Microsoft Azure DevOps Reviews

We use it for automating our code builds, significantly enhancing collaboration, and accelerating our release cycles. By reducing release times, we're able to ship our product faster, thereby increasing productivity and efficiency.

We use continuous integration and continuous deployment through Azure DevOps. With CI, we gain the advantage of fully approved code merges, as demonstrated in your demo. This ensures clarity on which releases are destined for production. With continuous delivery, we seamlessly deploy to both our test and production servers.

Azure DevOps supports our agile project management and sprint planning processes. This enables us to release sets of features more efficiently and quickly within the Agile framework. Additionally, DevOps facilitates the approval of features, further streamlining our release process.

When using the Agile template, we have visibility into what tasks are available, in progress, upcoming, and completed. This comprehensive view allows higher management to easily track the current status of tasks, including which ones are being worked on and which are finished.

It significantly enhances the testing phase of our software development lifecycle. Previously, after development, we deployed our software to a common QA environment for testing. However, now with Azure Test Plans, we can create isolated environments for each solution using virtual machines. This isolation helps us identify and address issues specific to our product, without being hindered by environment-related issues. With continuous integration through CI/CD pipelines, once our build is completed and approved, it automatically deploys without manual intervention, streamlining the process further.

Since adopting Azure Pipelines, we have observed significant improvements in our release management process. Previously, the process involved various stages and multiple approval steps, leading to fragmentation. However, with Azure DevOps, the entire process is streamlined, allowing for seamless transitions from board check-in to release approval within the same solution.

Before using Azure DevOps, we couldn't release as swiftly as we can now. With Azure DevOps, our ability to release has significantly improved. This increased efficiency means we can release more versions of our product, leading to higher productivity and the shipment of more artifacts than before.

The features that have a significant impact on us include CI/CD, where we have full integration with the source code repository and Azure Pipelines. This enables us to efficiently review and approve source code for deployment and testing. Utilizing Azure Test Plans, we can deploy to virtual machines, facilitating streamlined processes in a dedicated environment.

At times, our development work encounters issues, particularly when executing numerous CI/CD processes. Occasionally, these processes may experience delays or errors, often stemming from unavailable features or functionality in the cloud environment. Improvement in this area is necessary for smoother and more reliable operations.

We have been using it for two years.

This solution is stable. However, as mentioned earlier, configuring multiple CI/CD pipelines, with numerous processes running concurrently, can occasionally lead to issues.

Being cloud-based, this product is highly scalable, offering the flexibility to scale horizontally or vertically as needed. With a relatively small team of ten to twenty users, the scalability of the product aligns well with our requirements. It is widely utilized by both developers and the QA team.

The initial setup varies depending on the complexity of the workload. Some cases are intricate and require significant time to develop the end product or work item. Conversely, there are simpler, smaller cases that can be completed quickly.

For deployment, assistance from Microsoft or a system integrator is essential. Customizing templates and processes requires their full support to tailor them to our specific requirements. Since it's a cloud-based solution, the need for managers is minimized as management becomes simpler. A team of two to three individuals is sufficient for configuring it effortlessly.

The licensing for this product is on a monthly basis. It is relatively inexpensive compared to other solutions that necessitate servers and physical hardware.

 Overall It offers a comprehensive array of features with accessibility and support for customizations and performance enhancements. Its extensive feature set covers various aspects, making it highly versatile. I strongly recommend Azure's demo for exploring CI/CD pipelines, boards, and customization options. It will undoubtedly streamline development activities, reducing effort and boosting productivity significantly. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use it for requirements, development work, and testing. 

We're doing an implementation at the moment with the client. So, it is the latest version that would've been uploaded.

It is a cloud-based system. So, it is stable and scalable.

Azure DevOps is set up more for development and less for testing. If it is set up correctly, everyone can use it better, but it was set up from a development point of view, which means it is lacking in what I need from a testing perspective. Just like any other tool, it depends on how it is configured. I am not happy with the way it is set up. It is configured more from a development side, and it doesn't necessarily cater to all the other areas that probably need to use it, such as testing data, etc.

I have been using this solution for about 15 months.

Its stability and performance are okay. It is on the cloud. As long as you have got access to it, it is stable.

It is a cloud-based system. So, you can add more bandwidth. It is scalable on the cloud.

We have about a hundred users who are using this solution. It is used on a daily basis.

A third party deals with the technical support of it at the moment.

I wasn't around when they initially set it up, but the way it is set up, it is too complex. It is probably good for developers, but it is not good for the testing side. 

It is a third party that sets it up. I don't know about its maintenance because I'm not that close to it.

I would advise organizing and doing the right assessment for all teams that are going to use it. When it is being set up, more people within the program need to be involved in the setup, not just the developers. You need to know about the requirements for design, development, testing, integrations, and architecture. You need to solicit requirements on what each one of these teams needs from the tool before the tool is configured. When you set something up only from the development perspective, you forget that there would be a need to extract information for data testing and training. So, you need to assess who all are going to use the tool so that you set it up for maximum usage.

At this time, I'd rather not recommend it because it wasn't set up correctly. It wasn't set up with other teams involved. In a year's time, if I'm working on it again, I may have a different opinion.

I would rate it a five out of 10.

I used Azure DevOps for work item management, sprint planning, source code repository, continuous integration, continuous build, and continuous release. I build whole chains.

The most valuable feature is that it's fully integrated, where we have a single place to do everything that we need.

Testing is really good, it has come a long way.

It is the single source of proof or the single system of record that does everything you need, you don't have to put the different pieces together to form the whole chain.

We can do everything in one single platform, which is why it does a good job.

Requirements management is an area that can be improved.

Integration with Microsoft teams would be a good idea.

I have been using Microsoft Azure DevOps for five years.

It's stable. It's been pretty good, especially in the last two years.

There are no issues with scalability. We have approximately 50 people in our organization who are using it.

We have contacted technical support and they are excellent. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

I am using a mismatch of tools from HP and Atlassian, but they did not give us an integrated toolchain. Microsoft Azure does it exceptionally well.

It is reasonably straightforward, but it is only as straightforward as the problems that you are trying to solve.

If you are trying to set up the whole chain, then the problem is complex, and the solution has to be as equally complex.

The price is reasonable, but of course, you can find others that are cheaper such as Atlassian. But, if you look at the more serious products like Polarion, it's very competitive. 

If you have good Microsoft programs, it's nearly free.

I would certainly recommend this product.

There are a lot of parts to the toolchain for DevOps, so take each area at a time. My advice is to take one step at a time, don't overdo it, and over time build out all of the capacity difficulties. Automation is also one of the biggest things.

Overall, it seems like a really good solution.

I would rate it a ten out of ten.

We use Azure Repos for most things. It integrates with Azure Boards. 

It's good for the ticketing part and for saving the Azure Repos. We use Terraform.

Azure DevOps integrations with other tools have streamlined our workflows.

The centralized code repository is a major part. We store code and collaborate, and everyone can see what others are doing and what code they're adding. We can review the code and make changes if needed. 

The same code used for implementation is visible to other team members, allowing them to contribute. Additionally, the Azure board interface helps create tickets and assign workloads, keeping everyone informed about progress.

Azure DevOps is effective for repository management and code collaboration. We can create branches, differentiate between code versions, save and review code later, get PR approvals, and more. All these features are valuable.

There is room for improvement in customer service and support. Sometimes, I create a ticket for a specific issue, and they tell me it's not relevant to that ticket. 

They ask me to create a different one, basically saying they can't help with the current one. It's a communication gap. We're troubleshooting, so we don't always know the exact issue. They should let us stick with the same ticket and maybe assign a different engineer if needed. These areas definitely need improvement.

Another area is the Azure monitoring agent for Citrix machines. There's room for improvement there too.

I have been using this solution for four months. 

It's a very refined tool from Microsoft, so there haven't been any problems with stability for us.

Scalability is great. We can add as much code as we need, and the deployed code volume can also be scaled. 

The scalability comes in the sense of creating virtual machines using IaaS, which works really well within the suite.

I'm on the DevOps team, and around 25 to 30 of us in the team itself use Azure DevOps. So, overall, there are a lot of end users in my company. 

The customer service and support are good, but there are some issues when we're doing a deployment and need clarification. They're not very helpful there. Maybe there's a separate team for that. 

But in general, for project creation and work, after everything is deployed, Microsoft can help with a general support ticket. But they won't help with the planning phase. They're more like big management. So, there's a gap in the assistance we need for new project deployments.

Neutral

For ticketing, we use ServiceNow. Both solve the same problem in that regard. And for code repositories, we use GitHub. So, it's not an all-in-one solution like Azure DevOps, which has a lot of features bundled together.

Since Azure DevOps offers everything in one place, it feels more convenient. It does a bit of everything. So it's a good option because it replaces various individual tools and provides all their services in one package.

It is very straightforward. It was easy for me to deploy. 

The deployment depends on the workloads we have. For example, deployment for setting up Azure DevOps or the application itself isn't the same.

It takes a lot of time to get the setup ready. 

Regarding setup, connecting it to Visual Studio was smooth on both Mac and Windows. Integrations are quite good. 

Deployments depend on the workload. We create virtual machines using Terraform, so it's usually fast, especially when downloading repos from Azure Repos.

Smaller tasks like deploying a prepared code for a single service wouldn't require additional engineers. Many workflows can be handled by one person. 

Architecture is different, as the architect designs the infrastructure, which needs to be followed.

ROI depends on the cost optimization we can achieve. Sometimes, clients use heavier resources than they actually need. So it depends. 

If the environment is fully optimized, there can be significant savings, leading to a good return on investment. But they would also be paying for partner management. 

For Microsoft, it can get expensive when you need heavy-duty machines. But compared to on-premises solutions or the hardware we used before, it's still much more convenient for us. So even though it can be pricey, the benefits outweigh the cost in our case.

Maybe some more flexible payment options could improve the pricing. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We have a number of use cases. One of them is development, which includes several development teams that use source code control and testing support, as well as the entire software development toolset. I only use the front end, which is the project task management part.

I don't have any metrics on that. I can only give you anecdotal evidence. 

One of the benefits of using a Kanban board is that it keeps track of how long tasks take. People would hold onto tasks for three or four weeks before we started using the Kanban board. However, once we began using the Kanban board, it became more visible. 

We also realized that we needed to divide the tasks into smaller sections, and the tasks lasted an average of a week. As a result, the throughput and velocity increased simply because the Kanban board made them more visible.

I found the Kanban board to be the most useful for my needs.

I'm a project manager. I've been working with non-technical teams and training them on agile methodologies. Using a Kanban board is usually the most straightforward way to get a non-technical team started with an online task tracking tool.

In comparison to JIRA, I believe DevOps has very poor reporting and metrics support. They've done very little work, and they could benefit greatly from improved reporting and metrics.

Essentially, I would like to see more reporting support.

This solution was already in place when I started. I'm not sure when it was first put in place.

I started with the company in May of 2018, and have been using Microsoft Azure DevOps ever since.

We are using the most recent version.

Microsoft Azure DevOps is a stable solution.

It is difficult to customize DevOps. It's similar to a product that has had features added to it rather than being completely redesigned. As a result, it has limitations in terms of scalability and customization.

The most successful users are software developers and technical software managers.

I believe it is quite minimal. Microsoft, in my opinion, does not provide adequate support. My solutions are mostly found online. 

With JIRA, you could call someone, and they had a large community of users who could answer your questions. They also had a support department that provided assistance. Microsoft has a lot of information online, but you have to find it, look around its various websites. It is not well supported.

I used to work as an engineering manager, a scrum master, and as part of a technical team. JIRA is my preferred tool for this. 

JIRA is a more robust and mature tool. However, as you are aware, JIRA is more modular and requires integration with other parts. DevOps, on the other hand, has everything in one, it combines source code control, release management, and task tracking.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward. It's one of its advantages over JIRA. It is easier to set up because it is a simple product, whereas JIRA is more complex, more mature and complete, and more difficult to set up.

We have two or three technicians who deploy and maintain this solution.

You would really have to do a comparison, and you would need some training. 

It really depends on your project management and reporting requirements. DevOps is simple to use, but it is severely limited in terms of project management. JIRA is complete, but it's a lot more complicated.

I only use it for project management and the tools associated with project management. I know it's popular among those who use it for source code control and release management. It appears to be more satisfactory for that purpose.

I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps a five out of ten.

Our primary use case of Azure is to host our web application. We used Azure SQL databases for our project and found it useful to host our web application and make use of all Azure's facilities, such as function apps, API management services, etc. This solution is cloud deployed. 

Some of the most valuable features are the ease of use and the ability to monitor a lot of things. It has a lot of applications and facilities that meet all the developers' requirements. For example, we can use application insights to get an idea of our application's performance. Since it's cloud-based, it's really good for collaboration and working as a team. 

I can't think of anything I would like to improve, since I don't have complete knowledge of the platform yet. I'm sure that as I gain more experience, I will understand it better. The price could maybe be cheaper, but I'm sure I'll have more ideas as to improvements and additional features once I've used it more. 

I have been using this solution for about two months. 

This solution is stable. From what I have used it for, it has been pretty efficient. 

This solution is scalable. Most of my team uses Azure DevOps and other Azure facilities, so there are quite a lot of users. 

I haven't felt the need to contact support. I'm not sure if any of my friends or colleagues have, but one thing about Microsoft is the documentation is extremely good. So we barely falter anywhere because if we thoroughly follow the documentation, it's pretty easy to follow the process through. 

The installation is straightforward since it's cloud-based. You can do it yourself. For deployment, we were a team of about 20 people. 

We implemented through an in-house team. 

This product could maybe be cheaper. My organization handled licensing, so I'm not aware of which subscription they have. 

I rate this product an eight-and-a-half or nine out of ten. I have partial knowledge about it, since I haven't really explored everything in proper elaborate detail, but I would definitely recommend Microsoft Azure DevOps to others considering implementation. 

I took a part-time job doing a mentorship to guide the students on how to use cloud computing on the AW and Azure cloud resources. For that project, we go through each and every service on cloud computing that is part of the service platform. The new technology is called server-less technology. The goal of the mentorships is showing students how to fundamentally use these resources and explain the advantages and disadvantages of cloud computing over on-premises solutions.  

Currently, I do not know if there is really a single feature that stands out as the most valuable. If you consider our use case and that we were using Azure essentially as a teaching tool, it was the tool itself that was valuable.  

I do not have in-depth experience with Microsoft Azure, but it is like other services such as AWS. Currently, the number of services are increasing on Azure actually at a faster rate than with Google Cloud. If you are working with Microsoft products like Office 365 the best cloud solution would be on Azure services. The cost is also better than AWS.  

Microsoft has also built an association with other cloud products for helping to migrate your licenses to the cloud. This works out well if you have a substantial investment in licensing for Microsoft products on-premises. Being able to bring that license to the cloud is a good transitionary solution.  

I have been running reports on the availability of the major competitors in the cloud services to use as a demonstration in webinars and comparison of services. The most available solution on the cloud in user availability by minutes is Google Cloud. Google is the number one solution and the second one is AWS. The third one is Microsoft Azure.  

Compared to the availability of the other two major cloud solutions, Microsoft Azure needs to make an improvement in their availability. This report suggests that the Azure team needs to do some major changes to match the availability of the other services and make the product more competitive.  

In DevOps (software development and IT operations), server-less architecture and QNX platform integrations are things that need to be added to Azure. Currently, I am not sure that this is the case. But previously, I have had experience trying to use Azure with service and integration with the QNX platform and it is not as good as Google Cloud. Azure has improved its current set of data services on the cloud. But Google Cloud is doing more right now to bring those technologies and make them available to developers or enterprise solutions. So, QNX integration needs polishing.  

We have been using the product for only the last two months.

I have not experienced any issues with stability.  

In general, I have seen no real issues with scalability. It is a cloud platform and scalability should usually be available on demand.  

I used Google Cloud on one of my previous projects but currently, we are using the on-premise solution. So we are hosting everything locally on-premises. We do not have any current cloud provider for the business as a whole. We are using AWS for security and backup for the production environment but mostly we rely on the on-premise solutions at the moment.  

We use the S3 compute instance of AWS only. We do not use any other AWS services. We just use VM's that we create on the S3 instance.  

Setup is not so much of an issue as the product is on the cloud. The services are essentially on demand for the product. What you do with the services is what may take more time and consideration.  

I am not comfortable sharing the details of cost because there may be different pricing schemes, but compared to AWS, Azure is less expensive. So in the pricing in this class of services, Azure is good. It can work well for small to medium enterprises. But this solution is may not be good for those who are not enterprise-level users. Small cloud computing providers have better pricing than the bigger cloud computing providers like AWS and Microsoft Azure and may be a better choice for non-enterprise use.  

Still, Azure is priced better than AWS. Price may not be the only thing to consider.  

I have had the opportunity to use a variety of different solutions and it has not really come down to a situation where one is replaced with another. There is an ongoing evaluation of the products as newer technology including the most well known, like AW, Google, and Azure. AWS is the most expensive cloud hosting. In my estimation, that is the best product right now, but things are changing quickly.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps as an eight-out-of-ten. It is not quite up to the level of other offerings in some ways but it is improving all the time.  

All the artifacts are tightly integrated into the repository where you have changed tracking, and you can enforce policies. You can improve the quality of your deliverables. You can actually see the progress you're making towards your goal, and you can even forecast how soon a feature can be completed in the future. So, it's that tight integration of bringing all the parties together right from the project managers to the developers, to the system admin who does the deployment that helps achieve the goal of DevOps. That is, the ease of realization of this DevOps ideal is possible.

Most developers and project managers choose the Microsoft tools to begin with because of familiarity, and these new tools are almost an extension of the tools you're already familiar with. There's a lot of knowledge transfer, which helps, rather than bringing in a new product line.

Also, with Azure DevOps there is tight integration to Excel and Office tools so that you can actually even use Excel to do Azure DevOps type tasks. Excel will automatically update the Azure board, your tasks, your company boards, etc. So, there is that condition and familiarity for users.

What I like about it mostly is the tools. You don't need a degree to use them. Also, there's not too heavy a reliance on the CLI.

Right now, they tend to have a limit of 1,000 tasks per sprint, and some of their web-based boards, such as the Kanban boards, no longer display tasks. Once you hit over a certain number of task limits, you need to increase those limits. Depending on how big the sprints you're running are, once you hit that 1,000 limit, you now have to start grouping tasks together. It doesn't allow you to track granularly. When you go to the boards and you are rendering the task board, it gets slower to go over that 1,000 limit. If they could improve that to, maybe, 10,000 and still have good performance, that'd be great.

I've been using it for eight years.

The version we use right now is the 2020 version, but usually, we try and keep within the last two versions.

Depending on the organization, it can be deployed on-premises or as a cloud solution, usually with Microsoft Azure as the cloud provider.

It's very, very stable.

I've used it in organizations with multiple departments using the same installation, and it's scalable. We have about 20 users in multiple departments.

Microsoft support is excellent. Even when you don't have support for some lines, you can call them, and a lot of times, they'll give you what's called a grace case. This means that although you don't have a support contract on a product, they'll help you for free.

Normally, when you call and don't have a support agreement, Microsoft will still charge you an hourly rate to give you an engineer to work with you.

Microsoft Azure DevOps just provides better integration than Jenkins does. I've been in this industry for 27 years. The whole ecosystem and the fact that most of the developers are already using Visual Studio make Microsoft Azure DevOps a good option, along with the entire integration from the project management side, to the development side, to the repository side, and to the deployment side.

Installing Microsoft Azure DevOps is straightforward. You can have everything set up in three or four hours. It's pretty simple.

I've used Jenkins in the past and a group of source repository. I've also used SourceSafe and GitLab.

To run it, to use the tool the way it's designed, you need someone who understands Scrum or Agile project management.

I have used GitLab and other pipeline tools like Jenkins. Azure DevOps combines all of them together, and it beats all of them at everything they do.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at nine and advise others to go for it.