Microsoft Azure App Service Reviews

We use this solution for everything I do. We use it on e-commerce platforms and for business activities. Currently, we're using the latest version of the App. However, we used the e-commerce version between 2019 and 2020.

The most valuable feature is the Power Apps because it is very user-friendly. In comparison, the Logic Apps and Azure functions are very robust.

I can't pinpoint a specific feature that can be included in the next release because Microsoft is making new changes to the app every day. Currently, everything works perfectly. 

We have been using this solution for five years. I am a Cloud Solution Architect with TCS, primarily on the Azure front. I research different types of Power Apps. I focus on POCs and deal with architecture data.

This solution is stable as we haven't faced problems working with it yet.

This solution is scalable.

I can't comment on my experience with the customer service and support team because we connect directly with Microsoft whenever we have any issues.

Positive

It is easy to set up if you have experience and knowledge working with it, but the setup is complex if you have no experience. 

Regarding pricing, I can't comment on pricing because I don't deal with issues related to pricing. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. My advice would be to gain experience, get an MSN license and practice before working in production environments.

The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure App Service are its vertical and horizontal scaling, along with its ability to throw a docker image.

Microsoft Azure App Service needs some improvement in the scaling area. The solution should also be able to easily host apps that don't have an HTML front end.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for ten years.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service ten out of ten for stability.

Around 1,000 users use Microsoft Azure App Service in our organization.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup is pretty simple. I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

Microsoft Azure App Service's deployment is very quick and could take minutes since it is on an app-by-app basis. The solution's deployment requires minimal staff.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a seven out of ten for pricing.

Before choosing Microsoft Azure App Service, we evaluated AWS. Ultimately, we decided to go with Microsoft Azure App Service because it natively works much better with dot net applications than AWS. Not that AWS does it badly, but Microsoft Azure App Service is much more up-to-date.

Microsoft Azure App Service is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

I advise users to think about the types of applications they want to host on the cloud and adapt it for the cloud instead of doing a lift and shift.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure App Service an eight out of ten.

We are using Microsoft Azure App Service in systems, such as government, credit loan, and app services.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure App Service is autoscaling and resource grouping. Additionally, the integration works well, it is easy to do.

Microsoft Azure App Service has a lot of complexity because there are a lot of options and functionality. It is simple to become confused, there are many technical elements to learn before you can utilize the solution. If they could make the solution easier to use it would be a benefit. 

In an upcoming release, mobile device usage could be a better experience.

I have been using Microsoft Azure App Service for approximately five years.

The solution is highly stable.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure App Service a ten out of ten.

With all the deployments we have in many companies there are only a few users that use it.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure App Service a nine out of ten.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure App Service is simple. 

The price of the support could improve. It is expensive.

I rate the price from Microsoft Azure App Service a one out of ten.

I did compare this solution with Amazon AWS and Amazon and Amazon EC2. They are all comparable solutions. What stands out the most in Microsoft Azure App Service is the speed. Selecting the best solution will also depend on the use case.

We utilize Azure Cosmos DB, which has a distinct architecture compared to other services. Initially, we were concerned about the high costs associated with it since every document incurs charges due to Azure's containerization of every collection. However, we discovered that running it in a single container eliminates this cost.

I rate Microsoft Azure App Service a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is for hosting web apps so people can deploy this application and host it on an app service.

We have found the scalability feature most valuable. When you host an application on Microsoft Azure App Service and have a lot of users, there are times that there will be high traffic. High traffic is when many people try to access the Microsoft Azure App Service simultaneously. So Microsoft Azure App Service can scale up to meet the demand of those trying to access it. It has been at approximately 98% availability, and if any maintenance is required, it will notify you. You can find an alternative solution and use multiple instances to mitigate the downtime.

For now, I don't think there are any improvements to highlight.

We have been using this solution for approximately a year and a half.

We have had a fun experience with customer service and support, but sometimes customer service and support can be challenging. However, all the challenges we face are related to technology.

There are two options for setting up the CLI shop and the portal. In terms of the portal, you can easily create an app service from the Azure portal. Some people are comfortable using the CLI shop, and some don't like going to the portal and creating the app service. I believe Azure did very well in that aspect.

The pricing is quite fair because of its scalability. Before you choose the type of plan you want, you should look at the workloads that the apps have and what your organization needs. For example, if you have minimal traffic, you can use the basic plan. There's a plan for every type of workload which determines the subscription cost.

I rate this solution nine out of ten. The solution is good. If somebody is considering using Microsoft Azure App Service, it is the best because it's easy to use, and there's a plan for every type of workload. Some features can give you certificates for the domain. If you already have an existing domain, you can bring it in to do it from Azure. Additionally, you can buy your domain and bind it to Azure, but if you already have an existing third-party domain, you can also use it with Azure.

It simplifies the deployment of applications, including those built with technologies like .NET or UCS, making it particularly valuable for microservices applications. It streamlines the deployment process, allowing developers to easily deploy and manage their applications without requiring dedicated DevOps engineers.

The primary and standout feature is ease of deployment.

Having a surplus of tutorials from Microsoft, rather than relying solely on documentation or features from other sources like YouTube, can be beneficial.

It offers excellent stability capabilities.

It offers configurability through the Azure portal. Adjusting resources such as CPU or memory is a straightforward process, making it easy to scale up or down based on your requirements. We manage multiple projects. Each project, whether it's a toll-free initiative or any other, typically involves three or four developers who contribute to the content and development processes.

Deployment is a straightforward process: after coding, you package the application into a folder, compress it into a ZIP file, and execute a command line with the ZIP file's path. This command includes the ZIP file's location, and Azure App Service takes care of running the application and exposing it without any further complexities. I can handle the deployment on my own.

The cost is reasonable.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for MDM management. 

We primarily use the solution for application deployment. It is very easy to use. 

The solution is very simple to set up. 

It is stable and reliable. 

The solution can scale.

Pricing is moderate.

So far, it has been good. We haven't used it for that long and haven't had any issues. 

The pricing is average. It could be lower.

There are still some improvements that could be leveraged in the future to make it even better.

The response time could be better.

We've used the solution for about one year. We've used it quite often.

This is a stable, reliable product. We haven't had issues. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate stability ten out of ten. 

We have 600 people using the solution.

It is a scalable product. I'd rate scalability ten out of ten. 

I've never contacted technical support. I'm not sure how helpful they would be.

I did not previously use a different solution. We chose this solution to help improve the daily management of mobile users. 

The initial setup and implementation have been quite straightforward. It is not complex. I'd rate the ease of setup ten out of ten. It's very easy. 

The deployment process was very good. It took maybe a few hours, including lead time. 

We have 500 people deploying and maintaining the solution. 

We've witnessed ROI while using the solution. It's worth the purchase. 

The pricing is decent. It's not overly expensive. I'd rate the affordability five out of ten. The pricing is average. 

We may have looked at other options as well. We did also look into Office 365. 

We are end-users and customers. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

It's useful for companies that use iPads. 

I use Azure App Service as an application deployment environment. It allows me to access the FTB directly in deployed applications and change certain rules and regulations like filtering of access management.

The best feature is scalability, which allows you to target potential clients worldwide by connecting the application to a local server. This makes the application readily accessible, and the response time will be much better.

If you're on the cloud, you just get a web interface without much detail for additional configuration or the authority to configure the root or system-level configuration. This is a weakness in the cloud version compared to desktop. In the next release, Microsoft should provide additional options for configuring the deployment environment.

I've been using this solution for three to four years.

This is a stable solution.

Scalability is one of this solution's strongest points.

Microsoft's technical support meets expectations - sometimes there's a bug on their side, and we have some downtime, but it's usually minimal. However, there are some issues with technical staff passing cases on instead of dealing with them.

Neutral

Azure App Service is expensive compared to its competitors, especially its cloud-only version. I would rate their pricing as two out of five.

I would rate Azure App Services as eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is hosting applications such as function apps, web apps or API. The solution is deployed on cloud.

The ability to scale the App Service is very valuable. It allows you to host your App Service on Azure and provides the ability to bypass online. Additionally, it offers the ability to autoscale. That ability to scale out the infrastructure or the instances hosting the application is also a very good advantage in Azure which is cost-effective.

The solution can be improved by increasing the number of data centres worldwide.

We have been using this solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 1,000 people are currently using it across major sites.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate the service provided a ten out of ten.

The initial setup is neither easy nor difficult. However, it is simplified because documentation is provided to guide you. The documentation instructs how to host the applications and manage operations. In addition, the documentation aids in training and familiarizing people with the platform's requirements. 

There are different licensing options available, and we use the pay-as-you-go option. A student subscription is available with its requirements, other payment plans, and additional support. A free trial option is available to try out the platform and see how it works before subscribing.

We chose this solution because we support Microsoft Azure.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by increasing the number of data centres worldwide. I advise future users to understand how to use the platform and utilize the documentation provided online, which offers guidance.