portal, and people tend to follow this process because it is easy. It's true that this approach may get things done fast, but it will only get you so far. Working with the DevOps capabilities, such as automation with Terraform, should be done sooner rather than later.

Every cloud has its pros and cons.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Azure Data Factory is a great solution for orchestration. 

From a security perspective, there are certain things which could be improved. We have that option of enabling the datacenter which sits on the Azure site. The solution is difficult to manage if this particular feature is disabled. 

I've been working with Azure Stack for nine to 10 years for me.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward if you are familiar with some of the architecture. The complexity may increase if you have a large amount of data that needs to be migrated. 

Azure is reasonably priced compared to Google Cloud, AWS, or some other cloud giants.

You need to focus on what your end goal to achieve and build the system in a way that makes it easy to maintain from a software, perspective, and platform perspective.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

I recommend Azure Stack 100% for hybrid cases, dev & test, banking, financial (banking, insurance) , healthcare, public sector.

Also, The assessments include the following standards:

•PCI-DSS addresses the payment card industry.

•CSA Cloud Control Matrix is a comprehensive mapping across multiple standards, including FedRAMP Moderate, ISO27001, HIPAA, HITRUST, ITAR, NIST SP800-53, and others.

•FedRAMP High for government customers.

The compliance documentation can be found on the Microsoft Service Trust Portal. The compliance guides are a protected resource and require you to sign in with your Azure cloud service credentials.

The main pillars, on which Binbox is now developing, are Cloud Solutions (public, private and hybrid Cloud) using Azure and our DataCenters (built on state-of-the-art technology), Microsoft 365 and Binbox Managed Services (including 24/7/365 support). These being said, the Azure stack has come to complete our service portfolio like a glove.

The most valuable features that make Azure Stack different are low latency (<9 ms, high performance), data sovereignty, cloud readiness, public Azure features in the private cloud. Considering all the features, the quality of service / price ratio is superior compared to any cloud option.

It would be great when Microsoft will enable WDI, AI and Cognitive Services in Azure Stack.

Binbox Global Services has been using Azure Stack since 2018 when we deployed the first Azure Stack in Central and Eastern Europe. We were the second Microsoft partener that deployed an Azure Stack in Europe.

Now we have 7+ Azure Stacks and other Azure Stacks dedicated to Public Sector.

Azure Stack is stable. 

Azure Stack Hub provides on-demand, scalable computing resources.

The initial setup was a little complicated but not too much. 

We went through both a private vendor and Microsoft. The private vendor handled one part of the deployment; a Microsoft team did another. They both taught us how to manage Azure Stack. We have a large team of technical engineers who received Azure Stack certification. They know Azure Stack very well. Overall, it was not hard for us to deploy. 

The solution is cheap and helps consolidate infrastructure to a converged space compatible with medium customers. 

Azure Stack needs to improve integrations. 

I have been working with the solution for three to four months. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate Azure Stack's deployment a ten out of ten. My company has one customer for the solution. 

I rate the product's deployment a six out of ten. It took about a month's time to complete. 

I rate the tool's pricing a seven out of ten. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

Our company's customers consume the products installed from Azure Stack, so that is the usage of Azure Stack for our company. Speaking about Azure Stack from a financial perspective, if I have to talk about ERR, it is approximately 4,000 USD per month.

The most valuable features of the solution are related to anything and everything in data and analytics, including data management and Azure ML.

I think the monitoring and operational part, including more administration, must be simplified to simplify user adoption. The challenge in Azure Stack begins at an individual level when you try to monitor every service from Azure Stack that gets consumed. The more the configuration capacity is available in Azure Stack, the more configurable it becomes while becoming easier at a user level and administrator level, thereby helping to optimize the consumption cost.

With the road map of Azure Stack, I have, everything looks great. Looking at the way Azure Stack has matured in the market, I feel that the roadmap of Azure Stack is planned pretty well by Azure's product managers.

I have experience with Azure Stack for three to four years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Considering the administration part and scope for improvement, I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten since it needs improvement at a user level and administration level regarding its consumption. The administrator does have all the rights, but then there should be some level of configuration needed if you go at an application level or at a service level where a user is using native capabilities of Azure should have an option for the administrator to extend it to the end user also.

There are around 15 users of Azure Stack in my company.

I do contact the solution's technical support when the need for it arises. The solution's technical support is great since, in our company, we get answers to most of our questions, and most of our queries get resolved with the help of the documentation itself. At least at our company's end, based on the services we are working on, we are less likely to depend on the solution's technical support.

The initial setup of Azure Stack is simple.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

Azure Stack is a medium-priced product, so it is not overpriced, but the prices may be higher for certain services.

Based on the secondary data or information we got in our company based on the initial evaluation we did, I think the way the instances are spread and made available across the globe makes Azure Stack a relatively easier product compared to its competitors. Azure Stack becomes easier to adopt with the new GDPR and the country-level data privacy or security rules implemented.

I recommend Azure Stack to those planning to use it. Most of our company's customers who use Azure Stack are happy.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.