Microsoft Azure Reviews

We've been using Microsoft Azure for federal government installations, and it has been really useful. Azure works well with the servers and equipment that we use. We've been deploying a hybrid environment, so this has been a great tool for our clients. For example, we've been upgrading systems for a secure health institution in Mexico City, so we deployed an Azure-based management system for the entire institution. However, things weren't so easy for some of our other clients. In one case, we used Azure to manage all the mortgages, connectivity, and databases for a huge mortgage provider. We managed all that information in Microsoft Azure. 

One of the best features is the last package security of upgrades to Microsoft Azure. Also, we like Azure's compatibility with other operating systems. 

We use Microsoft Server 2019 and 2016. And I didn't like the 2019 client, so we had to downgrade back to 2016. The main issue there was its monitoring system. Our client needed an alternative, and if they were using more Windows products, they also needed to make that downgrade.

I started working with Microsoft Azure around 10 years ago.

I would rate Microsoft Azure 10 out of 10. We like how accessible it is to the end-user, not just the engineers or developers.

We use Microsoft Azure for many different things. It depends on the customer's requirements. For some, they use it for tasks, data lakes, and integration. Others use it for Business analytics.

There are a few easy ones that use it as the ESPs, a few workloads, creating a three-tier application database and web for specific internal clients, or it could be larger with several integration points.

I worked with one of the largest airlines in the region or perhaps even in the world, and Microsoft service was one of the most prestigious ones.

Overall, the solution is good but there are some minor technical issues that can be resolved.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for quite some time. Including the previews, it has been five or six years.

The support is responsive and dedicated to SMEs.

When there is a new case or, a requirement from the business, we rapidly check with the vendors in our region. We also sometimes work directly with Microsoft.

Generally, I work in IT and have experience with some cloud-based solutions.

There are several products that I appreciate from a security standpoint.

I work in security and tend to appreciate security products more.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a ten 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. 

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're using the product as an infrastructure as a service. I'm basically using it to host services.

The product is very easy to provision. This is one of its most valuable aspects.

The solution offers pretty good integration capabilities at this time.

We've found the pricing to be pretty good so far. It's not too expensive.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The stability is quite good. It's a reliable product.

We have found the scalability to be very good.

The solution offers very good upgrades and updates regularly.

The product can be a bit confusing at times. It's not well laid out. The interface, for example, can be a bit hard to figure out and they seem to be constantly changing things on us.

It's a rather new product and therefore lacks the maturity of other options. There is much they can do to add to it and to improve it. That may likely come with more time.

Up until two or so years ago, they weren't even accepting customer feedback on the solution. They've just started to do so, and they have given users a sense that improvements will be on the way sometime in the future.

Technical support is lacking right now. It needs to be better.

We've been using the solution for more than 12 months at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance, overall, has been rather reliable for our organization.

The product has the capability to expand. If a company needs to scale it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

Technical support needs to be better. We are not quite satisfied with their level of support. They need to be more responsive to use when we have queries. 

We actually use Amazon as well. We did use it before, however, we are also still using it. We use both Azure and Amazon at this time.

We did not find the initial setup to be too complex. It's pretty straightforward. A company should be able to handle the deployment without too many issues.

The pricing is decent. We don't find that they are charging too much. It's pretty fair.

As a cloud deployment, the solution is constantly updating itself, therefore we always have access to the latest release.

We have about 300 to 400 users on it currently. It's a business unit with various users of different job descriptions.

We are planning to increase the usage in the future.

I'm not sure if the company will use this solution for the long term or if they are considering trying something new. That is yet to be determined.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We're mostly quite happy with it in general.

Our whole data center is on this basically. We are UK Export Finance, so we've got financial products there. All of our servers are hosted in Azure.

We are using an Azure subscription. We are on Azure Public Cloud, but we have got our own private subscription.

We've got multiple tools on Azure, which is a very good feature of Azure. Our Palo Alto firewall and other things are hosted in Azure. We're using Sentinel as well, which is a security tool that is being used by our SOC teams.

I've also used AWS, and I find Azure to be more Windows-driven. Although Azure is newer as compared to AWS, it is growing fast. Microsoft is working towards the betterment of Azure.

As compared to AWS, Azure can improve its functionality. In terms of the feature list, it is still lacking a bit as compared to AWS. AWS supports lots of types of operating systems, which Azure is still catching up with. Azure is mainly focused on the Windows system, and it is not yet there in terms of integration with other operating systems like Linux, Unix. Azure is slowly catching up.

I've been working with Azure for the last five years.

Lots of glitches are still there. Microsoft is constantly working to resolve those. It is a new product as compared to AWS, so, obviously, it would have some glitches. Three years ago, it was full of bugs. It is much better and stable now.

It is scalable. We've got around 450 users.

Their technical support is very good. Their response is very good. At the end of the day, we're a business, and their business support is pretty good.

The setup is quite straightforward. It is not at all hard.

We've got a third-party maintenance company that actually maintains our Azure space. 

It is not cheap. Its price could be a little bit less.

It is a cloud solution at the end of the day. People can pick up any cloud solution, but Azure is renowned. Azure and AWS are the main competitors in the cloud market now. AWS comes first, and Azure comes after that. If your solution is predominantly in the Linux space, you should go for AWS. If you are primarily Windows-based, you should go for Azure.

I would rate Microsoft Azure an eight out of ten.

Azure Cloud App Services can be classified as a MEAP, Mobile Enterprise Application Platform. It is also a Platform As A Service solution. These Cloud PaaS services are the backbone and the back-end structure that you can use to build omnichannel applications (mobile + web SPA + Kiosk). Azure App Service eases the creation of flexible Express Node.js or .NET WCF microservices. It has an API based on OData and integrated security with OpenID Connect with federated or corporate login. If you need a quick mobile solution, particularly an enterprise mobile solution, this is a wonderful choice.

We use this solution as a template to build mobile, back-end-of-corporate-omnichannel apps. 

When mobile is a necessity for an already-running corporate system, you do not want to lose time setting up a whole new environment and platform. You need something that can help you easily put in place all the scaffolding you need, and concentrate on the business solution that you are providing. Azure does this.

The time-to-market. Once you master the technology, you can create running, mobile back-ends in a few weeks. Additionally, it easily enables integration with legacy environments (like connecting to existing servers).

Scalability is definitely in need of improvement. Azure is a very good solution but it still lacks the performance of other cloud platforms.

We had issues with the Mobile Service ORM and the Azure SQL Database (cloud version of SQL Server). At times, the queries that are created automatically from the ORM mapping are not very well optimized for this database and that can lead to performance and stability issues. On occasion, the connection manager from the ORM does not handle the database connections very well.

Azure does not handle scalability as well as its competitors. Sometimes a 10 percent increase in a server with 20 percent of CPU usage pushes the server up to 100 percent load, and you start having performance issues.

Microsoft allows you a certain number of tickets, depending on the cloud plan that you are paying for. If you have an available ticket, technical support is great, but if you happen to have none, it will be more difficult to find good support. 

Once you gain a certain level of expertise on the platform, you will be able to handle most of the problems. Also, now that the platform is very open (Node.js + Express) it is easier to access good documentation and an excellent community.

We tried many solutions. We tried Kinvey and Kony but prices were absolutely prohibitive for our customers. We also tried BAASBOX which is now a (mostly) defunct open-source MBaaS solution.

We move forward with a .NET customized solution that we created ourselves but maintenance of a general platform requires a lot of work and we couldn’t afford to charge our customers for the required amount of work.

We tried AWS Mobile Services once but our customers preferred Microsoft Azure (their existing back-end was mainly implemented in .NET, and they preferred to stay in the Microsoft world).

We also built a solution with SAP Mobile gateway which is the safest choice for companies that have huge legacy systems already running on SAP.

The initial setup is very straightforward. You can very easily have an application up-and-running almost out-of-the-box. The learning curve is steeper once you need to start building more services or when you need to take care of performance issues.

The cost-benefit equation for Azure is very good, particularly for small applications. However, Microsoft should do much, much more to improve how costs are communicated and how to forecast them. The Azure Pricing Calculator is not useful.

We checked the big players in MBaaS, particularly Kony and Kinvey. Kony was extraordinary (circa 2013) but the price was prohibitive. Kinvey was also very good and prices were slightly better but not affordable at all for our customers. We started using WAMS, Windows Azure Mobile Services, the previous version of Azure App Service, which was one of the first MBaaS solutions. Microsoft improved a lot the platform with App Service.

I would rate Azure at nine out of 10. The previous version of Microsoft's mobile cloud platform, Mobile Service, had some security and scalability problems but the new version, App Service, has many improvements in these areas. It also uses open-source tools and allows developers to work in isolated environments, in their own workstations (without all the hassles and costs of putting the cloud into the developer’s cycle).

If the mobile application is not that big (up to 15 services) and time-to-market is very important, Azure App Service is a great solution. If you need heavy integration with an existing .NET legacy system, this solution will also work very nicely and will reduce costs. If you need to implement a much bigger system, my advice is that you should think about gathering a specialized team that has a very good grasp of the platform.