Microsoft Azure Reviews

Most of our Customers do not want to have a single Cloud Service Provider (CSP) and have been adopting a Multi Cloud or a Hybrid Cloud scenario. We have addressed client requirements and have adopted CSP depending on the use case. We have worked with Azure and have provided niche solution such as Government Commercial Cloud, Healthcare Cloud etc.

We have deployed multiple solutions into Microsoft Azure. In most of the cases we augment our Application monitoring "in-house" developed tool to monitor things like garbage collection, IIS queuing. If these attributes and parameters could be included as part of the Azure Monitor it would be great.

Using Microsoft Azure for approximately three years.

Microsoft Azure is a stable solution.

The design of Microsoft Azure is for it to be scalable and it is scalable.

I have not contacted the support from Microsoft Azure. We support the solution ourselves. We have Azure architect experts who are on our payroll. We have experience since we have been working on the stack for almost two and a half years.

Neutral

We use all different types of CSP, such as Amazon AWS and Google Cloud.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure is complex.

I rate the initial setup of Microsoft Azure a four out of five.

Yes. We have a in-house Cloud CoE, that ensures the changes introduced by CSPs i.e. update on the new services that are provisioned as well as the periodic commercials impacts for the Services being consumed across all CSPs - Amazon AWS and Google Cloud

All the cloud service providers(CSP) are more or less have the same services. The use case for the cloud would need the sustainment of tiering storage. We don't see a big discrepancy when it comes to Microsoft Azure, but there are pros and cons.

I rate Microsoft Azure a seven out of ten.

I use Microsoft Azure for different clients. I have different workloads or different architecture in Azure.

The most common use case is for migrations from on-premise to cloud. The principal solution is for a virtual machine, storage, and networking. 

The principal features that I use include computing, networking, and storage.

The elasticity within the cloud is great for clients to complete their pre-determined goals.

The cost is pretty good. They have a pay-per-use way of dealing with licensing that is very attractive. Migrating to the cloud becomes very attractive due to this.

The solution can scale.

Stability has been good.

Maybe Microsoft could improve its monitoring around the networking.

Clarity on the cost of the things could be better in some cases. For example, it's difficult to do a report with the cost of the things in Azure. Their calculator to estimate the cost needs to improve in terms of the estimation they provide.

I have five years of experience with this product.

There are some products that have good stability and virtual machines - depending on your setup and configuration - are very good. With Microsoft Azure, it's very rare that I even have a problem with it. In any solution, there's always some form of issue, however, with this, it's less common.

I've found the scalability to be quite good. 

I have worked with clients that have 300 users or more, however, sometimes with a smaller client they will have maybe 60 or 100 users.

Technical support is very good, however, it depends on the problem. There are some problems that originate with the client itself that Microsoft, naturally, couldn't necessarily resolve due to the origin of the problem. However, in general, I haven't had any problems with the support with Microsoft. They are helpful and responsive. 

Whether the initial setup is straightforward or complex depends on the client. There are some products that are more complex to set up. However, for me, it's easy to deploy different features or different products. It's easier compared to on-premise deployments.

Deployments can be two to three months for an enterprise.

For maintenance, you need a good team with good skills in Microsoft Azure, especially in the cloud due to the fact that it's a bit different. Things are different in the cloud compared with on-premise. 

I am able to deploy the solution for clients. 

I work with a team in my company. When, for example, we need help or support from Microsoft, we have a contact with the architect of this provider to resolve some issue or some problem that we have in the cloud.

The pricing is quite good, and it is designed as pay-per-use.

We are partners with Microsoft.

I am an architect, cloud architect, and I work in design solutions and implementing solutions in the cloud.

I'd rate the product at an eight out of ten.

Most workloads can be migrated to Azure. For example, say a small business wants to have a website or even do development. 

Azure services like EDM and Batch are all famous, but one of the most popular services for development is Azure Functions, especially the PaaS option. Depending on a customer's environment, they can go for the PaaS.

The management portal can be confusing sometimes. We have difficulty navigating the menus because the terminology is unclear, especially when referring to the content or actionable items. 

I've been working as an Azure trainer for about a year and a half. In my last job, I was working with on-premises solutions, but the whole industry is transitioning to the cloud, so Azure, AWS, Google, and many other cloud providers are trying to get a market share now.  

I don't have any issues with scalability or stability. We moved migrated from our physical infrastructure earlier, and we haven't seen any problems. It's more about the organization getting comfortable with the solution. That's the only thing.

Azure setup is straightforward. There is no comparison to on-premises deployment because it's all automated. It's very fast, but I can't compare the speed to other vendors because I've never deployed AWS or Google.

AWS is good, but Azure's license is reasonably priced, and Microsoft is gaining market share with a competitive package overall. Moreover, Microsoft is well ahead of AWS in terms of ease of use and billing, so I think I still love Microsoft. Obviously, both have a market, but customers working on development projects or using Microsoft products often go for Azure because of the license benefits and product support. 

I rate Microsoft Azure eight out of 10.

We use Microsoft Azure for our IDB. That is our primary use, but we also have a certain degree of MDM through Microsoft.

It does what it is supposed to do, and what we expected of it. That's the key benefit. Being cloud-based saves the provisioning aspect of an on-premises solution.

The support subscription models need improvement.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for a couple of years.

We are using the latest version.

Microsoft Azure is a stable solution.

As far as we have expanded it, it is scalable. It's a startup company, we haven't scaled it to a significant number of people yet.

We have between 100 and 150 people in our organization who use Microsoft Azure.

I don't think that we will expand our usage at the moment.

I have contacted technical support on one occasion. My biggest issue with the technical support of Microsoft is when we had an issue that was product-related and it was difficult to get support on the subscription level we were on. In order to try to get support, we were told that we needed to upgrade. It was quite frustrating that an issue with their product required an upgrade to get serviced when it was a failure that they were responsible for.

It's not a question of knowledge, the knowledge was there. Access to that knowledge and the subscription model they were trying to put in place was the issue.

I used to work for Oracle. My previous experience was with Oracle Enterprise Manager.

I wasn't present or involved at the time of installation. I came along later. I started with the company after that.

Licensing fees are paid monthly.

We are currently in the process of deploying Zabbix to cover our monitoring needs. We have used other monitoring products which come with certain components.

From my point of view, it would depend on the type of solution and everything they were trying to encompass. In our case, it made sense to go with Azure. I think that for other companies, I would recommend that it's a good solution, but that depends on what problem you are trying to solve. It also depends on what infrastructure is already in place, and whether you want to have a lot of disparate systems communicating, or whether you want to consolidate that to a specific vendor. But for the purposes of what we needed Azure to do, it does the job. However, we don't use all of the MS Apps functionality.

It does the job, but it doesn't wow me. I am pretty happy with it. I don't get overly excited about it, but I am not disappointed with it. I would rate Microsoft Azure a six out of ten.

In my country, many organizations want to migrate their operations to the cloud. This is why we are using Microsoft Azure.

I have been using this solution for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

Microsoft Azure is scalable in my experience.

Approximately 1,000 use this solution.

The technical support has been good.

We also have customers using AWS.

The installation is easy.

We did the implementation of the solution.

The pricing of the solution could be reduced. We are not able to create a free account in my country.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Azure a ten out of ten.

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. 

It's similar to AWS.

It's an infrastructure as a service.

It's a cloud service, so it's always up to date.

If you compare it with AWS, it is not very friendly to use. I find the UI better to work with on AWS.

They easily provide service with Windows, but not with Linux.

I am a beginner, and only been using Microsoft Azure for a couple of months.

Microsoft Azure is pretty stable.

It's a scalable product. Because it's a cloud service, there is an infinite opportunity for scaling.

We only have one or two people who are using this solution in our organization.

I reached out to support once, but they were not that quick to respond.

Technical support could be faster.

I have experience with AWS and Microsoft Azure is not that friendly. It is a bit complicated compared to AWS.

It's a cloud service. There is no installation.

It is expensive, but it is less expensive than AWS.

Even with it being cheaper than AWS, the price could be cheaper.

It is similar to AWS, where it is on-demand and is billed monthly.

We are not currently using this solution and we are not sure if we will be using it in the future.

 For those who are connected to the Windows Operating System, I would recommend this product. However, I would not recommend it for a Linux environment.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.