Azure Stack Reviews

Our use case is for accessing central records and updating the backend system.

When you compare AWS to Azure adding on all the security components you require to protect your application and data AWS is by far the cheaper alternative, like the cost of Defender and ATPm, MCAS, ADFS, etc.

The stability is good. We haven't had any issues with the viability or scalability. It's been good so far.

The initial setup was straightforward. We have a business unit that specializes in this and they set it up from scratch.

My only comment would be to look at your use case and just weigh up both AWS and Azure to see which one best suits your use case and your budget. If you go with Microsoft Azure and you use all the security tools and everything that Azure offers, it will be an expensive proposition. Whereas AWS gives you all the security tools but it's less expensive. They both offer a similar service. It's just the cost differential.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. Not a perfect ten because of the price. 

It's a good and cost-effective solution for any organization. We can deploy the tech solution on-premises and also in the cloud.

The reporting for the interim monitoring purpose could be improved. Right now Windows Admin Center is on the level with Victor Server 2019. But we need to work on the same tool, so we provide them some code features on the same tool. It's very useful for any organization and an administrator.

Additionally, customers need to consider Disaster Recovery. Microsoft tech is only providing support to Azure. We would like to see it available for other services and solutions on the cloud, too, as well as a solution for Oracle backup.

I have been using Azure Stack for three years.

There is one bug we are facing now. In one of the organizations in which we have deployed Azure, when we are moving the VM from node A to node B, sometimes it gets stuck. We already raised the case with Microsoft. They are working on it with us. We involved the hardware and software teams from Microsoft. They gave us a solution and now the issue is under observation.

In terms of scalability, there is a calculator available and we can convert the scalability with it.

Because a chain solution was introduced by Nutanix to a Moscow based organization, Microsoft wants to introduce the same solution, but with better features including Microsoft 2019. So 110%, because some are using the Microsoft Azure tech right now in India.

There are about 10 - 15,000 users. They are providing the data production manager, data backup and are showing the customer that we can do a backup on GP back in 60 seconds. In Microsoft Azure, the only option is a little data backup which we need to buy through some third party tool to take a backup of our VM. Otherwise, we need to take a subscription on our Azure to make a side recovery for the VR purpose or the higher rating purpose. A good figure is also real time monitoring. But with Microsoft Azure Suite, the monitoring tool is a little bit weak.

I am satisfied with Microsoft customer service, they provided us with a good solution.

The initial setup was really simple. We did not face any difficulty when we deployed the SAP solution with the Microsoft SA.

My team and I did the deployment.

If we are trying to deploy the Microsoft suite, first of all, we need to buy the data center licenses. Datacenter licenses are only used for verification solutions. Using that as a solution, we can declare an unlimited number of four VMs on the hardware. I spent a contribution to the hardware, the code, and the processes, and that all depends on the hardware architecture.

On a scale of 1 - 10, I can give Microsoft Azure Stack a 9.

There are multiple use cases for us in regards to this solution, including IoT, DevOps, storage, analytics, and many, many other scenarios.

We use it for our periodic builds, and for our source control.

The IoT, DevOps, microservices, micro functions, and storage are all valuable features.

The solution should be more open to allowing access to other tools and environments.

Technical support also needs a lot of improvement.

The solution is pretty stable.

The scalability of the solution is good. We have hundreds of users internally and thousands of users externally. We do plan to increase usage shortly.

Technical support is very poor. When we meet Microsoft in the coming weeks to discuss expansion, we'll be speaking to them directly about this.

Previously, we used AWS.

The initial setup was quite a long time ago, so I don't remember the details of the implementation.

We received some help with the implementation from Microsoft.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would advise others considering implementing the solution to ensure they understand the solution to a high degree, as they won't get much help from technical support if they have questions.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

When we engage Azure Stack, it's very easy to lift and shift. That's why we've been successful because we can be clear and fast in understanding workflows from the customer.  

The most valuable feature is the clear and user-friendly interface.

Azure Stack could be improved with more integration, governance tools, monitor tools, and lift and shift tools. We also have problems with the capacity usage. In the next release, Azure should include a tool to manage the journey during the lift and shift process and identify where integration is needed.

I've been using Azure Stack for four to five years.

Azure Stack is stable.

The setup and integration are straightforward.

The premium version is too costly.

For those thinking about implementing Azure Stack, it's important to understand the customer's workflow and whether you're talking about IaaS, PaaS, or SaaS. I would rate Azure Stack as five out of ten.

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. 

I am using Azure Stack to build a lot of different solutions.

I have been using Azure Stack for approximately nine years.

Azure Stack is very stable.

The scalability of Azure Stack is good.

I have approximately 200 users using this solution in my company.

I rate the support from Azure Stack a five out of five.

Positive

I did not use other similar solutions in this category.

The initial setup of Azure Stack is very simple. It takes approximately 48 hours to build a complete platform.

The implementation of Azure Stack was done in-house. We have five people for the maintenance of the solution.

The licensing model of Azure Stack is complicated. The solution is expensive.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Azure Stack an eight out of ten.

The product is an on-premise data center for SQL servers and for virtualized environments.

The fact that it's integrated into Azure is its best feature. They go hand in hand.

It's very easy to set up the product.

The solution is pretty stable.

The product can scale. 

The fact that it is completely integrated into Azure, while positive, is also a downside. 

Azure Stack was implemented by Microsoft about eight months ago. That's pretty much how long I've been using it.

The solution is stable enough. It is not market-leading, however, it is reliable. 

The scalability is decent. It's not market-leading, however, it is possible. 

We have about 20 people using it in our company.

I haven't used technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We didn't change solutions. We just added it and we are still utilizing a host of other solutions, including VMware's vSAN. They both do similar things, however, if I had my choice, I would go with VMware. That's just subjective, however. 

The product has been simple to set up. The deployment is quick and takes an hour. It's not complex or difficult to implement. It's really quite easy. It's a next, next, next flow where you click through and run the software. When you implement it, you attach it to your Azure account and that's when the real work starts, of course, as then you have it up and running.

I install the solution myself. We both deploy it in-house and use a consultant. 

We're resellers. 

I'd recommend the solution, however, for those considering it, the most important thing is to get ahold of somebody who knows what they're doing, for example, a consultant.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

It resolves some security concerns. For instance, if the customer is a bank, they want the infrastructure to be under a data center.

We have experience in Azure Stack. Internally, the cost increases when you use Azure Stack because you have to buy services from providers like HP, for instance. So, more or less, it's more profitable to use the non-Azure Stack cloud services servers.

In some cases, we've seen that some financial software is not working correctly or compatible with Azure Stack. Many companies build this, but some third-party products may not be compatible with Azure Stack. So these are some areas of improvement. 

In future releases, there's some incompatibility with third-party software or connectors that need to be created.

The product is stable, unfortunately, if sizing is correctly repeated during the design phase. There's no issue in Azure Stack.

The support is quite excellent. 

Positive

The initial setup is easy. 

The provider deploys the solution. 

In some cases, it's difficult to calculate the licensing costs. All the cost is the big picture there because this concerns the capacity of Azure Stack and Azure Service as well.

it's a pay-as-you-go model. So, it has some concerns to define the cost.

We are providing services based on Azure – infrastructure services, fast services, and all these kinds of things.

Azure Stack is very good technology. You can use other Microsoft products, such as Nutanix as the virtualization layer or VMware, and then install all the products that other complex vendors are using – Cloud Service or Amazon Service.

The only issue is some performance issues. And with this concern, if you have to do the right sizing.

From my experience, this solution is suitable for enterprise companies because of the higher price, the cost is huge.

It has to do with capability. If you need all the features, you don't need to buy all the stuff upfront; you can go to the cloud service of Azure. So, in terms of cost, this is the only thing.

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