Microsoft Azure DevOps Reviews

My clients use Azure DevOps primarily for managing code deployment pipelines. We follow a structured process of pushing code from the development environment to testing and then to production, and Azure DevOps is crucial in this workflow. We leverage its version control capabilities to maintain and track our codebase efficiently. Additionally, we make use of its dashboard service to monitor and manage employee hours, helping us keep a close eye on project timelines and resource allocation.

The most valuable aspect of Azure DevOps for me is its robust version control functionality, which is critical for our workflow. I find it particularly useful how easy it is to automate pipelines. When we push code changes, the system automatically runs the entire pipeline, and the clear visualization of logs is a great benefit. This feature allows us to quickly pinpoint issues and understand what went wrong with our processes or tools, making troubleshooting much more efficient.

While there is always room for improvement, I don't have any urgent issues or specific feature requests right now. I'm content with Azure DevOps as it is. Its functions are standard and easy to use for those familiar with such tools. However, the only thing that could be improved is the stability of the solution.

I have been using Microsoft Azure DevOps for two months.

The solution is generally stable but not entirely issue-free. While problems do occur occasionally, they have become less frequent, occurring around six times less often than before. For example, a recent issue occurred when a dependency was updated, causing the pipeline to crash. However, with the help of logs and troubleshooting, we were able to identify and resolve the problem by making adjustments to the Docker file. I would rate the stability as an eight out of ten. There is room for improvement in terms of stability, as there are occasional issues that require manual intervention to address. While progress has been made, there is a desire to achieve a level of stability where network removal is not necessary in the first place.

Azure DevOps is highly scalable and works effectively even for large-scale projects. It can handle the demands of extensive engineering work and is generally robust in terms of scalability.

The technical support is good and quite responsive.

I have experience with using GitLab. Comparing GitLab and Azure DevOps, GitLab excels in functionality and offers excellent integration capabilities with Azure DevOps. However, Azure DevOps has a more user-friendly UI. The choice between the two depends on specific project needs and preferences.

The installation of Azure DevOps is straightforward because it is a web-based platform. You don't need to create solutions or go through complex setup procedures, making it a user-friendly option. Maintenance for Azure DevOps is minimal, especially if you have automated processes in place. If your solution uses Docker and you have set up automated updates on Docker Hub, the environment can essentially upgrade itself without much proactive maintenance. However, if issues arise, you can make adjustments to the configurations as needed, allowing for a more reactive approach to maintenance.

My advice to those looking to use Azure DevOps would be to make good use of the documentation available on their website. It is a valuable resource that can help answer questions and provide clarity on various aspects of the platform. Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps as an eight out of ten.

We use Azure DevOps for the entire lifecycle of software development, starting with requirements analysis. After that, we use it to continue the process of development and deployment.

Azure DevOps is user-friendly. The UI and the UX are perfect. Their software covers the whole development cycle, from requirements analysis to deployment. In particular, it's helpful in the requirements analysis phase. You can apply your methodology or Agile framework from the beginning. After choosing the framework, like Agile or Scrum, Azure DevOps provides many features, like user stories, tasks, managing boards, and those kinds of things.

Azure DevOps is complete and meets all of your expectations. You can develop your own plugins to customize it however you want, so it's highly flexible. We develop personalized plugins or use ones that other programmers create for the Azure Marketplace. 

This makes up for any possible deficiency in Azure DevOps features. If you want some capability that Azure DevOps doesn't provide, you can develop your plugin or customize any part of it. The options for customization make it worthwhile for any software development.

Microsoft could focus on refining the reporting and dashboard elements of Azure DevOps to improve it.

I've been working with DevOps for about five years.

DevOps is totally stable. And if there are any problems, Microsoft patches them as soon as possible.

When you enter into Microsoft ecosystem, you can scale any part of the product in this ecosystem. For example, you can connect Azure DevOps to Microsoft SharePoint for knowledge or document management. You can connect Azure DevOps to OneDrive for storage. You can connect it with Skype for chatting or Outlook. 

We don't use support from Microsoft. We mostly solve problems by searching for solutions on sites like GitHub and that kind of thing. 

I've used Atlassian products like Jira, Confluence, and HipChat, but I prefer Azure DevOps and the Microsoft ecosystem.

It is effortless to set up DevOps. All Microsoft products are user-friendly and easy to install. If you run into any obstacles, you can use Microsoft library or MSDN for any further help that you need. Microsoft provides a lot of wizards that you can use to solve your problem.

We are trying to move our entire DevOps cycle to Azure DevOps. It includes test management, source code control, and some parts of CSED.

It is deployed on the cloud, so we always have its latest version.

Most of the features are very valuable for us, especially the source code control and task management.

The main issue that I have is the connection speed. Sometimes, the response is too slow. I am based in Taiwan, and I am not sure if it is because of broadband or something else.

Its initial configuration is also a little bit difficult.

I have been using this solution for almost one year.

It is stable.

It is scalable. Currently, we have around ten users. We hope to increase its usage.

I didn't have to get in touch with them. I didn't have any technical issues.

We have used Jira and TFS. Microsoft Azure DevOps is very useful in terms of management. We are trained to be the users of the DevOps services, but with Jira and TFS, we also had to manage the server, which we didn't want. We wanted to eliminate this kind of effort and just wanted to publish our own developments without having to manage the server.

It is a cloud solution, so there is no installation. Its initial configuration takes some time and is not very easy. 

I would rate Microsoft Azure DevOps an eight out of ten.

In the first years, we had the solution, we did not use it for all of its models - not for the full life cycle. Now, within the past year or year and a half, we wanted to make the best out of it. We now use all the models and all the development lifecycle.

The product has integrated all the relevant models of task management requirements, source control, back management, test management, et cetera. You have a full ALM suite.

The connection to Git, which was bought by Microsoft, is also good. We use Git as a version control tool. 

Microsoft has good integration with its other products, such as Office, Teams, et cetera. 

The solution has proven itself to be very mature and robust. It's quite stable.

The scalability potential is very good. 

I'm not sure if "missing" is the right phrase, however, I am interested in, with all of these tools, if the connection to requirements management tools like DCRM, DOORS, et cetera, would be possible. That's a weak spot in most of the vendors.

We would like some bidirectional synchronization. It's the requirement if you want to analyze it to software requirements, et cetera. That's something that most of the tools aren't that good at.

I've been using the solution for around three or four years at this point. It's been a while.

The product is mature and robust and quite stable. I haven't experienced any problems at all with it. It doesn't crash or freeze. It doesn't seem to have bugs or glitches that affect it. We have the support in-house on servers and we haven't had any problems with defining collections for example.

It is my understanding that the solution is very stable. As an example, our organization has many teams and many departments and we use it across them all the time with no problem. We started using it originally when we had several teams, and now we have tens of teams, and it scaled up to meet our needs and we haven't had any issue with doing so.

We also use Jira. I myself do not use Jira, however, it is used by other teams and colleagues within our organization.

I can't speak to the implementation process, as our IT handled it. I was not a part of the initial setup. I can't speak to if it was complex or straightforward, or how long it took to set up.

We are currently evaluating both Jira and DevOps against each other. We use both in several development units. Lately, I've been looking for some comparisons and reviews, and material regarding those platforms and the comparison between them. I'm wondering to myself whether it's good for our company to have both, or to choose one of them to be the standard platform of our company. That's the main subject that I'm interested in.

We are customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft.

I'm a manager, and therefore I don't personally use it on a daily basis anymore, however, I manage teams that work directly with the product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. If I compare it against other products, it holds its own. It's quite a good solution overall and we've been happy with its capabilities.

I would recommend it to other organizations or companies. I'd advise them, however, to use the source control and to wisely choose which kind of collection they want to set up and configure. It's something very important that will set a company up for success. 

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. 

I primarily use the solution on projects often. We use it for our Git repository and the CI/CD.

I love how easy the solution is to use. It’s intuitive. I don’t need to reference a manual. Everything is just very naturally laid out.

You can link your tasks and assign people. To me, it just makes sense. The user experience is excellent.

I like the Kanban tasks and their various features. It’s all very straightforward.

The one thing that really stands out to me is how you can filter and how you can do your reporting and filter the tasks and everything by user. Every time I try to do that in Jira, for example, it's a pain.

The stability of the product is quite good.

I’m not sure what needs improvement. I don't even think I'm using everything. There are still a lot of things on the testing side that I'm not using. That said, there's, there's a lot that it can do. I wouldn't even know where to get started on discussing what it needs or lacks.

We did have some brief performance issues, however, that was due to putting everything on one epic instead of breaking a project up.

I’ve been using the solution for about four years now. It’s been a while.

For the most part, the stability is very good. There was one time there was a bit of a performance issue, however, it was just due to the fact that the project manager was overwhelmed. It slowed down and got laggy. We put everything on one story, one epic, and we realized we needed to split it up.

The product can scale. With the projects that I work on I just pick up Azure DevOps. It just makes sense. Everything from the beginning, for example, how the story starts right up to how it gets deployed and everything, is well laid out and you can adjust as needed.

On the project that I'm doing right now, maybe have a team of ten. On other projects, for example, at my previous company, we had a hundred devs or so using it.

Technical support has been very good. We used to call Microsoft and they would help us. They gave great support. We’re quite happy with their responsiveness and level of knowledge.

I also use Jira alongside Azure DevOps. I use both of them.

I find DevOps easier to use and better laid out. I find Jira difficult and confusing.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

I can’t speak to the exact pricing. It’s not an aspect of the product I deal with.

We’re a customer and an end-user.

I’m a big fan of DevOps. It’s a good project and I haven’t seen anything else like it.

As we’re on the cloud deployment of the solution, we’re always on the latest version.

I’d advise new users, if they are a Microsoft shop, to choose DevOps over Jira. It just makes more sense.

I’d rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

With the query feature, we have to group items, so it becomes difficult for everyone to understand it. It's easier in JIRA, which has filters and other query options. So, I think this query option should be there in the DevOps also. Also, I don't like the DevOps' boards at all. It's more complicated than JIRA, I think. So, DevOps can improve in terms of its boards, work items, and filters. 

Then there is also an issue with user access. We have about 10 to 15 users that we can add to DevOps. But only the first five users have basic level access, and the rest have stakeholder access. That means they can change the task status but not add or do anything. I think Microsoft should remove this restriction from DevOps. With the access restrictions, it's tough for us to add any status for our users or filter anything on the boards. So, Microsoft should add this functionality for the other roles as well.

DevOps is a stable solution.

It's average. It's not better than JIRA. It's average because many things need to be improved by Microsoft in all their products.

Setting up DevOps is easy. 

We pay for DevOps when we use it for our clients. But for personal and internal projects, we can use the free version. But there are restrictions on the trial plan. It should also be available for free use. However, the trial version of DevOps is free for only five basic users. So, I think it should be free for others also. And other extensions like test plan creation should also be available for the basic users, at least. We have to purchase the license for this.

We use both JIRA and DevOps. The main difference between DevOps and JIRA is the test cases. You can have test cases in DevOps but not in JIRA. And, DevOps has advantages in terms of executing those test cases. You can develop releases from DevOps but not from JIRA. At the same time, JIRA's jQuery is the best. I don't like the grouping and filtering in DevOps. 

I rate Microsoft Azure DevOps seven out of 10. I would recommend it to others. It's a nice and helpful tool.

We normally use DevOps. On the application, everything has gone DevOps, however, we don't use the functions. All applications developed there have gone under Azure or AWS. We normally develop them to be able to not be dependent on anything, so if we want to deploy them in another environment, we can deploy them easily. If we want to use it in Azure, we use it in Azure. If we want AWS, we use it in AWS.

I like the CD pipeline. It's the most valuable feature for us. It's so easy to integrate into the CD/CI environment. I mostly love that one.

The initial setup is quick and easy.

The functions have too much dependency right now, so it makes it really, really hard to upgrade and make a change in the code. 

If you want to use the DPR it's a bit harder due to the fact that it's only 30 days.

We've been using the solution for a year and a half at this point.

The stability of the product has been good so far. I can't say that I've witnessed glitches. There aren't bugs. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable, as far as I can tell.

We don't have any issues with the scalability of the solution. If we need to, we're able to scale.

We've never contacted Microsoft for technical assistance. 

We are Microsoft partners. We have several Azure experts on our development team, and we have a tech that came from the US and did the training for us. We have a very strong understanding of the product and therefore we don't need help with troubleshooting or anything of that nature.

We also currently use AWS, however, I prefer Microsoft's solution as it's a bit easier to use overall.

We did not find the initial setup to be complex. The implementation is straight forward. 

Deployment is quick and typically only takes a few days or so.

We have ten people that handle maintenance. They are in different parts of the world. We have two in Australia, for example, and two in the USA.

The cost can get pretty high if you aren't paying attention to what you are doing.

We're partners with Microsoft.

I'd highly recommend Microsoft, and I recommend it more than any other solution. Everything is very simple and straightforward. The only worry for some organizations may be the cost. You need to be really, really careful.

I'd rate the solution overall nine out of ten. I think it's really, really great. If the functions were a bit better, I'd give it a full ten out of ten.