We compared Gitlab and Microsoft Azure DevOps based on our user’s reviews in four categories. After reviewing the collected data. you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results : GitLab is the preferred option due to its comprehensive product that eliminates the need for multiple solutions and offers a single platform for various management tasks, including source code, build, test, artifact, and deployment management. The platform also has better integration with other platforms, more cloud-native capabilities, and a lower initial setup cost. However, Microsoft Azure DevOps is particularly useful for agile delivery and project management due to its easy navigation, customization, and integration with other Microsoft tools.
"I find the features and version control history to be most valuable for our development workflow. These aspects provide us with a clear view of changes and help us manage requests efficiently."
"As a developer, this solution is useful as a repository holder because most of the POC projects that we have are on GitLab."
"I like GitLab from the CI/CD perspective. It is much easier to set up CI/CD and then integrate with other tools."
"It speeds up our development, it's faster, safer, and more convenient."
"Key features allow creation of well-presented Wiki that includes ideas, development, and domains."
"The important feature is the entire process of versioning source code maintenance and easy deployment. It is a necessity for the CI/CD pipeline."
"We have seen a couple of merge requests or pull requests raised in GitLab. I see the interface, the way it shows the difference between the two source codes, that it is easy for anyone to do the review and then accept the request; the pull request is the valuable feature."
"The initial setup of GitLab is pretty simple, with no complications."
"What I like the most is the DevOps Boards. It's easy to create a hierarchical project structure, assign tasks to people, and to track their tasks."
"It has a good GUI, and it's very user-friendly."
"Before using this solution, we had to deploy our applications, from pre-production to production, manually."
"Microsoft Azure DevOps has helped the developers a lot and we are deploying process changes very frequently and simultaneously. A lot of my team members that are developers are updating the code in parallel using Git. Additionally, Microsoft Azure DevOps is providing a very good approval mechanism. Overall it is benefiting by creating efficiency in production deployment and applications, our new releases are running well. The security of secured is good."
"I like the fact that there is built-in Power BI. Both are Microsoft tools. So, you can incorporate dashboard capabilities."
"It's a great product for the CI/CD process."
"I think the most usable thing is that you can follow the whole progress of the development process. This makes it very useful for us."
"Overall, so far we have no major issues to report."
"It can be free for commercial use."
"I would like to see static analysis also embedded in GitLab. That would also help us. If there's something that it does internally by GitLab and then that is already tied up with your pipeline and then it can tell you that you're coding is good or your code is not great. Based on that, it would pass or fail. That should be streamlined. I would think that would help to a greater extent, in terms of having one solution rather than depending on multiple vendors."
"Their RBAC is role-based access, which is fine but not very good."
"I used Spring Cloud config and to connect that to GitLab was so hard."
"We have only seen a couple of issues on Gitlab, which we use for building some of the applications."
"There was a problem with the build environment when we were looking at developing iOS applications. iOS build require Mac machines and there are no Mac machines provided by GitLab in their cloud. So to build for mobile iOS application, we needed to use our own Mac machine within our own infrastructure. If GitLab were to provide a feature such that an iOS application could also be built through GitLab directly, that would be great."
"I'm new to GitLab, so I would appreciate more documentation about the code and commands."
"GitLab could improve the patch repository. It does not have support for Conan patch version regions. Additionally, better support for Kubernetes deployment is needed as part of the package."
"The solution should have fewer updates."
"It's too technical sometimes because it's meant for network developers. The CI/CD pipelines are not very easy to manage because it requires a lot of input. So it could be easier to manage."
"Microsoft Azure DevOps could improve by having better integration with other email servers."
"Being more technology-agnostic through ease of integration would be beneficial."
"It would be great if I could integrate with a human resource type of software that could control timesheets."
"There are certain features, and reporting that can only be used in PowerBI, but not directly in DevOps."
"The communication could work better, especially for the development team."
"Azure DevOps could be improved with more security plugins, especially for SaaS scanning and vulnerability scans."
GitLab is ranked 2nd in Release Automation with 70 reviews while Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Release Automation with 126 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Good support, helpful management capabilities, and great Kanban boards". GitLab is most compared with Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube, Tekton and TeamCity, whereas Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with Jira, TFS, Rally Software, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our GitLab vs. Microsoft Azure DevOps report.
See our list of best Release Automation vendors and best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools vendors.
We monitor all Release Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
