Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

We use Azure App Service for several web services and websites hosted on the Azure cloud. It was a COVID-driven decision because we serve hundreds of colleges and schools that are part of our industry. All the services hosted in-house had to be scaled and made accessible over the cloud. Azure was the easiest available option at that time. We have around 80,000 users on our Azure Cloud applications and about three admins.

I'm a decision-maker, not a technician. From my perspective, the most significant advantage is that Azure is a one-stop shop. Everything we needed was included in the Microsoft Agreement. During COVID, it was the most convenient and most straightforward decision. 

Now, we are reevaluating all the hosting post-COVID and realigning our strategy. Initially, our main concern was ensuring business continuity and remote work.

I want more transparency in billing. It would be better if we could understand and control the billing to customize it. Also, Microsoft should provide more guidance about the widgets and subsets of various products. The Microsoft portfolio is so huge that it's sometimes difficult to choose the correct option. There's always a chance we are paying more than necessary.

We have been using Azure App Service for about two years ago.

Azure App Service is a stable product, but we're reevaluating everything with an eye toward achieving the optimum utilization of various platforms. I believe there is still a lot of room for optimization compared to how we are using it today. In the future, we'll be more selective about which services we will use on Azure Cloud and other clouds. We are moving toward a private and hybrid cloud setup.

It is quick and easy to establish anything on the public cloud these days. I had no problem provisioning and creating machines. We have ample technical resources, so it was all straightforward for us. 

The cost requires a lot of monitoring to ensure it doesn't go through the roof. Azure is expensive, and the pricing isn't transparent relative to other options on the market.

We are reevaluating each application to optimize our hosting. It isn't one size fits all. I don't think will be hosted on Azure, AWS, or Google Cloud. We will mix and match based on orchestration requirements and requirements, traffic loads, etc.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Services seven out of 10. To use the product, you need to be trained in Microsoft solutions because they all work closely together, though they are compatible with the other services. However, Azure does have a high density of Microsoft-native products. If a person does not have a strong background in Microsoft products, they will struggle initially. It will be easier with some foundational knowledge. 

I primarily use Microsoft Azure App Service to deploy Python-based applications. It was majorly used for deployment purposes only. When you buy a virtual machine, you need to do lots of configuration, but using Azure App Services gives you lots of flexibility. It's easy - you just upload the code and do a few clicks.

Deployment is really quick, which eliminates the need for a separate team dedicated solely to deployment. A simple software engineer can handle it, making live updates seamless and reducing the need for thinking cycles.

The ability to deploy applications directly from my Visual Studio Code without needing to access Azure is helpful. Additionally, scalability is straightforward, and you can quickly adjust the resources to meet demand.

The interface is a bit complicated and not straightforward. Documentation is not well-organized, making it difficult to find current and relevant information. 

The logging process using stream is not always accurate, and the pricing is quite high, often twice the price of virtual machines. 

Additionally, in terms of scalability, they do not offer the option to have two different virtual machines with separate configurations.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for more than a year now.

I have never faced any stability issues in my last year of usage, so I would rate its stability nine out of ten.

Scalability is easy and helps improve application performance. However, there is no option to configure different virtual machines with various configurations, like one with eight GB of RAM and another with 16 GB.

I have had poor experiences with customer service. Although I have rarely required support, whenever I created a ticket, I never received an answer. I would rate their support one or two out of ten.

Negative

I used Amazon AWS virtual machines before. However, Azure App Service is much better, although it's costly.

The setup is quick and easy, taking a maximum of five minutes if you know which resources to choose.

The pricing is very high. It's approximately twice the cost of AWS virtual machines. While the deployment feature is convenient, the costs make it unaffordable for many in the industry.

I recommend Microsoft Azure App Service because it is easy to deploy. However, the pricing could be a deterrent for many users who might prefer manual configurations at a cheaper rate.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The use case that we have is that we have multiple different APIs that we expose externally for one of our products. We deploy those APIs into these app services.

The product is easy to maintain and deploy.

I do not have notes for improvements.

I have used the solution for around five years.

The customer service is pretty good. I have talked to them a couple of times, and they were able to resolve issues.

Positive

I did use this solution as well in my previous job.

The initial setup is straightforward. They have pretty good documentation.

You don't need people for the implementation team. You can automate the process.

If I compare this solution to AWS, it's cheaper, so it's better.

I personally prefer Azure. I haven't used much of AWS, but Microsoft made it kind of more simple. AWS is kind of complex, frankly. The reason is that AWS is more mature. They have a lot of other things.

I would rate the product ten out of ten.

My use case for Microsoft Azure App Service is to deploy web solutions faster and easier online. Rather than setting up my servers and worrying about the need to set up the infrastructure, the OS, and the run time, I use Microsoft Azure App Service for faster deployment and to get my solutions to the market at a faster rate.

I've used Microsoft Azure App Service quite a lot, and what I like best about it is that it's a serverless HAM, which is a feature that can run a function, a single function, but faster and more frequently without needing any other assistance. This has been what I found most valuable in Microsoft Azure App Service, the serverless option that's very easy to utilize, and you only need a minimal setup to use this and to enjoy the functionalities required, so the solution gives me a lot of comfort whenever I'm using it.

Customers love it when a solution is affordable, but with Microsoft Azure App Service, you can start and stop it, and when you stop it, it won't be reachable and it won't be available, yet you're still being charged for it.

You'll still be charged even if the solution isn't accessible because Microsoft Azure App Service runs on a shared virtual machine that keeps on running, so if there's a way to work this out, it'll be a great improvement to only pay for what you use. The solution should have no hidden cost and no extra charge when it's stopped. This is what needs improvement in Microsoft Azure App Service.

I've been using Microsoft Azure App Service for four years now, but professionally, this is my second year to use it.

Microsoft lives up to its word. For example, the SLA it promised is 99.7%, and to the best of my knowledge, Microsoft Azure App Service has been able to reach that percentage without any global outage from any of the services and underlying infrastructure that power it. The solution is available 100% throughout its lifetime.

Microsoft Azure App Service is very scalable, and it's built in such a way that it encourages flexibility in scaling. You can grow from a single instance to thirty instances, and you can increase from 5GB RAM to over 30GB RAM.

Microsoft Azure App Service is designed so you can start small and expand as your customer base grows. It's built around that ideology and it's been living up to that ideology. The solution is defined scalability-wise, and it's practical in both approach and usage.

The setup for Microsoft Azure App Service is very straightforward. All you have to do is navigate to the portal, search for the App Services, curate one, give it a name, select a location, region, and resource group, then customize the number of RAM you want. Do you want a disk to be attached to it? Do you want to do some modern networking parameters which are not requirements?

The basic requirements for setting up Microsoft Azure App Service are very straightforward, so anyone who can power his computer can get started with.

You also have several deployment options to choose from for Microsoft Azure App Service which would make life easy. You can deploy from your existing repository, or you can upload your code directly, so for me, the setup is quite easy for the solution.

How long Microsoft Azure App Service deployment usually takes depends on the content, specifically the size of the content you want to deploy to it. At most, if you have a one-page website, the solution takes less than five minutes to deploy, which is quite fast, so you can get your sites up and running in less than twenty minutes with the setup and deployment, so the process is considerably okay.

The pricing for Microsoft Azure App Service is per hour, and you're billed per hour, and it depends on the plan you're using. Each plan can host up to a minimum of four to eight applications at a time, so the pricing is quite okay with how I use Microsoft Azure App Service currently, but with the little testing I've done, I saw that some other regions tend to be costlier than others. If the same SLE is delivered for all services, there should be a way to make the prices parallel across regions. Having more transparent pricing for Microsoft Azure App Service would give customers more comfort.

Microsoft Azure App Service can be used by a lot of people, but either the cloud engineer or the infrastructure engineer should be in charge of it because the solution relates to a lot of infrastructures and other resources such as storage, databases, networking, firewalls, and it can even relate to APIs and other resources outside the cloud environment. A lot of people can work on Microsoft Azure App Service, but it's best handled by the cloud engineer who has an understanding of how to implement the relationship with other resources.

I've worked on Microsoft Azure App Service for four years, and I have enough experience to orchestrate, manage, and maintain it.

My advice to anyone looking to use Microsoft Azure App Service is that you should try it and see the power of getting your applications out at a faster rate. It can get your application to speed up in less than twenty minutes, and it can handle between thirty to fifty thousand users at a time. You can try Microsoft Azure App Service while you're starting, then you can keep scaling until you need more resources or more solutions that can help you with your workload. Try Microsoft Azure App Service out, so you can see for yourself what it can give you. This is the best way to enjoy its features and benefits.

My rating for Microsoft Azure App Service is nine out of ten.

My company is a partner of Microsoft Azure App Service.

We use this product for integration and use a bidirectional approach. Some cases are created in service now, which are pushed to Salesforce. When an item is created in Salesforce, it is also created in ServiceNow which exposes some risk APIs. Those risk APIs are Salesforce, snow and sales group, but it's not enough for our portal because they need some customization, so we do it ourselves with function apps deployed over Azure. The function apps are forced through API and ServiceNow and application performance integration systems. These function apps are consumed by those APIs.

We are able to do millions of things simultaneously. Additionally, Azure maintains and manages the server, which is very helpful because we don't have to. The microservice architecture is also very good. Performance wise it is the best thing I have ever found.

The product could be improved by including crude operations. Previously, we provided it in the same application. However, when the operation went down, other operations also went down. This was one of the risks we had to overcome with this solution to avoid other operations being affected when one operation went down. With this resolved, the performance will be seamless because data can be handled simultaneously.

We have been using this solution for the last six months. Microsoft Azure App Service has multiple plans and subscriptions. It provides access to certain subscriptions and specific profiles, fewer consumption plans and subscription premium plans. So when we work on logic or function apps, they provide certain resource groups. We can discuss certain logic and function apps when we have access to resource groups.

The solution is stable. Everything is organized. Additionally, access is provided to their help centres in case you face difficulty. When we had issues, we contacted them, and they made a ticket and resolved it.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 50 to 100 people in different roles use this product in our company. However, I am unaware of the total amount of people that could be added to this product.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on our experiences with customer service and support at this time.

The initial setup was easy. However, understanding the configuration was important because everything was very systematic. The configuration is slow without understanding the systematic process.

Deployment is fast, and it takes a few seconds to publish it. This often occurs in our application because we have to make changes, but not all of our staff are involved in deployment. We take 15 minutes from the client and 15 for testing, but it takes only two to three minutes to publish.

There are several plans available for different licenses and costs. When using this product for the first time, it is essential to understand the type of scaling required, the kind of skills needed and the level of necessary tiers. For example, to keep services running for up to 24 hours, there is a charge, but if you want to have your app services running for 12 hours daily, there is a different charge. You can also purchase specific plans. In addition, there are different types of client packages. Therefore it is important to explore each package to find the one best suited for the task required. We suggest using this product, which is helpful because it improves performance and loading times.

We chose this product because it has several plans, including consumption plans. My company will not have to worry about maintaining server systems. Hence, we only have to perform a daily routine after deploying and maintaining the service. Our company handed these tasks to Azure. Microsoft Azure takes care of our content application, including when to turn it off. We pay for these services, which saves us the pain of managing them. This is very important when using Microsoft Azure.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten. It is a very good solution that improves our performance. However, it would be helpful to include flow diagrams via logic apps in the next release.

We have used App Services to integrate a lot of solutions, to bring content from a different domain or maybe a different data source. 

We were using a lot of Microsoft Azure services to build. We were also leveraged to deploy non-SAP solutions like Python Machine Learning IOTs, using these App Services to bring solutions into SAP.

We were doing one POC for one of the last customers where we had to integrate mobile solutions and IoT. We were using App Services to build those IOT components, retrieve data, and integrate with SAP.

We were using some temperature readings for our supply chain logistics company. Once we read temperatures, we'll push it to the App Service, and App Service will internally push it to the digital twins. From there, we get the events and consume those events into a function, and then whatever the functions read will be pushed into the DB.

The best feature is the latency is significantly less. The functions which are provided in this App Services app work very fast, and there are no latencies that we see. The realistic data allow us to configure analytics on top of it, and it is very fast.

It is easy to set up.

The cost is reasonable.

We've found the product to be stable. 

Recently, we have used some scheduling and event management. From an IoT use case perspective, we're all good, however, we should have additional plugins.

We started using the solution in 2021.

It is stable so far. We have not received any challenges during our implementation. 

Azure was very fast in doing scalability from a user management perspective. Whenever you add a new user, it automatically aligns, and then the license gets adjusted automatically.

We have a few thousand users. Pretty much everyone uses it. 

We began using the solution due to the fact that digitalization is becoming normal now, and we have to integrate a lot of non-SAP solutions. App Services gives a lot of flexibility for us to bring data from any data source and push it to enterprise services, which we want to consume.

The solution is easy to set up. It's very easy. it's not complex at all. 

It only takes about a week to deploy a bare-bones product. To have an end-to-end solution, it only takes 20 to 30 days. 

From a licensing cost perspective, Microsoft Azure, compared to other cloud services providers, is competitive and reasonable from an implementation point of view.

The Azure license is based on usage. It's pay as you. We pay for what we consume. 

We are partners with Microsoft.

I'm not sure what version of the solution we're using. 

I'd advise users to try out the product.

I would rate it eight out of ten. It is flexible and easy to use. Configuring and deploying are also quick and easy. 

The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure App Service are its vertical and horizontal scaling, along with its ability to throw a docker image.

Microsoft Azure App Service needs some improvement in the scaling area. The solution should also be able to easily host apps that don't have an HTML front end.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for ten years.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service ten out of ten for stability.

Around 1,000 users use Microsoft Azure App Service in our organization.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup is pretty simple. I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

Microsoft Azure App Service's deployment is very quick and could take minutes since it is on an app-by-app basis. The solution's deployment requires minimal staff.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a seven out of ten for pricing.

Before choosing Microsoft Azure App Service, we evaluated AWS. Ultimately, we decided to go with Microsoft Azure App Service because it natively works much better with dot net applications than AWS. Not that AWS does it badly, but Microsoft Azure App Service is much more up-to-date.

Microsoft Azure App Service is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

I advise users to think about the types of applications they want to host on the cloud and adapt it for the cloud instead of doing a lift and shift.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for MDM management. 

We primarily use the solution for application deployment. It is very easy to use. 

The solution is very simple to set up. 

It is stable and reliable. 

The solution can scale.

Pricing is moderate.

So far, it has been good. We haven't used it for that long and haven't had any issues. 

The pricing is average. It could be lower.

There are still some improvements that could be leveraged in the future to make it even better.

The response time could be better.

We've used the solution for about one year. We've used it quite often.

This is a stable, reliable product. We haven't had issues. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate stability ten out of ten. 

We have 600 people using the solution.

It is a scalable product. I'd rate scalability ten out of ten. 

I've never contacted technical support. I'm not sure how helpful they would be.

I did not previously use a different solution. We chose this solution to help improve the daily management of mobile users. 

The initial setup and implementation have been quite straightforward. It is not complex. I'd rate the ease of setup ten out of ten. It's very easy. 

The deployment process was very good. It took maybe a few hours, including lead time. 

We have 500 people deploying and maintaining the solution. 

We've witnessed ROI while using the solution. It's worth the purchase. 

The pricing is decent. It's not overly expensive. I'd rate the affordability five out of ten. The pricing is average. 

We may have looked at other options as well. We did also look into Office 365. 

We are end-users and customers. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

It's useful for companies that use iPads.