Microsoft Azure Reviews

Microsoft Azure can be used for everything, including development, hosting and storage. Since it offers active directory as relates to the cloud, it can be used for directory management and logins.

We work with Azure, which is okay, but very clunky and complex. It lacks fluidity and is not intuitive. This can be problematic and require one to work with external consultants. Things can depend on the client. Not everything can be known in advance and there may be a need to make changes to the interface. Changes which are made to the functionality are not always intuitive. As such, while the solution offers very good functionality, its intuitiveness, in respect of user experience and configuration, is not the best. I should note that these are minor issues and I do not work with Azure very much, there being only a couple environments in which we employ it. 

We see the same issue with Microsoft, which is not an intuitive platform. The ways in which the various components are placed seems to be illogical. There are different screens and end-configurations. In my familiary with Microsoft, a decision was reached to do things this way and there is no way to alter this. 

As such, the solution could definitely be more intuitive. 

The solution is reasonably stable.

The solution is completely scalable. 

I have encountered no issues with Microsoft tech support. 

The setup of everything is very quick, although the real issue revolves around the speed at which the changes get synchronized. While this may take 24 hours, there are occasionally issues which arise, such as problems with the DNS or general networking issues. This requires one to involve Microsoft tech support.

The technical team required for deployment and maintenance can vary. One of the clients with whom I work is an external provider who does all the configuration in Azure. Another has a back-end of Microsoft 365 and I manage this on my own.

Everything involves an annual commitment with a monthly charge.

The solution is also cloud-based.

At present, two of my clients are using the solution. 

I would not recommend the solution to someone who does not require it, instead referring the person to AWS. Like Microsoft Azure, AWS is also not sufficiently intuitive, although it is a more robust solution in my experience. 

I rate Microsoft Azure as a six out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution as a server for some applications. 

As a software data center, we can put some pretty cool applications running there.

The stability is very good. It's reliable. 

We have found the scalability to be good. 

The pricing is reasonable. It's not too expensive.

They develop so fast, it's hard to trace the technology. They have a lot of folders, for example, and it's hard to keep up with changes. 

The deployment was quite complex. It's not easy to implement. 

I've been using the solution for about a year or so. It hasn't been that long so far.

The stability of the product is very good. It doesn't have bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's been very reliable for the most part.

The solution scales well. If a company needs to scale it out, it can do so. It's not a problem at all. 

We haven't really used support so far. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The initial setup isn't exactly straightforward. The deployment is a complex process.

We're happy with the licensing pricing in general. It's not overly expensive. 

We have a business relationship with Microsoft.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been largely happy with its capabilities in general. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We are working with the latest version.

PaaS is a valuable feature, which allows for management visibility of Microsoft. Everything is very good by way of performance. Many of my customers are using SaaS and PaaS and are happy with its tasks and performance. There are many tools, such as monitoring. The security can change along with your defender. 

From the perspective of management, the solution has functional apps that are running, SQL as a service. Everything is pretty good. 

In my role as a service provider the vendor appointment may be required from the Microsoft plan. Occasionally, the response time is inadequate. It would be nice to have faster support. 

I have been using and providing Microsoft Azure services since 2000. As of 2011 I have been providing PaaS and IaaS services. 

The solution is stable under the right circumstances. 

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is not complex. The solution is user-friendly. A good working knowledge enables one to do a pretty good job in comparison with AWS. 

Microsoft is in the process of implementing a vast security apparatus. Their security features are really good. The ones that are part of Microsoft Azure allow for vulnerability assessment, with good security features. In the event of someone deploying a red flag or app they get in contact with you and take action. 

Our customers run the gamut from small, medium to enterprise businesses. SMB comprise our major customers, with two or three being enterprise. 

As I am a Microsoft partner, I recommend Microsoft exclusively. 

I rate Microsoft Azure as a ten out of ten. 

We are a solution provider and Azure is one of the products that we offer to our customers. However, there is a problem. It is impossible to sell a cloud-based model here in Venezuela because we have strong inflation and most of our clients are immigrating to on-premises solutions.

The most valuable feature is the virtual machine.

The pricing needs to be adjusted so that the strong inflation in Venezuela does not prevent customers from purchasing it.

I have a lot of experience with Microsoft. I started using Microsoft 25 years ago. I have used it in all aspects, both on-premises and soon in Azure cloud.

This is not strongly done on-premises, but we have several approaches with Microsoft Azure.

We have approached our clients about using Kubernetes or Docker because it's cheaper when inflation is considered.

We are researching how we can migrate all old legacy applications using Docker. In Venezuela, the software installed with all of our clients is legacy. 

We have clients with Windows Server 2003, 2008, and applications with older operating systems who need to move to the cloud, but it is impossible because the cloud doesn't support those operating system versions. For this reason, we are considering using Docker to encapsulate the applications to see if it is feasible to migrate to the cloud or if we require new equipment on-premises.

Most of their software is not updated and won't be able to migrate to the cloud.

In Venezuela, we are having some problems with the economy regarding the exchange control with our currency. 

The best Microsoft product in my opinion Azure Stack Hyper-Converged Infrastructure or Azure Stack HCI. It's for working in hybrid mode.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a ten out of ten.

It could be used for overall migration from on-premises systems for data ingestion to data processing, data modeling, advanced analytics, and high-end reporting. Microsoft Azure can be used to move from conventional, on-premises relational and traditional data systems and big data systems to the cloud.

I have found cost advantage and faster execution to be valuable features. Overall, Microsoft products are budget-friendly. 

The cycle development time is pretty fast, and there's very good coupling within the whole set of Microsoft tools, from the database to the ETL engine, ingestion through Azure Data Factory, then modeling with Synapse Analytics, and reporting through Power BI.

You also have the ability to integrate with external tools if required. For instance, if you don't want to model on Synapse Analytics, which is a Microsoft product, you can use Snowflake. So, it allows customers to adopt a hybrid approach of mix and match when needed.

As for improvement, I think better accelerators and better tools that can be used to migrate and leverage the existing models and data schemas are needed. 

Also, on the ETL side, we can convert data pipelines that are already setup on-premises and business tools that already exist. If we can migrate and automate these into Azure faster, it would be great. I think a faster migration path will help. There is a lot of scope for improvement in this area.

Better reporting capabilities would be good also, because as of now, Microsoft Azure has its own path with Power BI. However, better integration with other enterprise reporting platforms would help.

I've been using Microsoft Azure for two to three years.

Technical support is good for all cloud platforms since it is at a global level. So, it is very professional.

Installation is very fast and can take a few minutes to an hour. A lot of documentation is available, so it could be done in-house.

Microsoft Azure comes with a long-term license and trial licenses as well.

I would rate this solution at nine on a scale from one to ten.

The strategy we are employing is to adopt a hybrid approach rather than switching all at once. We are moving in small bits and having both environments for business continuity. Then, once we and the users are feeling more confident, we will totally switch to the cloud.

We primarily use the solution as a platform for our applications and security.

The application gateway is very good.

We like the WAF feature.

The product has been quite stable.

The scalability potential is very good.

Technical support is very good.

The configuration process is very minimal and happens very quickly.

The solution should emulate what MuleSoft is doing. At the moment MuleSoft has a lot of other features compared to Azure API integration. Just the coverage of the features, for example, could improve. Azure should offer more coverage of the features.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years.

The solution is very stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable.

The solution scales very well. If a company needs to expand it, they can.

We have about 1,000 users on the solution currently.

We do have plans to continue to use the solution and may even increase usage in the future.

Technical support has been good overall. They are helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of service we receive.

I don't really have experience with other solutions at this time. I typically work with Azure.

There isn't much of an implementation process as the solution is in the cloud.

However, you do need to do some configurations in order to ensure it's set up as you need it to be. This part of the process takes a minimal amount of time.

We have about 60 to 70 people who can handle deployment and maintenance within our organization.

While I could handle the process myself, in our case, we had a network architect handle the configuration process.

I'm a consultant.

As we are using the cloud version of the solution, we are always using the latest version as well. It updates automatically.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We are customers of Microsoft and I'm an IT architect.

The solution reduces work for our IT teams. They don't have to keep things up to date, and we can concentrate on our mission. The best feature for us is the help we get from Microsoft to migrate applications to the latest release and support efforts. It saves us a lot of time. 

The cost is a big issue, it can quickly go up if you don't control things. We've set up a system that shuts down machines regularly so we don't run up costs. Sometimes our development teams start up machines and forget to shut them down, and we see our costs go up quite rapidly with monthly surcharges. It would be helpful if Microsoft didn't change the control panels quite so often. It means we need to retrain personnel whenever things change and that seems to have an impact on our IT teams.

We've been using this solution for nearly four years. 

Stability is good and the solution is easy to maintain. 

Scalability is really awesome. We don't have to worry about it at all, we're really impressed. Everyone in the company uses Azure. 

Tech support is great. I find that we get answers quickly. It's just the first line of support that I criticize sometimes because it seems that whenever we open a ticket, they give us a run around with certain questions that basically we've answered. But as soon as we get into the next level of support, it's more advanced and questions are answered quite rapidly. Our tech guys know how to open a ticket and basically provide all the available information that they need. We sometimes have to get through that initial loop, and answer the same questions again and again, until they push us to another level of support.

Four years ago the initial setup was quite complex but lately I find it's becoming increasingly easier, and the set up rules for securities are a lot simpler. These are things that are improving all the time. 

Licensing is on an annual basis. 

If a company wants to concentrate more on their mission and less on supporting infrastructure, they should give Azure a go. I find that it saves us a lot of time.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

This year, we built our own data center, and we use this solution to extend it into the cloud.

We have implemented the ExpressRoute connection, which is an established circuit between the local provider and the Microsoft network edge. This leads you directly to the Microsoft data center.

The digital workload transfers from on-premises here to the Azure cloud, which is a hybrid model. We have two different zones in Azure. One is for the intranet, and the other is for the internet.

The most valuable feature is the performance for our digital workloads.

At times, the support is terrible. It is not bad all of the time, but many times when we have contacted them, there are juniors without refined knowledge. We have had instances where it takes a long time to solve just a single problem.

We have been using Microsoft Azure for the past two years.

The stability depends on the customer. They decide the compute and other things, such as the level of support. If they take premium support then the SLA given by Microsoft is higher than when you choose a virtual machine without premium.

At the moment, we are reviewing and studying how to migrate our full workload to the cloud. We have one datacenter with more than 120 virtual machines and we are learning how to do the migration. Once it is achieved, the hybrid model we have can become a public model.

Our design was complex because we wanted it done in a certain way. There were lots of things to be done. We just experienced problems in the firewall's compatibility with Azure because when you implement a firewall, it's not as straightforward as in the case when you implement it on-premises. This led to some challenges and we had to troubleshoot the deployment of one firewall for a full month.

Even the local providers did not have experience with how to deploy that one firewall, which is why we spent so much time troubleshooting. It turns out that when you deploy a firewall on-premises and you want to migrate to the cloud, there are certain considerations that you have to keep in mind, which makes it more complex.

For our second firewall implementation, it was faster and better.

Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis.

This is definitely a product that I recommend, but it has to be done smartly. Not everything can be migrated and you shouldn't try to migrate everything as-is. It has to be done properly and people have to understand how services that are to be migrated need to be done. Also, there are some services that should not be migrated because it is better to keep them on your own cloud. This should all be studied in advance.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.