Azure Monitor Reviews

We all use Microsoft in the company and we are customers of Azure Monitor. 

The product is very good for developers who want to integrate with Visual Studio. The solution provides an overview and high-level information on what hurdles to expect, and which endpoints have problems. 

If Azure Monitor wants to compete with other APM products in the industry, it has to stitch together the information and user flow. It also needs to provide all the information, as you get with Stock Trace, including details related to where the call came from and where the problem lies. That's what we'd like to see. With a solution like Dynatrace, you have a clear path and you know which calls were made before and after the problem, and where the issue occurred. That feature is lacking in Azure Monitor.

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution scales easily. It's not a big deal for Azure Monitor or any other APM product.

With Azure, implementation needs to be carried out in multiple places and you need to add other things to get the information and that's a tedious process. The Dynatrace setup is much easier. 

We made a comparison between Dynatrace on-prem and Azure Monitor as to what each solution offers. Azure is great for developers wanting to integrate with Visual Studio but when it provides Azure monitoring information on the dashboard there is a lot of Google analytics. When it comes to the application performance monitoring information, Azure gives you the overview or high-level information regarding issues and which endpoints have a problem, but it doesn't give you anything in-depth at the matter level.

It's important to know what your requirements are. If you're able to put best practices in place, and need to add SBKs and turn on profiling at the meter level to look into the details, then Azure Monitor can help. But if that's not something you need, Monitor might not be the best solution for you.

I rate the solution six out of 10. 

We use the solution to develop AI technology, particularly for financial services. It involves creating a chatbot or conversational AI system.

The solution's most valuable features are its ability to focus on delivery and maximizing the performance of applications and services.

The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics. Also, its support services could be better.

We have been a customer of AWS Monitor for less than a year.

It is a stable solution.

We have more than ten people using the solution.

The solution's technical support services need improvement.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward.

The solution is expensive, but it is worth the price.

You can use this technology, as it is unique to Microsoft's services. It focuses on performance monitoring. It is highly effective for diagnostic purposes, viewing metrics, and enabling/disabling logs. It facilitates data gathering and logging, as its name suggests.

I rate it an eight out of ten, as we had a great experience learning the technology.

We haven't yet implemented it in my current company. It's going to be for our clients. We're an MSP, and we'll be implementing it for some of our clients. The only thing that we're thinking about is using it for performance monitoring and storage monitoring. Its use case is most likely going to be to manage data.

We're building out a cloud plan. We're trying to pick our own. We're trying to move certain companies into the cloud. There is a debate going on about taking the Microsoft route rather than the AWS route or the Google route. If we're going to go with Azure, we would need a monitoring tool.

The only things for which our company might be using it are storage monitoring and performance monitoring. Nothing else.

In the last company where I worked about a year ago, it looked very simple. 

Its interface has room for improvement. Some of the options or some of the ways to navigate could be improved, but that's a general thing. All companies are always modifying the user interface because there's a better way to move things around or a better way to put things so that people can see the product features that they didn't know existed. For me, that's probably the biggest thing.

It's a little lacking in features. There are some things that they could do to improve it, but it's not that big of a deal for me. There's obviously competition that does a lot more, but for what we're going to be using it for, it's perfectly fine. The biggest one is probably just the user interface. There could be more advanced logging at the database level. They can also improve their query builder to allow you to search for things better, but I last used it about a year ago. They might have already changed a ton of things in the newer versions.

I've used this solution for two years. I last used it in my previous company about a year ago.

It was pretty straightforward. 

Based on my experience with Azure Monitor about a year ago, I'd rate it a seven out of ten. There are better tools with better interfaces, deeper integration into applications, and things like that, but they could have improved it, and it could be a lot more comfortable now than when I was using it.

We use it to monitor all the services and applications, whether it is running or whether it is standing still. We use it to monitor the server and all of the CPUs so you can audit the bandwidth that has been consumed - all the day to day administrative stuff.

The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds. 

The troubleshooting logs need improvement. There should be some improvement there. I have a hard time finding the right logs at the right times whenever there is an issue occurring. They should simplify the logs. 

I have been using it for around two years. 

We definitely do have plans to increase the usage but it depends on what the management calls. I'm not the authorized person to make calls here but we do have plans to increase the current infrastructure.

We have a separate team that handles creating incidents with Microsoft.

I would rate Azure Monitor an eight out of ten. In order to make it a perfect ten, the solution should be simplified. For a beginner, it's kind of complex. It should be made easier for beginners or newcomers.

I would recommend this product. We get good results from Microsoft Azure, so that's why we stick with Microsoft Azure. 

I definitely recommend this product to all my colleagues or my friends or my friend's companies.

Azure Monitor helps with infrastructure monitoring and getting application logs. 

The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth. 

Azure Monitor is not user-friendly, and the interface is not exciting. Switching between the dashboards is not easy. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a seven out of ten. 

I am experienced with Azure, and hence, the installation was easy. However, an inexperienced person may find it difficult. 

Azure Monitor is cheaper compared to other third-party monitoring tools. 

You need to go through the documentation before deploying the solution. Also, learn Kusto Query Language to create custom metrics and logs by yourself. I rate the product a six out of ten. 

Azure Monitor helps monitor resources to get alerts on the usage or incident's generation. One can also use it to log the events in the event's hub or analyze them through Azure Log Analytics workspace and SIEM tools available to analyze your resource utilization.

The logs, analytics, alerts, and Azure Log Analytics workspace are valuable features in Azure Monitor.

Improvement is a continuous process, and Azure Monitor should keep improving the solution per the evolving trend and technologies. The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations.

I have been using the solution for more than four years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution but needs some improvement because of its policies.

Azure Monitor is useful at the enterprise level because it already has many resource monitoring solutions.

I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

Technical support is good and helpful as the services they provide us are based on the SLA we have with them.

The initial setup is easy. Those who opt for Azure Monitor should use it as per needs. For example, one can use it to monitor resources, administrative operations, or log events. The solution was deployed on the cloud.

My company is okay with the current pricing of the solution.

I recommend the product to those planning to use it. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for Application Insights logging, Database logging, etc. We also use it to analyze charts on the dashboard to get an overview of the issues found in the logs. The solution helps us in monitoring, analytics, and logging.

With the solution's help, we can detect database performance issues, like which tables are missing in the indexes on some columns, etc. It helps us monitor timeout in the database, such as performance issues of the queries. If the queries timeout in five minutes, we can analyze the problem with the help of Application Insights. We can detect the problem of a specific step or reason responsible for letting the application fail or crash. For example, if the application crashes during Selenium's end-to-end test on the UI, we can find the reason by going through the logs.

The solution has tons of valuable features.

They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool. Presently, we are not able to catch the transaction logs. The preview mode is available only for dedicated SQL servers and not for a database pool. They should improve this particular area of the solution. 

They should add a built-in feature for tracing the request and responses. Currently, it does not get measured automatically, and we need to write down the custom solution to check the request and the responses in the logs. They should create a log utility to log the request and send it to the Application Insights in the integration as a custom attribute. 

There should be default parameters and headers, which we can customize. It'll be beneficial because, at present, we only have responses, but not the requests. It is the solution's downside.

We have been using the solution for six years.

I rate the solution's stability as a five for the European region and ten for other regions.

I rate the solution's scalability as a ten.

A part of the setup process was straightforward. At the same time, a part of the process required some guidance because the Azure monitor evolves constantly. Most of the time, the blog post or guidance article on how to set up gets outdated quickly. Sometimes many things don't work as expected or as written in the Microsoft documentation.

If you have a solution built on Microsoft technology, go for Azure Monitor. I rate it as a nine out of ten.

Our use case for this solution is application monitoring using the Insights app. We have about five specialists in our operations team and we also have an application management team of around 10 people. There are plans to increase usage but that's something that is driven by the customers that we provide our services to. We partner with Azure Monitor and I work as a SW technologist and process unit manager in the company. 

There are a few good features in this solution. First, it's integrated with Azure DevOps. Second, it has good load gathering and very good analysis. Finally, the metrics gathering, even though it requires some actions and application level, is also fairly good.

I think the product could be improved if they were to work on automation related to gathering metrics from more applications without the need for instrumentation and things like that. I'd like them to work more on that.

Additional features they could include would be more automations related to applications and monitoring, user experience monitoring on the application level. Improvement on technical support would also be helpful. 

I've been using the solution for six months. 

This is a stable solution.

I haven't tested the solution for scalability but from the specifications it seems that it would be easily scalable. 

The technical support could be improved - their response time can be quite slow. 

Prior to using Azure Monitor I used SolarWinds. I think that SolarWinds is more infrastructure level oriented while Azure covers infrastructure but also covers the application side. That's why we migrated to Azure.

The initial setup was very straightforward. Transfer to the solution required some training so I think in total it took us about two weeks. 

Before choosing Azure Monitor, we evaluated it compared to SolarWinds and Dynatrace, which was a more expensive solution.

This is a good enough product for anyone wanting something that might not be top of the range but it does the work easily, is simple to configure and is a fair price.  

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.