Microsoft Azure Reviews

I use Microsoft Azure for different clients. I have different workloads or different architecture in Azure.

The most common use case is for migrations from on-premise to cloud. The principal solution is for a virtual machine, storage, and networking. 

The principal features that I use include computing, networking, and storage.

The elasticity within the cloud is great for clients to complete their pre-determined goals.

The cost is pretty good. They have a pay-per-use way of dealing with licensing that is very attractive. Migrating to the cloud becomes very attractive due to this.

The solution can scale.

Stability has been good.

Maybe Microsoft could improve its monitoring around the networking.

Clarity on the cost of the things could be better in some cases. For example, it's difficult to do a report with the cost of the things in Azure. Their calculator to estimate the cost needs to improve in terms of the estimation they provide.

I have five years of experience with this product.

There are some products that have good stability and virtual machines - depending on your setup and configuration - are very good. With Microsoft Azure, it's very rare that I even have a problem with it. In any solution, there's always some form of issue, however, with this, it's less common.

I've found the scalability to be quite good. 

I have worked with clients that have 300 users or more, however, sometimes with a smaller client they will have maybe 60 or 100 users.

Technical support is very good, however, it depends on the problem. There are some problems that originate with the client itself that Microsoft, naturally, couldn't necessarily resolve due to the origin of the problem. However, in general, I haven't had any problems with the support with Microsoft. They are helpful and responsive. 

Whether the initial setup is straightforward or complex depends on the client. There are some products that are more complex to set up. However, for me, it's easy to deploy different features or different products. It's easier compared to on-premise deployments.

Deployments can be two to three months for an enterprise.

For maintenance, you need a good team with good skills in Microsoft Azure, especially in the cloud due to the fact that it's a bit different. Things are different in the cloud compared with on-premise. 

I am able to deploy the solution for clients. 

I work with a team in my company. When, for example, we need help or support from Microsoft, we have a contact with the architect of this provider to resolve some issue or some problem that we have in the cloud.

The pricing is quite good, and it is designed as pay-per-use.

We are partners with Microsoft.

I am an architect, cloud architect, and I work in design solutions and implementing solutions in the cloud.

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

Most workloads can be migrated to Azure. For example, say a small business wants to have a website or even do development. 

Azure services like EDM and Batch are all famous, but one of the most popular services for development is Azure Functions, especially the PaaS option. Depending on a customer's environment, they can go for the PaaS.

The management portal can be confusing sometimes. We have difficulty navigating the menus because the terminology is unclear, especially when referring to the content or actionable items. 

I've been working as an Azure trainer for about a year and a half. In my last job, I was working with on-premises solutions, but the whole industry is transitioning to the cloud, so Azure, AWS, Google, and many other cloud providers are trying to get a market share now.  

I don't have any issues with scalability or stability. We moved migrated from our physical infrastructure earlier, and we haven't seen any problems. It's more about the organization getting comfortable with the solution. That's the only thing.

Azure setup is straightforward. There is no comparison to on-premises deployment because it's all automated. It's very fast, but I can't compare the speed to other vendors because I've never deployed AWS or Google.

AWS is good, but Azure's license is reasonably priced, and Microsoft is gaining market share with a competitive package overall. Moreover, Microsoft is well ahead of AWS in terms of ease of use and billing, so I think I still love Microsoft. Obviously, both have a market, but customers working on development projects or using Microsoft products often go for Azure because of the license benefits and product support. 

I rate Microsoft Azure eight out of 10.

I am a customer of Microsoft Azure and this solution is for my personal use. 

Compared to other solutions, I find Azure to be the best organized in terms of user interface, access, and features. The Google cloud platform is very awkward, access is not easy and it's difficult to see the prerequisites for your needs. With Microsoft, everything is easily accessible, you see all the preconditions, all the requirements with great monitoring, and at a good price. They do a lot of promotions so I was able to get the Azure subscription with my Visual Studio subscription. 

It's possible that the performance could be improved, but it's not a big issue. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

I haven't had experience with Microsoft's technical support because they offer good insights in the platform itself.

I would recommend this product. 

I rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

We use Microsoft Azure to patch our servers. We are also using it for creating and access management.

We have several benefits in having Azure on board. If you are Microsoft-centric, you get gold certificate partnerships. Furthermore, if you elect MSP, you have MSP certification, which allows you to have more customers on board.

The most valuable features of this solution are the Access Management and the PIN modules. They are very good features.

Update management is also very good, for both on-premises and for cloud services.

Microsoft Azure is a very good product. For my requirements, it works fine.

It's user-friendly, and the reporting is good.

Because it has a lot of features, a person just coming into Microsoft Azure might feel that it is a bit complex. Once you are familiarized with it, they will find that it is organized in a structured way.

It's a bit clunky at first.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for two yes, but I would not say that my experience is at the expert level.

We are using the latest version.

Microsoft Azure is a stable product.

It is very scalable.

I have not contacted technical support. 

There is a lot of documentation available online.

The initial setup was straightforward.

It's a pay-as-you-go subscription.

Overall, I would recommend Azure to anyone who is interested in using it.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

We are a consultancy company. We provide technology solutions for our clients. We use Microsoft Azure to provide infrastructure for our clients. 

Active Directory is a good feature. The infrastructure features that Azure provides are also good.

There should be more language options for the Azure Functions apps. It supports programming languages, but there are only a few options. It could have more programming languages. 

I have been using this solution for one year.

It has good stability. It has an availability of 99,9%.

It has good scalability. It is an automatic process. 

It is a retail solution. Therefore, we have a lot of users. We probably have direct and indirect users in thousands.

I don't like their support so much. The support of Microsoft is not fast enough and should be faster. They have a lot of layers or levels. I used to get in touch with them through the Azure Portal.

The initial setup is easy. We have developed a DevOps automatic process, which makes it very fast to deploy. It takes just a few minutes.

I would advise taking care of the intermediate layers between your business and Microsoft. They aren't good.

I would rate Microsoft Azure an eight out of ten. This rating is based on the general features. If they put more programming languages, I would rate it a ten. It is a good product.

We use Azure as an infrastructure service. Most of our customers have web servers but we also manage Azure for SAP R/3. It works fine. They do have a lot of options for SAP All-In-One, but we don't have as many options for SAP Business One. What Azure offers for Business One customers is too short to have enough servers certified. It works fine but it's not a complete solution for customers that use SAP Business One.

Azure has improved my organization because it is a new technology and so the customers who don't have enough knowledge about the cloud delegate the administration of their cloud infrastructure to us. We incorporate and add a new service to our product lineup about how to manage their Azure. It impacts our business because we're able to incorporate this new service.

The Pricing Calculator would be the most valuable feature. It's easy to use. 

I would like to have more certified servers for SAP. Our customers need an easier interface to manage Azure. They don't have people who have cloud knowledge. The knowledge group is taking time and they use our services to manage the cloud data. Azure is built for auto services but it's not easy. The interface is not easy to use. I'd like to see them develop a better interface and more graphical information about the resource and the consumer.

There's a machine, the server. The smallest machine that they have has 112 GB of RAM. It is big for a customer. It has around 16 cores and a 112 GB of RAM. Amazon has a server with around 8 cores and 60 GB of RAM. The smallest certified machine for SAP Business One HANA in Amazon Web Services is 8 cores and 60 GB of RAM and Microsoft it's 16 and 112 GB of RAM. It's too big for a small customer. Because this machine is able to manage 50 concurrent users it's too big for a customer with 22 or 30 users. 

Until now I have only had a few problems with stability. There was a problem with Azure Active Directory in the US central region that affected almost all of the data centers around two or three months ago but otherwise, it's good stability. The stability is good enough.

Scalability is fine. We tried to create services in the data center in Brazil and there was not enough space. There were not enough cores and RAM so we were not able to create it. We opened a ticket with technical service and they told to use another region.

We chose Azure because of its scalability. With Azure, we are able to use the size of a machine that we need.

I haven't opened any tickets with technical support. The technical team opened most tickets but from what I hear, technical support has been fine. It could be better. They could improve the time it takes to respond but I have never heard about any issues from the technical guys about their support. They would prefer to get a faster response back because when you have a problem, you have your boss asking for updates so you need a fast answer.

It's a very expensive machine and I would like for them to improve the price. There are smaller sized competitors who offer cheaper prices. 

We didn't look at any other options because we are not business partners with other cloud solutions or providers. We only have Azure so we try to solve everything with Azure. If a customer asks us for a proposal to move or create some interesting tool in the cloud, we all use Azure. We never compared it to other cloud providers.

I would rate this solution a nine because they are always incorporating new alerts and new features. I wouldn't give it a ten because it's sometimes not easy to use and the price is not a fair price for the solution.

I don't know why customers think that Amazon is the best. I think that the customer thinks that the best option for cloud is an Amazon service and the second one is Microsoft. My advice to someone considering this or a similar solution is to be careful with Amazon because the customers think that they are always on the list.