Microsoft Azure Reviews

We are using this solution as a cloud computing platform.

The solution could improve by providing a better user interface and more organized workflows.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for approximately four years.

The solution is stable.

Microsoft Azure is highly scalable. It can be scaled to our needs easily.

The technical support has been excellent.

I was previously using AWS and we switched to Microsoft Azure because of the new project's use case.

I rate Microsoft Azure a nine out of ten.

Microsoft Azure is mainly used for legacy system migration. We also use it for platform development and new custom development package solutions.

The solution is very easy to use.

The product has been stable and the performance is good.

It's very flexible. We find that it is easy to integrate with other Microsoft technologies such as Microsoft Office.

The solution scales quite well.

Technical support is very helpful.

There aren't limitations that come to mind. Whatever they have planned for the solution in the future, I will be happy with it.

The solution could always work to reduce its costs.

It would be ideal if the solution could offer more non-Microsoft-related integration capabilities.

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

We have found the stability and performance to be quite good. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The solution is very scalable. If a company would like to expand it, it can do so.

Currently, we have around 1,000 users.

We've found Microsoft's technical support to be good. they are helpful and responsive and so far, we are satisfied with their level of assistance.

I also have experience working with AWS, Amazon Web Services.

I was not a direct part of the installation, therefore, I can't really comment. I can't directly speak to if the process was easy or difficult.

The pricing could be a bit lower. It would make their customers happy if they decided to charge less.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

We are customers and end-users, however, we are also advisors. We give advice on products to our customers.

As the solution is cloud-based, it's consistently updated and we are always on whatever the latest version is. 

We've been quite happy with its capabilities. I'd rate it at an eight out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to other users or companies that want to start exploring it.

I'm using the entire Microsoft Azure suite for storage applications and database applications.

I like the functionalities and the price. I'm very satisfied with Microsoft Azure.

It could be cheaper.

I've been using Microsoft Azure for at least five years.

It's a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure is scalable.

The price is good, but it can always be cheaper.

The fact is I, as a customer or anybody else for that matter, will value the choices in front of them before deciding. In this case, the functionality on offer and the price helped us choose Microsoft Azure. If I get something better in terms of these two variables tomorrow, I will certainly switch.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Azure an eight.

I'm currently trying to build a new product for my company using Microsoft Azure. Prior to that, I was using Microsoft Azure on the cloud to deploy microservices using specific Azure services to host the microservices. But the most common Azure services that we're using is the App Service and relational databases. In terms of the application, the first one was just the Microsoft Azure application and the second one was an integration with Elastic Stack. I'm a software architect.

The user interface offers a good experience, it's better than Azure itself. The portal is great. Microsoft Azure has very good documentation for any kind of technical person.

Sometimes the Azure Calculator doesn't have a good way to do a higher estimate, because for any organization there are sometimes issues with the application sites, but I know that the logs are not the real time and there are issues with login synchronization. It cam sometimes take more than five minutes for that information to reach the Azure application side. I'd like to see integration with other lifecycle managing rules because with Azure DevOps, it's straightforward, but the system is painful sometimes. 

I've been using this solution for nearly five years, the last 12 months in this new company. 

In general, stability is good, but in the past month I had some issues with the connection to Azure resources, not just Microsoft Azure, but with Azure in general. Microsoft has an issue with its authentication system which has proved painful, because my applications were up and running, but I can't log in to make changes or see metrics. It's a lot better now, we've had the application down three or four times but it hasn't been critical. 

Scalability is good, I haven't had any issues with their configuration. I think we have around 600 concurrent users. 

I haven't used Azure support. They have good documentation, although I sometimes think that the examples on GitHub aren't updated. On the whole, documentation is good. 

We previously used AWS but we knew there was already a lot of experience with Microsoft Azure and their technologies and we wanted to use all the features for each service. Given that this is with government and the integration is with Microsoft Azure, we can use all the features and benefits of each service. Another issue is that they were using AWS with infrastructure as a service, but they redesigned this application to use software as a service and platform as a service. We dropped the use of infrastructure as a service and using the platform as a service, and it was estimated that it would cost less than with AWS.

I think the initial setup is straightforward. I have around 20 microservices, so deployment took probably two weeks. It took longer than a previous implementation which took several hours.

We did a quick check with cloud computing, but we didn't find anything really efficient outside of the Google Kubernetes Engine that was better than the Azure Kubernetes Service or the Kubernetes service in AWS. But it was just a quick check and it was documented.

I can sometimes see that Microsoft has poor training, but to be honest the whole training thing isn't good at a technical level. They are designed to be the entrance point and show the way you can create a web portal and database. But if they could offer an in-depth technical solution of Azure services that would be good. It's possible that Google has something about it and they can offer better learning than Microsoft sometimes does. Reading through their documentation can take some time. 

I rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

We just use it as a virtual environment.

It has been good financially because no CapEx investment is required for any of the on-prem infrastructures. It is an OPEX model, so it is easy for budgeting.

Its resiliency is most valuable. It is also a very scalable solution, so you can spend the resources on demand.

The interface for configuring the environment is not very intuitive. Certain things are at different places, and it is not easy to navigate.

They should have a more transparent licensing model. Currently, Microsoft's licensing is a bit clunky, and it keeps changing depending on the type of subscription you have. Different features are included, and sometimes, it is very hard to figure out the right licensing. So, the commercial aspect of the licensing can be improved, and they can make it easier to understand all the features that are included.

I have been using this solution for about a year and a half.

I can't complain.

It is a very scalable solution.

Thankfully, I didn't have to use support. We have a CSP, and we are dealing with our partner who deals with Microsoft on our behalf.

I am not sure, but I think this is the first cloud infrastructure that we have used.

It has a pretty straightforward deployment. There are just a couple of clicks. The deployment takes about a day.

We used the reseller.

Price-wise, it is comparable to other solutions for the features that we are using.

It is pretty straightforward. I would advise others to just make sure that you have an architecture that you want to implement. You need to understand what you want to achieve in order to build or configure the platform correctly. The infrastructure, architecture, and design are very important to fully understand what resource groups do you want to use because you're building around the resource groups. That's pretty much it. 

We are thinking of increasing the usage of the cloud, and I'm looking at alternatives. After all the research is done, we will see if it is going to be Azure or something else.

I would rate Microsoft Azure a ten out of ten because it is doing everything I want it to do, and I don't really have a comparison with other similar products.

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.

Implementation of Cloud Backup and Disaster Recovery solution, where we used Carbonite Availability as the primary tool and Microsoft Azure as secondary/target location.

Real-time replication configured from one point to another for business continuity and high availability. 

Altogether, there are eight servers in the local premise which are entirely replicated to the cloud. The kept cloud servers are idle until a disaster happens with the on-premise servers. The project setup was successful even with real-time testing. It was done with automatic failover and failback.  

It has improved our organization. 

It was very user-friendly when setting up the virtual machines and console. It was an easy task for my team to create virtual servers and start replications. 

We able to manage resources wisely with a third-party tool.  

It should have cost optimization tools. Customers are required to use third-party applications to avoid usage complications. Also, charging on downloads is not a good option, especially when it moves to a production server. 

Two years.

Achieving business continuity was a nightmare. Project was done for a supermarket chain where they kept one machine in every branch directly connected to remote data center. The connection was done using VDIs. Whenever there is glitch at the remote data center, the entire infrastructure was in trouble, which in turns affected the business a lot. Setting up a disaster recovery data center was an expensive plan and maintenance was too heavy. Connecting Carbonite Availability with Azure was an easy options, as it reduced overhead and maintenance.

Monthly billing convenience reduced cost overheads up to 70 percent.

We are a service provider and Azure is one of the products that I use to assist my clients.

I like the ExpressRoute because that makes it easy to configure connectivity to Azure-hosted services.

Azure could be made more user-friendly. For example, the configuration wizard should be more intuitive for the users.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for about 18 months.

This product is stable enough.

Scalability-wise, we have not had any problems.

We have been in touch with Microsoft technical support and I would say that they are average.

I am also working with AWS and I find that it is more user-friendly. I am a fan of AWS and although it depends on the use cases and requirements, we generally implement AWS more often than Azure.

The initial setup was fairly simple. If we did have any issues then we would consult with Microsoft Professional Services, or some of our cloud architects, just to figure out how to resolve them.

We follow the Microsoft update paths. There isn't any maintenance required because it's a managed service and the providers take care of it.

For the most part, Microsoft Azure works well. They are constantly upgrading their services. That said, I don't think that it's perfect.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.