Azure Stack Reviews

We use the solution for its virtual machine features.

The visibility of the solution's SDN feature and transmission policy needs improvement.

We have been using the solution for five years.

I rate the solution's scalability as a ten.

Whenever we raise a ticket, it gets addressed immediately by the solution's technical support team.

Positive

The solution doesn't need configuration as it is prebuilt on hyper-converged infrastructure. Its deployment takes two to four months to complete. The process involves installing the hardware and network requirements. 

It is not a cost-friendly solution. I rate it a seven for pricing.

I advise others to appoint premise engineers to manage day to day activity of the solution. I rate it a ten as it is business-friendly and has all the features prebuilt.

We use Azure Stack primarily for hosting customer applications .NET applications. We use mainly App Service, Blob Storage, and Cognitive Services. 

We develop applications on the Microsoft platform, infrastructure, and servers. Our servers are Windows, and we use the .NET framework and C# programming language. Everything is easier in Azure.

Azure Stack integrates well with Microsoft. It's also good for transitioning from an on-premise or hybrid setup to the cloud. It's seamless. 

Microsoft is changing the Azure Stack interface all the time, so it's sometimes hard to find the functionality or the service you're looking for. A feature was in one place and now it has moved somewhere else. 

It's because the product is quickly evolving, so they're changing constantly. I understand, but it's difficult to find things when we don't use Azure every day. It's not a big issue.

We've been using Azure Stack for seven or eight years.

Azure Stack is highly stable.

We have had a good experience with scalability. Azure Stack's replication is well-written. It's flexible. For example, you can scale it differently on workdays and weekends to reduce operating costs. We automatically reduce the sizing of the solution. We stop some services like VMs on the weekends if we can. Scaling up and stopping resources is automated based on a set schedule. This is useful.

Microsoft support is very good.

We switched from AWS to Azure. The main issues were costs and some bad experiences with temporary disks. This was a long time ago, so I cannot say if AWS is currently better or worse than Azure.

Azure Stack is also in the cloud, so it's easy. We also use the Internet Information Server. If you use the node server, it's going to be local and based on the technology you're using. We can choose between one or the other.

For example, we use Mongo Atlas service on Azure and on-premises. Both use the MongoDB Atlas service. It is architecture bound, so you have the choice of going through Azure or the on-premise solution because both have advantages.

Azure is relatively expensive, but on the other hand, you get excellent support, stability, and security, so I think it's worth it. 

I rate Azure Stack nine out of 10. It is a great tool if the technology you use is a Microsoft-based stack because Azure is Microsoft's cloud provider. 

Our company is trying to build an application out of Azure Stack. We are trying to build an API out of Azure Stack, which will communicate with the ERP systems.

Azure Stack provides us with computational power. We also get an option to have it with Azure Cloud, which is beneficial. We don't need to buy any other extra servers or any virtual machines with high-end graphics. All the aforementioned details make it more convenient for me to work with Azure Stack.

The solution's price is high, and the implementation process is difficult. I would like to see a lower price and simpler implementation for Azure Stack.

I have been using Azure Stack for a year and a half. We also use the solution in our company. I am using the solution's latest version. 

My company is a reseller of Azure.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

Right now, it is not in the production stage as it is still under the development stage, because of which I can't give a number on how many people are using it currently.

We got technical support from Azure about thirty days ago, and they have been very good.

I rate the support team a nine out of ten.

Positive

The solution is deployed on Azure Cloud.

The deployment part was a bit difficult, but the document helped me to get it done. While configuring it, we faced issues with its network interfaces, along with some security issues and vulnerabilities.

It took me around 40 days to implement Azure Stack.

The implementation process was something that came along from the reseller from whom we bought the solution.

Three members consisting of an ML developer, a person from DevOps, and an architect, were required to do the deployment.

Azure Stack is not a very costly tool. The pricing is according to the services we buy. When compared with AWS, Azure is a bit more costlier.

There is a need to pay additionally for maintenance or support. If you need premium support, you have to pay extra.

Azure Stack is a good solution since it allows you to explore more things, especially on the ML or DevOps sides. I would recommend Azure Stack to anybody planning to use it.

My company has attempted to integrate Azure Stack with products from other vendors. We haven't faced any difficulties integrating Azure Stack with products from other vendors. We provide solutions with Azure platform.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

We are looking to implement asset management of marks and enrollment.

The product is fine. It comes with everything. It is probably the best solution out there.

Certain elements are difficult to deploy.

My organization has been using the solution for a number of years.

The deployment is probably not easy. Certain elements are easy to deploy, but certain elements aren’t. The ease of deployment depends on the maturity of the technical teams. If they're quite mature and experienced, then it's not too much of an issue. If there is a knowledge or skill gap, then, obviously, it'll be quite an issue. However, if it is a large organization, engaging with Microsoft is probably fine since it can fill in all the gaps for the organization.

We have a dedicated Microsoft team always working within our organization.

The product is expensive, but it is fine for the value that the solution produces.

I work for the government in a department related to leasing infrastructure. We are using the latest version of the product. Intune has recently opened a lot of functionality very similar to Jamf. There's quite a big gap between what Jamf offers and what Intune offers.

People planning to use the product should engage with Microsoft quite early on and see what products would benefit them rather than trying to figure it out themselves. It would be good if Intune would offer features aligning with enrollment and asset discovery. Jamf provides these features.

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

We're getting more serious with Office 365 now. We start from the mailbox, the mail server exchange, and then we also have SharePoint. We have migrated all the local network drives, shared drives, home drives, to Office 365 SharePoint. We have been making use of the document library for sharing, and this year, we've started to use more of Microsoft Teams as a kind of collaboration, for online meetings within the organization and also to communicate with our students. Microsoft Teams is not the only software that we use, we also use Zoom for class meetings, and then Microsoft Teams for team meetings, really.

As an education provider, we have many students — over a thousand students actually; they are also the users of this domain. We also have 250 permanent and casual staff, it's quite a big number.

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

At this stage, we are quite pleased with Office 365 Azure. To me, Azure offers a pathway for dealing with the active directory, and for storing all our Office 365 information assets.

Technical support is quick and responsive. I find that whenever I encounter an error (sometimes it's really the system errors or something that I didn't know how to do), the customer support is quite helpful. We get good support from Microsoft in terms of Office 365.

Take today, for example, we have a worldwide issue (maybe just Australia), and our Office 365 cloud authentication components were down for almost an hour. Thankfully, customer support helped us rectify that problem very quickly.

A consultant helped us with the implementation back in 2018.

I would only recommend this solution to smaller organizations like ours because I cannot really speculate what big issues that the bigger organizations will face. For a small or medium-sized college, it's quite good — I can't see any negative sides. In particular, our staff and students don't really use our computers. That means they are bringing their own devices and using their own computers. Because of Office 365, they don't need to come here (to campus) and they don't need to connect to any kind of VPN in order to access their emails or order their course materials or even the information that we provide on the internet, for that matter. Everything is on the cloud.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of ten — strictly because I have nothing to compare it to.

Not sure

move to cloud - improved by no need to maintain hardware

We've had a lot of issues with the solution as of late. We aren't very happy with it right now.

The stability is okay.

You can scale the solution if you need to.

We started to get issues in May of this year.  We didn't know that the one side of Azure was not fully migrated. There's two Azure on-premise solutions in our organization.

I needed to migrate everything that wasn't migrated over quickly. I needed someone who was knowledgable to assist to get it done. Therefore, I asked Windows and was looking into our budget.

We told them to go ahead and do it, and that we had two thus far, one for memory, one for CPU, and that's all. I only wanted two point areas. I wanted my Azure to point to only one, however, now it's set up to point to two point areas, which is not what we want.

The solution is not user friendly. I'd prefer to move over to AWS, which is much easier in this sense.

The product could improve its manageability.

I've been using the solution for a while, however, we started having issues with the solution in May of 2020.

The stability is okay, however, there are a few glitches here and there. 

The scalability is okay. However, AWS is easier to scale. With AWS, you don't have to update your CPU and RAM. Everything's done for you.

In terms of technical support, it's very bad. We don't have a guy who is good at helping us, in our company, so we have to rely on the Shanghai team. The one person who supports us is in Shanghai.

We are relying on Shanghai technical support to help to create dashboards or whatever we need. Moving forward, we need a good technical guy in-house to help us. I cannot rely on Shanghai every time. 

Shanghai also seems to have two teams, however, I don't understand why. There's no direct number to the right people you have to reach, and the customer team we find to be quite bad. We're not overly satisfied with the level of service we've been provided so far.

The initial setup wasn't as easy as AWS, which has a much simpler deployment.

We ran into issues in terms of migration. Not everything was fully migrated, originally, and that caused us a lot of problems. It's still not quite set up how I would like it to be.

I've looked into AWS, which is more user friendly, and is a solution I would prefer to move over to. Not only is it always easier for us too manage by another provision, it's a lot faster. Azure is slower. 

Honestly, if I were to compare the two, I'd say that AWS is much better. It's so much easier to deal with and easier to understand. It's also easier to deploy and has a shorter learning curve overall. On top of that, AWS provides 20% of the traffic to the site. You don't need to update your processor for CPU and RAM. They do all of that for free. There's just way more up-sides to AWS than Azure, unfortunately.

Azure is just average. I'd rate it five out of ten. As an end-user, I find it far too difficult to manage, and it's not really worth the effort, especially when there are other solutions that make it so much easier.

We are a solution provider and we provide cloud service to our customers using Azure Stack. Some of the services that they use are Microsoft Intune, Azure Active Directory, and Azure Storage.

The user interface is nice and very simple to use. 

Azure provides a great deal of flexibility.

The user experience could be improved to make it more comfortable.

My company has been dealing with this solution for the past two years.

We have had no complaints with respect to stability.

Our customers are satisfied with the scalability of Azure Stack.

The technical support is good.

I have experience with AWS and I would have to say that it is more comfortable to use than Azure.

It's not complex at all. Based on the customer's requirements, we implement the solution. The deployment usually takes approximately 15 days.

In terms of costs, it is a standard price, and there is no negotiation.

My company is not very involved in the cloud, but Azure Stack is a product that we recommend depending on the customer. If their budget and requirements are appropriate, and they want the flexibility that this solution offers, then we can implement it.

I do not have experience with all of the products on the market, but from my perspective, Azure Stack is a good one.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have an application that is working on Azure Stack. It is a Microsoft application that we wrote for our customers. 

Azure Stack is easy to use. Its major benefit is that it doesn't need its infrastructure. We didn't face any issues integrating it with our infrastructure. 

The product needs to improve its pricing. 

Azure Stack is stable and I rate it an eight out of ten. 

The tool is scalable. We have one customer working with it. 

The solution's customer service is fine. 

Depending on your setup, the tool's deployment can be complex and take a few hours to complete. I need to select the services and resources to deploy the tool. Though I have a team, only one engineer works on the product. 

I am using my Microsoft license, and it costs monthly. You need to pay additional costs apart from the standard costs. 

We are in the process of obtaining co-pilots to integrate AI into our infrastructure. I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.