Azure Stack Reviews

Currently, we are just using it to plan for our proof of concept and internal testing, not for production.

I've been using Azure Stack for more than a year.

It's not stable as IBM solutions. It fully supports all the .NET solutions, but our main applications are based in Java. So in those cases, we've had some minor problems with Azure, but Microsoft always says that it can handle this stuff.

Microsoft's support isn't as good as IBM's. They are fast, but they aren't knowledgeable enough.

Setting up Azure Stack isn't as straightforward as IBM's Cloud Pack for Apps. IBM's solution uses OpenShift implementation, so it's fully automated, whereas the Microsoft solution has some hardware issues, so we had to some manual configurations. The total time for deployment was around one week, I guess.

I believe our license is yearly.

I would rate Azure six out of 10. I don't have a lot of opinions on it yet, but when we start using it in production, then I'll have a better idea.

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.

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 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. 

The solution is geared towards customers with large Microsoft footprints, in which it is very advanced. There is tight integration in respect of Microsoft workloads and extremely intelligent performance. Customers can use it to run SQL Server, Active Directory, VDI, Windows Server and other workloads. Many users use it for their dynamics, although I am not aware of a lot of deployments with SAP HANA. One who has a 60 or 70 percent footprint in the data center with Microsoft can save a lot. 

Azure Stack is a really good product when it comes to the functionality and the Azure Stack offer. Its most attractive feature is the licensing. The virtualization is in-built and free and it offers almost all the functionalities someone looks for from the Azure platform. 

Now that the solution is transitioning to a hybrid cloud approach, the licensing is not determined by the number of instances and this can result in huge savings. 

A subscription model customer will not need to do much up front purchasing. He can obtain all the up to date features offered on public cloud and grow at the rate he feels is best, with the attendant savings. 

I would like to see better network integration. 

While they are working on security, several things can be brought in on the networking side, such as extending to networks stretching in between data centers. These are absent at the moment. It would be good to have a single control plane for the networking.

I have around two years of experience with Azure Stack. 

The solution is certainly stable. 

The solution is definitely scalable. 

Installation is straightforward and not very involved. It can even be automated. 

The deployment was straightforward and really nice. While creating a system and configuring a cluster is possible, it would be really beneficial to do this in the reverse, since the cluster can be pushed in using the hardware management ID. 

While deployment is straightforward, it would require a good skill set with Microsoft technologies and a certain amount of networking knowledge to handle any trouble which may arise. 

The licensing is one of the solution's most attractive features. 

Subscription model customers need not make large expenditures on upfront purchasing. 

A customer must purchase the software needed for Microsoft support, if he wishes to have this. This would incur a monthly fee. But, the upcoming Azure Stack HCl, which is hybrid cloud, does not involve an upfront purchase, only a subscription-based fee. 

I work with Lenovo as a consultant, which means I handle deployment for others. 

We have a handlful of customers, most of whom are using Microsoft products, but some of whom use Windows. Many go with the Azure Stack solution. 

I would recommend the solution to others. 

I rate Azure Stack as an eight out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for everything from VM storage to networking to app services.

We use almost every aspect of the solution. Overall, it's quite a valuable product for our organization.

The setup is very straightforward and it's quite stable.

I can't think of any area in which the solution is currently lacking.

The solution could use more training materials to help users understand how to use the product effectively. Online training would also be a beneficial addition to the product.

I've been using the solution for about five years.

The solution is quite stable. We've never faced any issues so far.

The scalability potential of the solution is very good.

The technical support has been good so far. We have been satisfied with the level of service they've provided to us. They've always answered our questions, and, depending on the severity of the issue, they've been able to resolve things quite quickly.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

We've found the initial setup to be quite straightforward and simple to execute.

The pricing of the solution is quite fair. It's not too expensive.

I'd advise those who don't want to spend money on hardware to try the solution out. I'd recommend it to others.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten overall.

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.

We use Azure primarily for sales management. Specifically, we use it to help us manage the delivery of digital solutions that we provide to clients.  

We also use it for our own internal accounting, tracking our CRM document management, and we have developed different tailor-made solutions through which we provide additional services to our clients.  

It allows us to creatively integrate solutions easily.  

The best thing about this product is that it is user-friendly and intuitive. That is true, especially for dashboarding and management reporting. The low code development tooling that they provide allows us to do rapid development. They also have some interesting features for self-learning, artificial intelligence, and machine learning.  

It is a complete stack that helps us to easily link various components together so that the whole component-based development connects to other open-source components. This helps make the rapid development of general solutions possible.  

As far as what we would like to see added, there are no burning issues right now. If we are looking for certain areas of improvement and we want to have specific features or functions, the flexibility of the environment allows us to easily add the functionality we want.  

There are always things that you have to find out for yourself. That creates complexity. Could Microsoft make the product easier to use? Probably by adding more scenarios, but Microsoft already has guidelines on when to use what feature. In the area of training, Microsoft already offers a lot of opportunities to further your skills with its products. These resources make it possible to get started quickly. The product is never going to do your learning for you in that way.  

I do not have any recommendations as to how the product should be enhanced as some of that is the user's responsibility and opportunity.  

I have been using Azure for one and a half years now. That was half a year after we originally embarked on using the Microsoft suite.  

This product is stable. I would say 'yes' to that twice over.  

So far we have not found any problems with scalability. Azure Stack was easily extendable. We started with a small cloud environment, we had to extend it over time and it grows as we do.  

Our client base is growing rapidly. We are now above a hundred clients and on average there are two to three users per client.  

I have not been in touch with technical support myself but other people in our organization have. More or less, I think they were satisfied with the tech support services.  

For most users, the support experience depends on the subscription you have and on experience. We have some experience with Microsoft Stack people within our network. That makes a big difference. Because of that we hardly ever really need to use technical support services.  

The setup for Azure becomes more complex when you have multiple users. When you have multiple organizations, with multiple users working or using the same solution, data storage needs to be very well separated because of privacy. That is a piece of complexity that is embedded in the way we provide our services. There is no link to Microsoft or any software provider service. We defined how to make it work that way.  

Given the current direction and strategy of Microsoft, I think Azure Stack is one of the most comprehensive solution platforms available today.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product as an eight of ten. In my case, there really is very little Microsoft can do to make the score better. I could really never give a software product a perfect score. There is always something that can be improved. If you work in a flexible, dynamic environment, you have to make choices in terms of how to design things. You have to decide which additional components to use or incorporate, or to not use what are considered standard features that most other people use. Users' choices will be different depending on their needs, application, and adaptation.