Microsoft Azure Reviews

We use the solution for analytics, storage and retention, for just about everything.

The solution is fantastic, with Teams, the works. It's just an amazing product.

It is stable and collaborative. It also helps that every person has Microsoft. So, the ease of use and the compatibility between users is fantastic for collaboration.

The biggest area needing improvement involves the licensing cost. The cost of actually acquiring the solution is of much significance to small to medium enterprises, especially in countries that have a negative currency. The biggest challenge we face in Africa is the lack of awareness among overseas, European and American vendors of the massive impact that the exchange rate has in the South African market. A cost of $20 for you can equal 300 rand for us. This is what most vendors neglect to realize, that a price affixed to something for the European or American market cannot be applied to the rest of the world or to a continent like Africa. The disregarding by vendors of the importance of the exchange rate amounts to ignorance or arrogance.

My issues are not with the product itself, which I think is great, including Microsoft's strategy concerning respecting it and the consolidation. The pricing, in terms of what can be referred to as traditional third world countries, needs to be addressed. 

The main takeaway that vendors should leave with is that they should not neglect the market in South Africa or in Africa. It is not enough for them to want to have a presence or sell a license. They should also show a desire to sell a value proposition.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for the last two years.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very scalable.

I have clients who use it and there are plans to increase its usage.

In respect of technical support, Microsoft's skill level in the African market is great. There has been swinging about in terms of Microsoft's skill-set over the last three years and I think this boils down to the company having undertaken much training and education. McAfee can learn from Microsoft. 

As it is a cloud-based solution, there is no installation involved. It is more about configuration.

We pay for the license on a monthly basis. 

The solution is cloud-based.

I utilize it both for my personal use as well as that of my organization.

We have a group company and I think this amounts to around a thousand users.

I would absolutely recommend the solution to others.

Taking into account the usability of Microsoft Azure, I would rate it as a seven out of ten. 

We use the solution for executing the ADF pipelines through the database port. We provide the scripts in the database, we run it, and it goes through the ADF pipeline. Afterward, through the database command, the ADF pipeline will run and push the data into Azure SQL. 

I have found the solution to be flexible, easy to use, and the documents are straightforward to understand. For example, it is flexible, we have a single pipeline that has three phases, within approximately 15 minutes the records get transferred into this solution efficiently.

Additionally, the solution is well integrated with other solutions such as Power BI.

When we are doing transfers of records in large amounts, for example, petabytes of data or few long datasets, the performance should not degrade as it does. I am working on big data platforms like Informatica and others and even though there are terabytes of data being transferred it does it immediately. However, in this solution, I would like the performance to be there when building a large dataset to integrate the data.

I have been using the solution for the past three years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the solution to be scalable. We use Teradata for large data and we are building the pipelines for it, so far it has operated well. We have approximately 25 individuals using the solution in my organization.

The technical support is very good, if you have an issue they will be able to help.

I have used Informatica in the past and it has some performance advantages compared to this solution.

The solution does require a license.

I would recommend this solution to others and we are going to continue using it in the future. We have numerous clients switching to this solution.

I rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

The solution is basically a platform as a service for web applications, virtual machines, Azure identity, et cetera.

My day-to-day is to migrate servers using Mover or some other app to access on-premises data centers. We then use Azure Migrate to move the servers in order to take advantage of the new functionalities and things like that.

The solution offers good monitoring features that allow us to configure items better in the customer environment. The monitoring is really awesome.

Occasionally, clients have specific requirements for their applications and we can move them onto Azure services or apps. 

Overall, it offers a better way to move the applications and monitor or configure the applications with higher availability. For example, there are load balancers, different types of layers that load balancers use, traffic managers, Front Door, and things of that nature that are available to us and the client via Azure.

Overall, I like how the solution works. It offers everything I need, for the most part.

The user interface is very nice and makes everything easy to use.

The power share modules have been improved, and the AC module was introduced - which has been great. There are ten or 15 more regions on the way as well.

The tools on offer are excellent. It has some really great environment assessment tools as well.

There are preview features we are waiting on. When I contact Microsoft support, there is no timeline given or clear information about when those preview features are going to be on GA, general availability. It would be ideal if they could finally give us at least an estimation of how much longer we have to wait.

Support could be improved. If you pay for a higher plan, it's okay, however, the lower plans don't offer as good of a service experience. It also seems as though each different tier doesn't talk to the other. they should be able to communicate and share details internally with each other so that they are learning from each other instead of staying siloed.

I've been using the solution for the last few years. I would estimate it's been about five years at this point. It's been a while. I've definitely been using the solution over the last 12 months.

In terms of stability, for me, it works. However, depends on the type of project that's happening. If you're going to have just a virtual machine running there then it can fail. That said, the platform offers a lot of options to improve the capability, so it depends on how much money a client wants to invest.

The scalability works just fine. I've had some issues before with Azure App Service, with an App Service environment allocation, however, Microsoft has improved that, making a bigger rack. Since then, I haven't seen issues with scalability. That was maybe a year ago.  

We currently have three clients on Microsoft Azure.

There is room for improvement with technical support. I work with premium support and therefore don't really face issues. We have good engineers. There are some issues when you get a new support person. They have a lot of rotation in their personnel. They train people for a couple of months. They're trying to help however, it's not the same as getting a seasoned professional. It really depends on the support line you buy. If you go for a lower tier, you're likely to get less experienced assistance.  

For the most part, the initial setup is straightforward. It was not overly complex. I worked with a Microsoft support engineer. I had contact with the product group and know the technical advisors and technical matters, which made it very easy for me.

For example, in comparison. I tried to use Amazon Web Services by myself, and I got confused as I didn't have that level of support. With Azure, the interface is nice, and it's pretty straightforward. Anybody with a little bit of technical knowledge about working, virtual machines, or similar items can use it with little to no problem. The implementation is pretty good.

The time it takes to deploy the solution depends on the customer environment. If they have 25 servers versus five there will be radically different deployment times.

Typically, we use Microsoft strategies as a foundation assessment. We'll look at the customer environment and be in the background for a couple of weeks to pull some data so we can have a better understanding of the customer environment. After that, we create a plan to start migrating the servers. Each client is unique.

I worked alongside a Microsoft support engineer who assisted in the process.

You do need to pay for technical support and there are different tiers of support you can get. The higher the tier, it seems, the better the service you can expect.

I haven't used AWS or Google Cloud, therefore I don't really ever compare this solution to them. I don't say "this platform has that and I like how this works". For me, Azure just works and it's fine and I don't need to go in-depth and look at other options.

The company I am working at new does use AWS and we're planning to introduce new cloud technologies as well. 

I'm not a salesperson, however, I can say that we would move the client to whichever technology made sense to them after doing an evaluation of their requirements. That, of course, is handled by a different department.

We are a reseller and a Microsoft Gold partner. We are a CSP, a Cloud Solution Provider. We offer managed services to our customers. We are moving data centers to Azure, however, we are a managed service provider. We have access to the customer's environment in order to pull analytics data to help them with consulting services, and things like that.

My basic advice to those considering the solution is that planning is essential. Microsoft does a good job of advising their customers at the outset to ensure they get what they need, however, it's helpful to go in and understand deeply what it is your company needs overall. 

That said, Azure is a strong cloud and its technology is great. Microsoft offers good implementation with service legal agreements and good practices.

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

One of the use cases that we have is with our installation of SAP on private. We also have some apps that we have developed that are public, and we use the security system that they provide. We also use Microsoft Sentinel, which is the SIEM that helps us to align with the alerts and the incidents. We have a combination of public and private clouds, but everything is in Azure.

Its ability to scale is most valuable. There are certain periods of the year when we are busier, and we're able to scale up and scale down with Azure depending upon our needs.

They're already doing quite a bit. I'm not unsatisfied with anything that they're doing right now. They can maybe make the transitions a little smoother and improve its pricing. The pricing for the end-user packages is a bit high.

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. It is very simple to scale.

You have to go through a lot of preliminary levels before you finally get to someone, but you can get a difficult problem solved. There is a process that you have to follow.

As far as the setup goes, most of it is pretty simple. When we started working with Microsoft Intune and a little bit on the unified labeling, it became a bit more complicated, but we're getting through it.

Shared active directory and multifactor authentication (MFA) are a little bit difficult to introduce because once you put something on it, it affects all of their Office products and anything that deals with Microsoft, whether it is SharePoint, OneDrive, or something else. Often, we want to activate it for an app and not so much for everything else, but that's our peculiar quirk. I don't think there is anything that Microsoft needs to change necessarily.

The pricing for the end-user packages is a bit high. It is full of very interesting services, but I would still like it to be less expensive.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for IaaS, SaaS, PaaS security, identity, and Kubernetes.

I like everything, overall.

It's a cloud platform so it's alive.

There are many different components such as SaaS, PaaS, and API, so every month they are releasing a few hundred new features.

It is constantly updating. There are weekly releases, sometimes daily releases, and there should be fewer that are consolidated into one.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for six years.

We are using the latest version.

The stability is very good.

It's a very scalable solution. It is not really the number of users we have, but rather, it is more a case of service PCs. We have 70,000 or more.

My experience with technical support has been good. They are very supportive.

It's as complex as it wants to be. There's nothing initial about it.

It's an OPEX model, you pay as you go, or you can reserve funds.

Pricing can always be better.

It's a good product and I recommend it to others.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

The solution is mainly used for setting up a big data platform on Azure and using some Azure items to navigate the data links and Data Factory.

The solution is quite flexible.

The product has been very stable for us so far.

You can scale the solution if you need to.

The solution needs to be easier to configure in the future. Right now, it's a bit difficult to accomplish.

Technical support could be better. They need to be more responsive.

The documentation should be more accessible. It's hard to find what we need right now.

It would be helpful if there was more data science or AI implemented in future versions.

The product needs to implement more API capabilities.

I've had about two years of experience using this solution.

We've found the stability to be quite good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

We can scale the solution well. If a company wants to scale the solution, they can do so pretty easily.

We have about 20-50 people on the solution currently. We do plan to continue to use it in the future.

I've been in touch with technical support and I haven't found them to be overly helpful. They need to improve their support services. The answers take too long to get. We shouldn't have to wait for as long as we do. I'd say, at this point, we aren't exactly satisfied with the level of service they provide to their clients.

We previously used AWS. We simply used it for benchmarking.

I can't speak to the initial setup as I didn't have any experience with it. I wasn't part of the implementation process.

I did mage the Azure DevOps deployment.

We're just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft.

I'd recommend the solution for larger clients, especially if they are based in Europe or America.

In general, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate this product at a seven. It's been mostly good for us. However, it could use much better technical support and documentation to make things easier.

Our primary use case is Infrastructure as a Service. We use it for SaaS applications, as well.

Azure is very flexible and easy to manage.

The interface and usage are nice.

Previously, there was no IP group, but they have since implemented that and it has become better.

For some use cases, Microsoft Azure is okay and working, but it is lacking features and we cannot implement it fully.

Talking from a networking perspective, when you create a file or a rule in Azure and you want to view this IP group, sometimes the way it is displayed on the GUI, you don't see the name of the group. At a minimum, I should be able to see the name of the group. They need to improve the GUI with respect to creating files or files. In summary, on that GUI view for firewall rules creation, the IP groups that are chosen in the firewall are not easily seen.

If I want to track, for example, a soft IP group, and mistakingly I click the wrong thing, then it's a problem. They need to improve it so that you can just view it, read-only, and then edit it later if needed.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure for approximately three years.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten, as they are still developing. 

We have approximately 500 users.

The technical support is very good.

In my own workstream, I've not had cause to work with Microsoft support. However, my teammates from the department have been in contact with them.

The initial setup is straightforward. I can say that because my use case was greenfield, starting out fresh. It was a whole new installation and everything was straightforward.

It took between a month and two to deploy. The installation is not a big deal once you have the necessary license, and then you can begin testing.

This is a product that is fast-growing and they are gaining popularity. We have invested in it, and plan to keep using it for the next five or ten years.

In my opinion, it is an awesome product. Microsoft is everywhere and it predates the cloud. Everything that they have is easy to use.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are going to use Microsoft Azure to move some on-premise servers into the cloud so that our data can be held there.

We are now trying to decide exactly this. Where can it improve our daily business?

Microsoft Azure can be pretty advanced and difficult to understand. I would like it to be simplified. The licensing especially needs to be simplified.

We have not been using Microsoft Azure for very long, about three months. My company has asked me to look for a better solution in terms of security perspective. They have asked me to technically go through to see if there is a real need to change or not, and what the new features are.

The stability of Microsoft Azure has been very good from what we have seen.

I have not actually gone through the initial setup yet. So I am trying to figure that out. They want me to go through the training so I can understand the setup.

So far we are satisfied with the pricing of Microsoft Azure.

We are also looking into other platforms. Perhaps an open-source platform.

I would rate Microsoft Azure at an eight out of a scale of ten.