Microsoft Azure Reviews

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 this solution to build VMs and create databases. 

We absolutely plan to continue using Azure in the future. We actually plan on increasing our usage.

Azure allows us to bring applications to life quickly. 

Microsoft Azure is very dynamic. 

The cost is something that could be improved. There's not much clarity regarding the price range. We'll create a VM and then at the end of the month, we'll receive a bill with various costs from different locations — it's confusing. 

Integration with other cloud environments can be tricky at times. 

I have been using Microsoft Azure for three years. 

Microsoft Azure is very stable. 

The support could be improved. On a scale from one to ten, I would give their support a rating of six.

The initial setup is very complex because of the landing zone. Only Microsoft can create the landing zone. Implementation is very fast; it only takes a few minutes. 

We implemented Microsoft Azure ourselves. 

The licensing costs are quite reasonable. 

My advice is to keep an eye on your usage otherwise you could wind up with a hefty bill. 

The biggest lesson I have learned is that Microsoft Azure is very dynamic — the environment is very dynamic.

Microsoft Azure is absolutely great. On a scale from one to ten, I would give it a rating of eight because it's user-friendly and very simple to use. All of the basic features are covered. Some things can be tricky, but there is always a simple solution.

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 primarily use the solution to host the web server.

The product is very convenient for us. It ensures the website is set up right.

The solution can scale if you need it to. Expanding it is easy.

The product is rather stable. We haven't had any issues with it in that sense.

The solution is very easy to use.

I can't say that we have any complaints in terms of features or lack of capabilities within the product. Over the last two years, I'd say it's been so far so good.

It would be ideal if they could reduce costs a bit. Right now, we find the product to be expensive.

I've been using the solution for around two years at this point. It hasn't been too long.

The solution so far has been reliable. We haven't had problems with stability over the last two years of use. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's been good.

The scalability of the solution is very good. If a company needs to expand it, they can do so rather easily. It shouldn't give them any trouble.

We don't currently have plans to increase the usage ourselves at this point. There's no scaling that will be done in the near future on our end.

We've been in touch with technical support in the past. We had a question we needed them to answer and they were able to help us. I'd say they were knowledgeable and responsive and that we've been happy with the level of service so far.

The licensing is based on usage. I'm not sure of the exact costs involved as it's not an aspect of the solution that is my responsibility.

That said, it is my understanding that it is a bit expensive.

We're just a customer. We aren't a reseller or consultant and we don't have a professional business relationship with Microsoft.

We only really use the solution to host a website, and therefore we don't really use the full scope of features right now.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations as it is rather easy to use.

Overall, we've been quite happy with the product. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

We use it for various services and business applications. 

It is stable and scalable. It is useful for many applications and services, such as SharePoint, Microsoft Teams, and OneDrive.

They can add more documentation about the solution.

I have been using this solution for two years. 

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have around 100 people in the organization.

Their technical support is good. There are no problems.

It is easy to set up.

I would recommend this solution. It is a good solution.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

My current project is to carry out a comparison between Azure, AWS, and GCP, the three variants of cloud in order to analyze the best possible solution. In terms of costing and services I've been carrying out a comparison between all three. We are currently building the machine learning pipeline. We're partners with Microsoft and I'm a data architect. 

The data factory is a valuable feature. I come from a hardcore Microsoft background so I was able to relate to the data factory best among all the components as it's close to my existing system. 

I think the pricing model could be improved. I have that clarity with AWS but with Azure it's not that easy. If I am building a solution on Azure, the first question that stakeholders will ask me is about the cost. If I'm using multiple services of Azure, then how do I figure that out given that it's all on cloud.

Technically, I would say there could definitely be improvement on the AutoML part, which is the machine learning component of Azure. I made a comparison between AutoML versus DataRobot, another vendor that provides machine learning. DataRobot is definitely ahead of Azure AutoML. Of course that could be because I'm using the licensed version of DataRobot versus the free version of AutoML but there does seem to be a gap. 

I've been using this solution for about six months. 

I haven't had any issues with stability. I think it's more to do with the volume of data that I am playing with which for now is only 5GB of data. I don't expect any problems.

I don't see any issue with scalability. But here again, on the cloud platform, there won't be any issue with the scalability but you need to understand the pricing. Once you have that,  scaling will never be an issue. 

The complexity or otherwise of the initial setup depends on the person who will be using it. If you take the AutoAI services from other vendors, those are more graphical, more eye pleasing versus what Microsoft offers and less complicated to implement. With Azure ML, values have to be manually fed into the columns and that's clearly going to be more time consuming. 

There are multiple players in the market and this seems to be a good solution. It really depends on the use case and on the customer. I would personally choose AWS over Azure because that's where my experience is and I'm more familiar with AWS.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10.

We primarily use Azure for our ERP system and DR usage. It is set up for multiple production workloads.

This solution requires minimal administrative effort.

The scalability is good.

The most valuable feature is Azure SQL.

Improvements need to be made with respect to the availability of third-party services.

I would like to see more advanced functionality in terms of information security.

We have been using Microsoft Azure for six years.

There is room for improvement in terms of stability.

Scalability is one of the best features. We have thousands of users.

I have been in contact with technical support and would rate them better than average. I find that it takes a long time to reach somebody who is a subject matter expert. This is because they first need to escalate requests from the level one or level two helpdesk. For the problems that we have experienced, we needed support directly from people with expertise.

The initial setup is straightforward and the deployment can be completed within short time. Now we can deploy most components/services within a day or two.

When we first implemented Azure, we engaged with a third-party system integrator. Now, however, we can do everything ourselves. We have approximately five people who do the maintenance of the cloud infrastructure.

The price of Microsoft Azure is pretty good. Among the top market players, it’s usually the cheapest or the one after. Our usage is more than $1,000,000 USD annually.

My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that it can be a good start for SME, up to MNC who needs to see their full environment, rather than just a particular system or area.

Overall, this is a good solution but there is room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Working Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) to create a Kubernetes cluster. 

We are maintaining two environments of Kubernetes cluster on Azure using Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS).

We have used other managed PaaS services like ACS, Database, and monitoring, integrated with Jenkins for continuous integration and continuous deployment. 

We are running our product which is deployed on Azure AKS cluster. This really helps us to drive more business from customers.

• It's very easy to create a Kubernetes cluster with the Azure Console 
• Able to connect to the cluster using Azure PowerShell
• Able to connect to the cluster using kubectl
• Very good help from Microsoft Knowledge Base and also from the community
• Very good support from the Microsoft team
• Easy to manage as the core part is handled by Microsoft
• Easy to add/scale up the cluster with more nodes by using the Azure console window or through scripting
• Can integrate plugins with Jenkins for auto deployment
• Integrated with a lot of open source tools for easy deployments and other functionalities like logging, monitoring, etc.

Better logging part when deployments are crashed, even when the entire cluster is crashed.

Should always go with recommendations provided by Microsoft during the creation of new clusters. Otherwise, stability is an issue.

Scalability is very good.

Technical support is excellent. Recently, we have encountered a few issues however, the customer support team helped us very quickly to come out of it.

We did not previously use a different solution. Kubernetes is the one we are using for container orchestration through Azure-managed Kubernetes service.

The initial setup is very easy; straightforward.