The only thing is regarding the management of multi-cloud environments. That's not really possible. 

So basically, it's wonderful if you manage Microsoft clearly and if you manage Microsoft Azure, but if you need to consume external services and have a global overview of all your consumption, it's not the case. 

Google, for instance, has tools that help you manage multiple environments, which makes sense because Google is really the cloud provider. So that's why they need to be compliant with the others. 

But for sure, Microsoft's approach is different, and it's wonderful when you're one hundred percent on Azure. But if you'd like to have something more of a multi-cloud strategy, that's a bit of a gap where they could improve.

View full review »

One thing I find is that there are updates happening all the time, but they don't always roll out information about the changes. For example, the way to connect to Git repositories six months ago was different from how it is now. 

It would be good if the platform incorporated some kind of announcement system, like "This process has changed, here's the revised method." That would be really helpful. So, update announcements should be there. 

View full review »

We use most Azure services. However, there are limitations with a few services, like the Standard Load Balancer. It lacks features like utilization visibility compared to traditional load balancers.

Some older services need better log visibility. Additionally, limitations can be restrictive. For example, the Standard Load Balancer currently lacks the ability to proactively monitor its own health.

Additionally, through the Cloud Solution Provider (CSP) model, Microsoft support isn't ideal. We often need to escalate to outsourced technical support, who rely on documentation. I often need to remind them that we follow the documentation and educate them on the issue. I rarely reach the actual Microsoft back-end engineers. Despite this, the service uptime and monitoring are good.

View full review »

The product's initial setup process and stability need improvement. 

View full review »

The third-party data-sharing features must be improved. It will be useful for users who use other cloud providers.

View full review »

It would be nice if there was an on-premises version of the solution, and it wasn't just cloud-based. Oracle, for example, has both capabilities. Some people don't understand the cloud, or are hesitant, and this might prevent them from adopting the product. Also, migrating to the cloud can bring a lot of misunderstanding and a lot of trouble to some companies. Some prefer that their data is not moved from the premises, or have requirements to that effect. If Microsoft could address these concerns, that would be ideal.

The solution has a lot of terms of services. These should be simplified.

View full review »

It can be cheaper, which might simplify things a bit.

View full review »

There's a complexity involved in getting the subscriptions provisioned. There are too many complications. Without IT knowledge, we cannot subscribe and work. The product is not user-friendly. All the services must be available in one place so that I can get the services that I need at the right time.

View full review »

One area where Microsoft Azure could improve is in offering a broader range of pre-built plugins and tools compared to AWS. While Azure excels in certain capabilities like text-to-voice and voice-to-text, it may lack robust support for handling diverse languages effectively, such as local dialects or combinations of languages like Chinese and English. Enhancing flexibility and language support could make Azure more competitive in diverse global markets like Singapore and the Philippines. Additionally, a feature I would like to see added to Azure in the future is support for a native graph database technology. While AWS offers Neptune for graph databases, Azure currently lacks a similar offering.

View full review »

Improving transparency in billing is crucial for us. Understanding how billing works only becomes clear once we start using the services. A more accurate billing calculator would help us anticipate costs associated with using specific services.

View full review »

The documentation can be outdated and is not as clear in Microsoft Azure as it is in AWS or Google.

View full review »

In Azure, there are so many things. Especially when dealing with different regions. Suppose we are far from a region and using it over the internet, then probably more Edge Zones in nearby cities would help. This would give easier access with no delay or latency.

Right now, the problem in many remote areas is they may have low-bandwidth internet connections. This can make it difficult to access large services that require more bandwidth to download data and such. So, if the service were closer, it would be faster to access. At least they could access it easily.

Again, there are many other suggestions from a technical perspective on different services. But this is just from a user's perspective, and user demographics can create challenges. Other users with very good access might not have latency or other issues, but they might have operational challenges.

For example, let's say ExpressRoute. It's very expensive and mainly available for enterprise customers. Suppose individual users want that kind of dedicated connectivity over a service provider like Airtel or Vodafone and have an ExpressRoute from their phone, but is there any availability for a lower-cost option?

Because it's very expensive as well, if there were any such services available at a lower cost, then that would really help customers, especially SMBs, to have more consistent and reliable applications.

The main improvement I expect is capacity improvement. For example, live streaming applications require a lot of backend computing power. During events like football matches, millions of requests can occur per second. Existing services might not be sufficient to handle this. 

We need to know the maximum scalability based on data center capacity limitations. In some cases, we have to deny customer requests due to insufficient capacity. So, improved scalability is a key area for development, and I'm sure other cloud providers face similar challenges.

There are a lot of services already in Azure, but from a regular user's perspective, improvements can be made to specific services and features. For example, in Kubernetes, initially, it was limited. You could only create a Kubernetes cluster in one subnet. 

If all the IPs in that subnet were used, you couldn't expand that subscription. That was an issue, but it's been addressed. Now, you can increase the number of nodes by creating a new node pool in the same cluster with additional subnets. Improvements like this feature-based approach can be applied to many services. 

Another key area for improvement is the Azure load balancer. Currently, it only supports virtual machines (VMs) running in the same virtual network (vNet) on the backend. 

They should definitely support machines or IPs running on-premises (prem) or in other Azure VNets. GCP and AWS already support that. So, Azure Load Balancer should support that as well because being able to provide support is a very basic requirement or a valid request from any customer. These kinds of feature requests can be improved from a cloud service provider's perspective.

View full review »

The pricing criteria can be improved with broken-down terms that can be understood easily. 

There are rare cases of time-consuming technical issues. The Azure team can devise efficient and streamlined procedures for dealing with critical technicalities that can affect workflows. 

Integrating the system with third-party platforms not connected to the Microsoft system is not easy. 

Maintenance is sometimes hectic due to poor cloud and on-premise server integrations. 

The overall performance has been excellent, and I can recommend Microsoft Azure to other enterprises.

View full review »

The solution must improve its pricing.

View full review »

Navigating the frequent changes in the interface has been a challenge, requiring effort to keep up with updates. Options or features that were once located in one window may unexpectedly move to another, making it hard to stay current with the changes.

View full review »

While Azure continually improves its services, one area for enhancement could be in the realm of big data and unstructured data storage. Although I haven't explored this aspect extensively, focusing on improving offerings in this area could benefit users who rely on such data storage solutions.

View full review »

One significant area for improvement in Microsoft Azure is the cost associated with its services. While integrating services from different vendors, the perceived costs are high, with occasional confusion about specific charges, especially in data transfer scenarios between regions. This cost factor poses a barrier for small companies, and they could simplify the process and reevaluate pricing structures.

View full review »

From the perspective of a user who has a partnership relationship with Microsoft, I would want Microsoft Azure to provide some credits that can be used to test and validate Microsoft’s different solutions since it is an area where the product lacks.

View full review »

Ease of use could be improved. You wouldn't just be able to use this solution without being trained on it.

View full review »

The solution should be more intuitive and provide better support. We often do not receive frequent updates or comprehensive support, even as partners. Additionally, we are exploring the AI functionality within Azure. We are looking to collaborate with Microsoft to activate AI features in Azure to fulfill AI-related tasks requested by our clients.

View full review »

The solution’s stability could be improved.

View full review »

For additional features, I believe our team is interested in exploring SmartOps on Azure.

We are also exploring the power platform and have a keen interest in leveraging premium features. It would be beneficial if Microsoft could enhance the free version to allow for more exploration and development. That's my only suggestion regarding Azure.

View full review »

There are some minor aspects which require improvement but they are very technical for an explanation. For example, the cost calculation for the services can be an unclear aspect which makes it difficult to estimate the expenses incurred accurately. Therefore, it will be beneficial to have it more transparent and apply your user-friendly cost estimation process to help users plan their budgets in a more efficient manner.

View full review »

I would like to see Internet content filtering included.

View full review »

In terms of what could be improved with Azure, I would like to see something like what Google has created with their cross-platform solution, Anthos. I would like to see some features like Anthos has. Secondly, there are multiple DevOps solutions and tools available in Microsoft Azure, but most of the time they are either in the build mode, meaning you don't get complete support for them because they are either making changes, or changing the names of the particular services. Sometimes, services vanish from the portal. We are not able to see that. I think they actually change the names of the services.

For example, they had advanced data analytics in Office 365. They actually removed it and they now include all those features in Windows Defender. 

One more thing that I would like to say is that AWS works on availability zones. You have multiple availability zones in a particular region, which means that in that particular region you have more than one data center. If any of their single data centers fail, they can do a failover to the next immediate data center, which is in the same region. But in the case of Azure, if the data center fails for one particular region, they need to do a failover to different region altogether, which is separated by a geographical distance. That will be a kind of DR scenario.

Microsoft should focus on the higher availability of data centers where they can have more than one data center in a single region. I think they have implemented that kind of solution in the USA. They are going to do it soon in Europe and other countries as well, but it still is an upcoming feature. It's not completely built. They need to build that. 

The second thing which I feel regarding Microsoft Azure in India, is that they have less case studies when we talk about SAP on Azure as compared to SAP on AWS. There are fewer numbers of case studies on the portal. You can't find any. Whereas when you go into the India section for AWS, you will find plenty in terms of SAP and cloud.

Case studies are not there. If you have case studies, good case studies of large banks or any kind of government sectors, those case studies would definitely help to build customer trust on that particular platform.

There is one more thing which I would like to talk about in terms of costing. When you talk about AWS, they have three different types of costing models - partial upfront, no upfront, and all upfront. Azure has two models, all up front and no upfront. But also in these costing models, AWS has multiple other payment modes in terms of one-year or three-year. Azure does not have that. It lacks that particular costing mechanism, which it needs so there are more costing models. There is a lack of pricing flexibility, and I would like to see more costing models and licensing.

The third thing I would like to say, is that Azure was pretty bad in terms of the recent service off-time for Microsoft Azure and AWS. They didn't complete 99.99% of service they provide to the customers as compared to AWS. AWS data centers have also gone out recently, I think, four or five service interruptions, but definitely Azure should be keeping that in mind. I think with the help of clustering data centers in a single region, they can achieve that.

I do not want to take any credit away from Azure or AWS, but definitely Anthos is a big plus point for DCP. Azure should also build that kind of platform. Secondly, they can work on creating more data centers to build the regional availability,  which AWS already has across geography. The third thing they can work on is their costing models and the RI models - make them a bit more flexible for the client.

View full review »

At this point, the latency is too high to use Azure in our production environment.

I would like to see support for data streaming in the future because I understand that currently, data streaming is not there. It would work like Kafka does, in Microsoft Azure. If they can provide the Platform as a Service and Infrastructure as a Service, it will be better.

For example, if want to use Kafka, I should be able to purchase Microsoft Azure and then use my Kafka license. This would also give me support. Right now, using it requires first getting a server through Infrastructure as a Service, then getting a Kafka license, then installing the server in the cloud.

View full review »

Improvements are needed in Azure to enhance integration tools and support for effectively migrating and managing third-party dependencies. Additionally, there is a significant issue with payment restrictions on Azure, particularly for users in regions with limitations in their local economies. Integrating third-party payment services could alleviate this problem, allowing users from various international locations, such as China, Europe, and Africa, to make payments more seamlessly. By providing alternative payment methods beyond the reliance on US debit cards, Microsoft could greatly improve the usability and accessibility of Azure for users worldwide. There's room for improvement in integrating the Azure Marketplace with the Azure portal. It would be beneficial if users could directly communicate with solution owners or developers through the portal. For instance, if a user encounters challenges while using a particular solution from the marketplace, they could easily send an email, initiate a phone call, or even send an SMS to the solution owner or developer for assistance. This direct communication channel would streamline the troubleshooting process and foster better collaboration between users and solution providers, enhancing the overall user experience.

View full review »

Most of the problems that we've had are related to the DNS and the SSL certificate. Those two things have been a real pain. Sometimes, it happens because of GoDaddy and sometimes it happens because of Azure. Either we make a change in GoDaddy and the configuration is lost, or our developers make a change to the website and from there it gets lost.

It would be helpful if Azure provided more information on the various add-ons to give people an understanding of what they are used for, and how they're applied by other companies or businesses. One downside is that I find myself signing up and paying for things that I don't really need, and I have to call them to find out exactly what it is that I'm paying for. For example, I recently added the Azure Data Studio and I don't know what I need it for. I see that it can create a connection and run a query but I don't know if I'm going to be using it. That said, I will probably need it in the future.

View full review »

The support, the cost, the way they have the tiers, this could all be improved. For example, our company has been purchasing Microsoft Office 365 cloud licensing for approximately five years, and we do not have any production. We have five divisions and these divisions have different classification and levels of data. This company has changed hands over the years. We now lead the was as far as IT, but the corporate office didn't do a top-down infrastructure. It's a long story, but the way that we do things is not the way that everybody else does things. Just because others are moving to XYZ doesn't mean we're going to go there today. We might look and see how everybody else is doing everything, and once we decide we're ready to go, then we'll go. It might be 10 years later. It might be next week, but we don't follow the crowd. We follow the Navy.

View full review »

Some of the dashboard features can be improved.

Some of the backup solutions for SAP are not compatible. For example, we have a Sybase database running, and Azure does not have an agent tool for connecting with it. This means that we have to use a third-party tool to properly backup our SAP Sybase system.

View full review »

The platform should be available at the same price worldwide. 

View full review »

The solution's initial setup was a bit complex in the beginning. We had to go through a major learning curve before we got hands-on familiarity with it.

View full review »

Microsoft Azure is so complicated inside. If you should do something internally, if you have to configure something, the opinion about Azure is that it is a little complicated inside. That's why the end users and clients are looking for help and why we help them configure and do anything inside of Azure. That is why we offer other tools to optimize the Azure environment.

Microsoft makes the space for such tools because it is a little complicated and end users know it. That's why we sell these tools to optimize the Azure. I think the Microsoft team knows this and they create the space for other third party partners.

I know all the points about how the Cloud is so beautiful but if somebody starts to do something inside the Azure, it is a little hard to understand. Many services are so complicated to configure out. That's why sometimes clients are obviously confused inside the Azure. That's why they are looking for help with it and why they are looking for a Microsoft partner with the knowledge of how to connect this software into one solution. From my perspective, I like Azure because it makes me money from the end user clients. But for the customers, their opinion is, "Oh, my god. The AWS is easy."

It is well-known that Microsoft is not so easy for the end users. Maybe it's because there is a note of everything changing. They add new features and new functionalities. Azure is growing. From my point of view it's okay. From the customers, it's also ok, but they are looking for someone who understands how to configure it.

From the beginning, the first move to Azure as a solution, it's a long journey with many, many services to find the final configuration for the customer. But it's okay for me.

View full review »

When you use one feature in six months or a year, it changes for the others, and it isn't very easy. The filters are too complicated. I'd like to see better integration with S/4HANA integrated and other services, like monitoring, for example.

View full review »

The quality of some components of Microsoft Azure is not that great. For example, Microsoft has not fixed issues in Microsoft Teams for many years. There are well-known issues that are submitted by customers two years ago and they still are not fixed.

View full review »

We need more security to be available on our smartphones and mobile devices. They need to improve the protections available in that area in particular. We're actually currently looking for solutions that will protect devices of this nature so that they can safely access the corporate network. 

View full review »

For deploying multiple resources in a big number, such as in hundreds, we need a streamlined process and more user-friendly scrips. The scripts have to be more user-friendly, and they should also supply some standard templates to deploy multiple resources at a time. Currently, it is very easy to deploy a couple of resources, but if you want to deploy multiple resources, it becomes complex.

The material that they provide for integration with an existing on-prem data center is complex. They have to make them user-friendly. The scripts related to resource management need to be simplified.

View full review »

The permissions and controls in the product are not easy to use. From an improvement perspective, the permissions and controls in the product need to be made easier. I believe that the product is working to improve the native domain controllers in the cloud. My company studies the road map of Microsoft Azure quite frequently and closely. I believe the solution is working on areas where my company finds ideas or areas for improvement.

The product's current price needs to be lowered from an improvement perspective.

View full review »

Sometimes, I need better support. Microsoft must acknowledge support cases for the product. There have been some data leak issues lately. The support team is not responding to my emails. I had a call with an engineer on a weekend, and he told me he would follow up on Monday, but he hasn’t shown up yet.

View full review »

There's an ongoing development, particularly concerning the Data Fabric offering launched a few months ago.

Data Fabric is an additional offering which is Software as a service "as a service" application, unlike the core Azure platform initially focused on "platform as a service." It sits on top of Azure. 

We thought Azure could be more flexible and cost-effective, but our experience suggests this separation might simplify things for some customers. It's worth exploring as a potential improvement for specific needs.

View full review »

The solution should improve the shared cache. For the shared cache, Microsoft uses RADIUS third-party services. We have a lot of trouble with RADIUS and I suppose that is due to the fact that is not owned completely by Microsoft.

View full review »

There are preview features we are waiting on. When I contact Microsoft support, there is no timeline given or clear information about when those preview features are going to be on GA, general availability. It would be ideal if they could finally give us at least an estimation of how much longer we have to wait.

Support could be improved. If you pay for a higher plan, it's okay, however, the lower plans don't offer as good of a service experience. It also seems as though each different tier doesn't talk to the other. they should be able to communicate and share details internally with each other so that they are learning from each other instead of staying siloed.

View full review »

There are some small things that could be done to improve Azure. I think they should actually do more to implement function as a service. It is a completely separate capability that they currently do not address. Function as a service can be a completely different scheme altogether than PaaS or IaaS which it does quite well.  

For an example of a FaaS, I think the Azure product can be stronger in terms of storage. I would like to see it have better management systems as a service specifically for managing documents. Right now they are handled as a more generalized object.  

Say Azure came out with Microsoft Document Management and it was very strong as a service. It would not have to be deployed as a complete infrastructure. I would be able to use that as a service inside my organization and it is a product that any organization can use.  

The question is what is the separate USP (Unique Selling Point) that Microsoft will provide to the user that would fit a unique need when making FaaS solutions available. Document management systems have already been proven to be very popular by Google. Microsoft Office uses OneDrive storage. There may be a better way to promote document management in a more general PaaS. Sometimes it is very useful to virtualize a platform or an infrastructure, but in the same way, it is sometimes valuable to virtualize a function. Applications may be a collection of functions.  

It is this type of branching out of services that Azure can do within the structure they already have.  

They are targeting Azure into specific domains and not working as much with open-source as they could. That would be helpful. I think eventually this approach will just drive the competition away. If I have a product that is very good for manufacturing as a function — something like is being done with Edge — it might be beneficial for Azure to be able to tie in this FaaS and let manufacturing clients start working with the solution without having to reach outside of Azure. Right now that I do not see that happening and it is an opportunity that Microsoft is missing with Azure.  

View full review »

The solution's email hosting pricing could be improved. Microsoft Azure gives different options in terms of how you're going to access your email. It would be good if the solution could improve and give cheaper emails that can work in Outlook.

View full review »

Microsoft Azure needs to improve its user interface. New developers and teams have difficulty understanding its lifecycle. 

View full review »

There are improvements needed from a roadmap standpoint. Some of the roadmap items that they typically publish don't move at the same pace.

The predominant area in need of improvement is support.

Microsoft needs to continue working on out-of-the-box connectors to contemporary products in the market, specific to different verticals such as finance and HR. Investing in this would be helpful because it means deploying solutions faster. We've had challenges in terms of having to custom-build some of it and at the same time, the roadmap contains more connectors.

View full review »

Any time you use a cloud service, there are increased security risks. If you want more security, you have to have private hosting.

View full review »

Integration with other services could be much better.

View full review »

The management console needs work and the pricing calculator is truly user hostile. View full review »

The subscriptions are complicated. The process is not user-friendly.

View full review »

It can be improved in terms of ease of billing or monitoring of the billing. That gets to be a little difficult.

View full review »

I'm currently based in the Philippines and the availability of services locally could be improved. Technically speaking, I'd like to see more flexibility in terms of storage or resource allocation. Resourcing is currently quite fixed so that if you want to move between level two and level three resources, or customize resources, you can't do that. The discrepancy in terms of costing is around $200. If they improved flexibility for selecting resources it would be easier for us to get the costing approved.

View full review »

There aren't really any issues with the product itself. For us, the problems are organizational and the processes inside the company, which uses Azure, aren't as clear. They need to define a good process and a good implementation strategy going forward. We only really have issues with what they want to do, and not the technology itself. Basically, the technology is not the problem. It is just the way we want to use it.

It would always be nice to have even more integration capabilities.

A company needs to have strong finance managers. It could cost a lot if you haven't got a finance function inside each company.

The installation process is complex. 

The pricing could always be better and a bit more standardized.

View full review »

There needs to be better data security. There are organizations that do not want their data to be submitted to Microsoft, they should have strong encryption.

In the future, Microsoft should increase its data center percentage in Africa.

View full review »

The solution is not particularly user friendly so that could be improved. With Microsoft Azure it's quite difficult to do anything freely or try my hand at something new. I think the solution is also lacking in security. I'd like to see the option of a free account for carrying out a POC and the ability to play around with the solution without any restrictions. 

View full review »

This solution is not user friendly to set up and it's difficult to understand, particularly with regard to information protection and the sort of licensing needed to utilize it. Simplification would go a long way. 

I'd like to see them improve on the watermarking. There's a feature that allows you to watermark documents that are checked out. Currently it watermarks a document with whoever publishes it. For example, if you wanted to watermark the email address, it doesn't watermark with the person checking out the file, but with the person publishing the document. It would be more valuable if the watermarking was related to the person checking out the document, in case it leaks out.

View full review »

I would recommend some enhancement regarding integration features. 

View full review »

Microsoft Azure can improve by adding more features for virtual machines, such as tier virtual machines.

In an upcoming release, I would like to see more information, features, and warehouse information on data.

View full review »

In terms of adoption, one issue we face is providing training for users who are new to Azure and want to try some features out. There are some methods by which the organization has to allot some budget to them, but it has to be apart from the developer endpoints. It's difficult for them to try out something new. It would be nice if Azure had an evaluation period of 30, 60, or 90 days, so people could try out a few things and learn.

That is one challenging area, but this is a problem with all cloud providers, not just Azure. Some free subscriptions are available, but they are for the cloud platform as a whole rather than just a single service. For example, say I don't have a trial subscription, but I want to try something new like Azure AKS for 30 days to learn and to try out. 

It's hard to say what Azure could add. There are a few specific requirements that clients raise based on business needs. In general, I don't think there is any particular feature I can recommend.

View full review »

The tool needs to improve its navigation. 

View full review »

Everything needs improvement. The tool must constantly improve to provide a better experience. The security must be improved. The scalability could also be improved.

View full review »

The solution’s learning curve could be improved.

View full review »

The solution is too expensive.

View full review »

There is room for improvement on a couple of Azure services. One that comes to mind is Data Factory. Microsoft has improved a lot of Data Factory's capabilities, so maybe it's now possible to make a green custom database within Azure and Data Factory. 

I think it would be good to keep making progress on giving users the ability to do action calls on Data Factory. Right now, it's mostly local. Perhaps Microsoft could add the ability to put some calls in the workflow. Airflow is a good example. You might say, "Why not just use Airflow?" And maybe you could use that, but I think it would be better if all these things were possible with Data Factory. 

View full review »

It could be more open to external solutions.

Integration with other ecosystems would be beneficial. During this transitional period, this is our primary concern. For example, when we offer solutions to our customers, we must connect to their IT ecosystem, which we are unable to do in some cases.

A good strategy would be to include a feature for integrating with external ecosystems.

We would also like to improve the security.

View full review »

Microsoft allows you, via Azure, to have different authentication methods. You can use the Microsoft Authenticator app, text or voice, or something called a FIDO, which is like a USB security key. Unfortunately, the authentication method only allows me to have up to 90 users, and there are 2,300 people in the company. When I have to push multifactor authentication, I cannot specify certain users for the authenticator app. It forces me to lock it down and say conditional access only allowed.

Another issue I have is that Microsoft notifies me retroactively about certain things. For example, when a user sends an email with over 200 recipients, it can take half an hour for me to get a notification but sometimes it can take 24 hours. I have the same issue when it comes to things like phishing attempts. It's a problem. 

View full review »

I would like to see support for the applications that are currently in place. Ideally, Microsoft Azure should be compatible with the applications that we are using in my environment.

View full review »

The level of authorization or authorization cascading can be improved. We have the most powerful admins and then we have sub-admins, but the level of authorization is not that easy to handle or manage.

View full review »

We have reported some bugs we encountered, and it would be good if those bugs were resolved more quickly.

View full review »

I'd like to see improvements with the price calculator tool. I would like to get a forward-looking view of the services I want to cost. For example, if I want a bigger machine with two CPU's and eight gigabytes of RAM, maybe the calculator can allow me to input my recipe, the tool can then give me a list of virtual machines that have that specification, and it will be easier for me to choose the virtual machine I want. 

There are no additional features at this time I can suggest for future releases.

View full review »

More integration with other platforms is what I would like included in the next release for this solution.

View full review »

The solution should have better interface capabilities. 

There should be be better support for microservices and containers.

View full review »

The pricing could be better. 

If you don't understand Microsoft, the initial setup can be a bit difficult. You have to be slightly technical. 

View full review »

There are always areas for improvement. The integration is good but it can always be better.

The openness and the security policies can be better. It is missing a bit in everything related to the policies.

I would like to see better policy-based management and everything related to security management could have been better integrated.

View full review »

While Microsoft Azure is user-friendly, some of the other cloud products I use are more user-friendly. I use AWS and I like it more than I like Microsoft Azure.

I would like to see the console improved.

View full review »

I think Azure Active Directory and also the backup solutions provided in Azure need to be improved by Microsoft. The backup solution is not a very enterprise solution, and it is very simple. I think in comparison with other backup solutions like Nakivo and Veeam Backup, it can be improved to have a lot of options.

Along with this, one of the lack of options in Azure is managing antiviruses in virtual machines in the Azure environment. For example, if we have a lot of virtual machines on-premises and have to migrate them in Azure, there is no handy tool for the central management of antivirus software in all virtual machines in Azure.

On-premises, we have a lot of options like Kaspersky, Norton, and a lot of others, but in the Azure environment, you are limited to Windows ATP.

Windows ATP solutions are limited and can be improved by Microsoft, specifically the central management of the GUI for configuring agents on virtual machines.

I think Microsoft Azure should provide more innovation and new services to get better performance in the market.

The documentation for how to connect to CLI could also be improved.

View full review »

With Microsoft, our only concern is exchange rates because we're paying in dollars. It's very expensive for us because of the exchange rates. It would help if they partnered with someone locally so we can pay in our local currency. That's the only major area that we wanted them to look into. At least for exchange rate purposes, they should try to do something.

View full review »

I would like to see this solution support integration.

View full review »

It should have a better hybrid-cloud central analysis. Their support service also needs to be improved. Our main concern is support calls. Our issue is basically related to the technical functionality of the services that we use. It doesn't behave as expected, and support often fails to solve the problem.

View full review »

Pricing is very difficult to guesstimate. With so many a la carte options and individual pricing it can be a hassle to understand. I constantly need to go over the report to find out where I can save money and what is eating up the monthly costs.

View full review »

The security feature in the solution is an area that needs to be improved.

View full review »

It's not always simple to manage the team who use it. Sometimes customers abuse the capacity and it's not always easy to bill the department for the usage.

Microsoft Azure is not always a user-friendly solution. There are too many people who develop this solution. For the end-users, sometimes it's not really fun to use or simple to use. It could be improved.

It's difficult to stop the solution when you have started, you need to use it for the long term. You have to make a good choice when you start the project with Microsoft or with Amazon too. You will have the same problem, once you choose one you have to commit.

When a feature doesn't exist in Microsoft Azure, generally we can use other software that does the job very well, such as backups or supervision. Any products to help the customers and engineers to do a good job, such as managing large infrastructure. There is a lot of solution to make it work well.

View full review »

Use of the solution could be easier. It is too complex.

The solution is not sufficiently informative and there is a need to wade through much information. 

Moreover, we find it lacking when it comes to active dashboards. This is problematic when looking to Teams, as it does not allow one to know what is transpiring in real time, such as when there are concurrent conferences. This information only becomes available the following day. 

View full review »

Talking about improvement is like a double-edged sword. We like that they have the new capabilities, but sometimes they're deprecating capabilities faster than we can handle. If we had to improve it, we would want to stay on some of these older capabilities a bit longer. It's a brilliant platform for our staff to be more agile and more efficient but probably doesn't match with us in terms of maturity.

For example, they offer this tagging capability, but they keep introducing new platforms without it. We've become heavily reliant on tagging, but in the case of NetApp, they introduced it into the environment, and now we're not able to get the showback off of that. 

If they introduce new capabilities, they have to have all the features and functions on that new capability. They're not very good at that. If they introduce new capabilities, all the feature sets on these new capabilities should be available immediately. From my perspective, that's where they need to improve.

View full review »

I get the impression there are a number of services offered by AWS that are not yet available on Azure, but it seems to be catching up pretty fast.

View full review »

The tool should add an interface that is similar to AWS. 

View full review »

Microsoft Azure needs to be simplified to make it better understood for users. 

View full review »

There are times when using a service in Microsoft Azure can be confusing because you have four or five options that do similar operations. It would be helpful if there was a clear decision tree around those features. Microsoft does provide a lot of decision trees around a lot of their services, but it's not for everything.

This would be helpful for the users because sometimes it gets confusing what to use, what not to use. Then you start with something, and then after two months, you think you should have used something else. There are approximately 200 services and I have found this issue with approximately 10 of them.

View full review »

Some of the capabilities available in an on-premise SQL Server aren't available in Azure. For instance, we found Azure Managed Instance to be lacking in certain aspects. One of our clients decided to stay on-premise rather than migrate to Azure because of this reason. Maybe Microsoft is working on building these capabilities in the future, and we are unaware. 

View full review »

It would be advantageous if the dashboard had more clarity, in terms of the visibility that it provides. The challenge that we are facing has to do with resources and the grouping of them. We have different services that we use and we cannot see all of them until we filter the resource group.

Having inbuilt security would be an improvement. As it is now, Microsoft has a sentinel as a security tool, where you need to integrate it.

View full review »

For some use cases, Microsoft Azure is okay and working, but it is lacking features and we cannot implement it fully.

Talking from a networking perspective, when you create a file or a rule in Azure and you want to view this IP group, sometimes the way it is displayed on the GUI, you don't see the name of the group. At a minimum, I should be able to see the name of the group. They need to improve the GUI with respect to creating files or files. In summary, on that GUI view for firewall rules creation, the IP groups that are chosen in the firewall are not easily seen.

If I want to track, for example, a soft IP group, and mistakingly I click the wrong thing, then it's a problem. They need to improve it so that you can just view it, read-only, and then edit it later if needed.

View full review »

Dashboards and reporting could be improved.

View full review »

You eventually end up with a large collection of 'bits' all working together, I find it hard to be able to create a logical 'box' and put all the 'bits' that need to be in that box / application into the one place.

We're still learning though, so odds are there's something that will help us with this already in Azure.

View full review »

The Azure Billing API could be so much better. It only provides billing metrics for a set duration. For example, if you want to look at billing for a week /month/some other duration, then you have to make all the calls, store the data separately, and run your own computation to get the results that you need. Obviously, the billing system already has all of this data, so the API should just give you parameters to specify the billing duration and return the figures accordingly.

View full review »

I have found that if you not working with Microsoft Azure's GUI every day, it's not very user-friendly. It changes very often and fast. They are implementing new functionality. If you're not working with it every day, it always takes you additional time to get acquainted with the GUI. You always have to know all the tools because it's one software solution where you work with different kinds of tools to achieve results by implementing policies and other parameters. It would be better if they had everything in one place so that it is clear what type of operations we are doing, such as DLP. However, that's is how it is with all of the tools of Microsoft Azure at the moment.

There is a need to be better on-premise solutions that are more helpful. However, I don't think that is the goal of Microsoft Azure. They want the solution to be secure cloud solutions with cloud applications. This is their main goal at the moment.

View full review »

Microsoft needs to simplify its licensing, which is hard to understand currently.

The security of the solution could always be much better. 

View full review »

Because it has a lot of features, a person just coming into Microsoft Azure might feel that it is a bit complex. Once you are familiarized with it, they will find that it is organized in a structured way.

It's a bit clunky at first.

View full review »

The market place can be raised, and the CMT can be more sophisticated to create more opportunities for the end users. Nowadays, if I want to go and do a cloud management platform across private clouds and public clouds, then I would need something more out of the box and easy to use.

There's a huge need for platforms, like vertical platforms, where you've got to create the platforms out of the box to sell to those with particular domains. For example, aviation. They might be using their own platforms underneath CAPEX and OPEX that are not distributed. So it would be nice to address the security until you can provide a mutualized solution with CAPEX- and OPEX-based cloud platforms.

It would be good to have out-of-the-box modernization capabilities because the industry is always looking for modernization. So, it would be good to have an out-of-the-box AIML-based solution that would reduce the time needed for application modernization.

View full review »

When we are doing transfers of records in large amounts, for example, petabytes of data or few long datasets, the performance should not degrade as it does. I am working on big data platforms like Informatica and others and even though there are terabytes of data being transferred it does it immediately. However, in this solution, I would like the performance to be there when building a large dataset to integrate the data.

View full review »

As compared to AWS, Azure can improve its functionality. In terms of the feature list, it is still lacking a bit as compared to AWS. AWS supports lots of types of operating systems, which Azure is still catching up with. Azure is mainly focused on the Windows system, and it is not yet there in terms of integration with other operating systems like Linux, Unix. Azure is slowly catching up.

View full review »

Azure ARM console can be a bit overwhelming at the beginning. 

If you are not aware of costs, pricing, etc., you can end up with a hefty bill. However, I found that the Azure price calculator is a valuable tool to use before starting to deploy VMs in Azure. This tool will give you an overview of the costs you should expect on a monthly, quarterly or yearly basis.

View full review »

Microsoft Azure could improve by having more virtual machine operating systems available.

View full review »

I find that in many cases it's more expensive than AWS, and for no good reason. The pricing itself is also quite difficult to comprehend, it's not easy to know the total cost and not worth checking the calculator because the outcome is going to be totally different anyhow. I also find it difficult that they are specific to x86 and x64 machines, I haven't found any ARM-based virtual machine images that I could run in my IP test lab, which would be a great boost for productivity because I could run the internal pipeline in the cloud and would not have to divert to locally installed devices. 

If they want to be serious with IT devices then they should find a way of deploying ARM-based devices to Azure, to get more freedom of choice with virtual machines and services. It would be hardware virtual machine image offerings to other platforms, not only PC-based or x86-based. It would make my life much easier. 

View full review »

I would like to see more automation and AI with the cloud to help the clients understand more about their clients, their data history, and their predictive analytics. This would help them better manage their clients.

View full review »

Microsoft Azure could improve by having the availability be 100%. Which is difficult, but not impossible.

In the future, there should be more automation.

View full review »

In a month, there is a plan to increase pricing, which is something we are not looking forward to.

View full review »

I would say an improvement could be allowing for more external, third-party tools. However, I think that's their vision, how they develop the product. 

View full review »

Overall, the solution is good but there are some minor technical issues that can be resolved.

View full review »

They develop so fast, it's hard to trace the technology. They have a lot of folders, for example, and it's hard to keep up with changes. 

The deployment was quite complex. It's not easy to implement. 

View full review »

In my role as a service provider the vendor appointment may be required from the Microsoft plan. Occasionally, the response time is inadequate. It would be nice to have faster support. 

View full review »

As for improvement, I think better accelerators and better tools that can be used to migrate and leverage the existing models and data schemas are needed. 

Also, on the ETL side, we can convert data pipelines that are already setup on-premises and business tools that already exist. If we can migrate and automate these into Azure faster, it would be great. I think a faster migration path will help. There is a lot of scope for improvement in this area.

Better reporting capabilities would be good also, because as of now, Microsoft Azure has its own path with Power BI. However, better integration with other enterprise reporting platforms would help.

View full review »

The product can be a bit confusing at times. It's not well laid out. The interface, for example, can be a bit hard to figure out and they seem to be constantly changing things on us.

It's a rather new product and therefore lacks the maturity of other options. There is much they can do to add to it and to improve it. That may likely come with more time.

Up until two or so years ago, they weren't even accepting customer feedback on the solution. They've just started to do so, and they have given users a sense that improvements will be on the way sometime in the future.

Technical support is lacking right now. It needs to be better.

View full review »

I would like to see all of the cloud providers be more compatible with each other. All of the big organizations, such as large manufacturing and banking and financials, use Azure, while other places will use Google Cloud to AWS. Compatability between these is important.

View full review »

The user interface is great if you like tablet, a.k.a., Windows type functionally. The PowerShell is robust. However, there is not much in between, although you can do a lot of customizing views, dashboards, and other things.

I like the extensiveness of the new VS classic interface. At times, I still find the AWS dashboards simpler and more streamlined. Nevertheless, Azure is more elegant.

View full review »

The system has some limitations on resource use, such as number of cores, max transactions, I/O, maximum number of VMs etc. These limits make some things very difficult, and could be improved. Also Azure is constantly undergoing changes, and the move to Azure API v2 offers a lot of improvement, but is still rather unfinished. Once it is complete it will be great, but in the meantime there is much room for improvement. Microsoft is constantly looking for ways to improve, so many of the improvements I can think of, they are already working on.

View full review »

I have only been using it for a month, so I'm still learning about the various options that are available. They have a lot of options, but I won't be able to comment unless I use it or explore it properly. Everything is fine, but I'm still learning.

The license price could be lower. If there is anything else, I will not know unless I explore.

View full review »

We work mostly with the data services and the SQL database features. We like the optimisation recommendations we get such as creation of indexes etc. What I would like to see further is  some basic data profiling stats or charts representing data stored to be integrated in the SQL database services instead of using other services such as the Azure Data Catalog.

View full review »

We work with Azure, which is okay, but very clunky and complex. It lacks fluidity and is not intuitive. This can be problematic and require one to work with external consultants. Things can depend on the client. Not everything can be known in advance and there may be a need to make changes to the interface. Changes which are made to the functionality are not always intuitive. As such, while the solution offers very good functionality, its intuitiveness, in respect of user experience and configuration, is not the best. I should note that these are minor issues and I do not work with Azure very much, there being only a couple environments in which we employ it. 

We see the same issue with Microsoft, which is not an intuitive platform. The ways in which the various components are placed seems to be illogical. There are different screens and end-configurations. In my familiary with Microsoft, a decision was reached to do things this way and there is no way to alter this. 

As such, the solution could definitely be more intuitive. 

View full review »

The solution is less mature than AWS. That said, it is catching up quickly.

The solution could always be cheaper. That way, it would be less expensive than AWS.

View full review »

They're already doing quite a bit. I'm not unsatisfied with anything that they're doing right now. They can maybe make the transitions a little smoother and improve its pricing. The pricing for the end-user packages is a bit high.

View full review »

It is constantly updating. There are weekly releases, sometimes daily releases, and there should be fewer that are consolidated into one.

View full review »

The improvements are more on the partner's part than on the product's part. It is difficult to keep up with the continuous improvements that Microsoft is doing.

Issues were seen in the size and unclear configuration settings. If the bandwidth is limited, it can be an issue when migrating from on-prem to off-prem.

View full review »

Probably the 2 main areas where things could be improved are getting direct console access to VM's and its Azure backup solution to add backup types (eg System State).

View full review »

Something that could be added to the solution is the use of deep learning, which is going to grow in the near future.

We are waiting for a new version, a new RFID for Azure Virtual Desktop AD 1, or Virtual Live Desktop AD 1. It really needs a whole new platform, because I think their platform has the best opportunity to offer features like HORIZONT.

View full review »

We don't have any expectations. We have recently stabilized our application in terms of moving to the Cloud. We are still exploring the features available in Microsoft Azure, so determining what could be improved is difficult.

More integration may be required in the future, but I don't believe it is necessary for us at this time. We would be working with a hybrid platform more than anything else.

From a security perspective, there is always something that can be improved as we serve our customers.

View full review »

I haven't checked the console for some time, however, compared to the AWS console, the interaction console of the web part, the web services, it's not so easy. That will be a good area to improve, which is to make the console for interaction with services a little easier.

Another point to improve could maybe be the pricing model or maybe the interaction with information. When you look for information in AWS, it's more straightforward and clear. It's hard to find that information on Azure.

View full review »

The solution could be easier to use. However, when comparing it to AWS it is a bit easier.

In an upcoming release, the interface could improve.

View full review »

It's not user-friendly because it is made for developers. A normal user can't use it, but for a developer, it is a very friendly solution.

The initial setup can be improved. It should be simplified and made easier for developers to set it up.

I would like to see the use of Microsoft DevOps simplified. It's automation to develop and deploy software that is very difficult to use. It is so complicated and we need extra time to learn it. It is not easy. 

View full review »

The solution should emulate what MuleSoft is doing. At the moment MuleSoft has a lot of other features compared to Azure API integration. Just the coverage of the features, for example, could improve. Azure should offer more coverage of the features.

View full review »

Virtual services might be improved by adding more rules for the validation of protocols and peripheral elements in security assurance. This feature could help to gain more visibility in compliance validation using cross-referencing between firewalls and legacy systems. By example, only mobile devices with Windows at phone, laptops, or tablets running either Windows 10 or Windows Mobile can print using Windows Server Hybrid Cloud Print, and this possibility cannot apply to another devices due to the feature uses an UNC path. UNC means for Universal Naming Convention, a standard for identifying servers, printers and other resources in a network. The UNC uses double slashes or backslashes to precede the name of the computer.

View full review »

We are looking for the Azure to get involved in the case of other applications, like the Java application. Because it is predefined and has been set by Microsoft, who is providing better compatibility to the .NET application, so we are looking for the same from Azure for the Android app. Therefore, we are looking for better compatibility and scalability.

View full review »

Azure is growing its open-source offerings and I see this as a continuous area of improvement.

View full review »

Compared with other cloud solution providers, Microsoft is not good at local support.

View full review »

We have faced some issues on the pricing side, but it has improved lately. We are trying to adjust to the new pricing methods that they are using now. It should be better from now on.

In terms of features, it is constantly improving. We receive improvements from the site daily.

View full review »

There are worldwide issues on Microsoft Azure, however, it is happening to Google also and as well as AWS. The problems we have are nothing new.

Technical support needs to be better.

View full review »

There are many bugs in the solutions and we already have a ticket to Microsoft. Their content team is working on that.

We don't have the active-active options for Microsoft SQL Server. This is something they can work on.

View full review »

Azure could be improved with better security. The world is changing and their security could be better. Compared to five years ago, many of these cloud systems are a lot better, especially since you can set up a private cloud and configure your services to make it more secure. 

View full review »

Microsoft should have one package for all their solutions in one place to be found. 

View full review »

It could be more flexible. If you look at all Mircosoft products, they are not up to the mark. For example, Azure Ready doesn't provide the same kind of access a domain administrator has and the kind of flexibility that they have when using Active Directory. 

Microsoft support could be better. Their service could also be better. For example, specific policies for templates suddenly become unavailable. When I checked, they said that certain things might be withdrawn based on customer feedback. This happened once or twice, and it wasn't available at all for five days, it just went down.

View full review »

The cost is something that could be improved. There's not much clarity regarding the price range. We'll create a VM and then at the end of the month, we'll receive a bill with various costs from different locations — it's confusing. 

Integration with other cloud environments can be tricky at times. 

View full review »

The pricing needs to be adjusted so that the strong inflation in Venezuela does not prevent customers from purchasing it.

View full review »

The pricing needs to be a bit lower. It's an expensive solution right now.

In future releases, I would like to see Microsoft offer personal desktop environments in a virtual solution. Citrix, for example, now offers this as an option.

View full review »

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. 

View full review »

The solution needs to offer more data analysis services. It would be extremely helpful to Azure's clients if they had more of this.

View full review »

The design of the platform is not so easy to navigate. It's not very user-friendly.

Some services are more difficult to use in AWS and GCP. I have projects on the three clouds, and some things are easier to do on AWS. On the other hand, using Databricks on Azure is easy, as they are integrated well. However, some products are more difficult to use than other products. 

View full review »

The cost is a big issue, it can quickly go up if you don't control things. We've set up a system that shuts down machines regularly so we don't run up costs. Sometimes our development teams start up machines and forget to shut them down, and we see our costs go up quite rapidly with monthly surcharges. It would be helpful if Microsoft didn't change the control panels quite so often. It means we need to retrain personnel whenever things change and that seems to have an impact on our IT teams.

View full review »

If the price were reduced then it would be an improvement.

View full review »

Better logging part when deployments are crashed, even when the entire cluster is crashed.

View full review »

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.

View full review »

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.

View full review »

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. 

View full review »

The support subscription models need improvement.

View full review »

It's possible that the performance could be improved, but it's not a big issue. 

View full review »

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.

View full review »

I honestly can't think of anything that needs to be improved.

View full review »

There should be more language options for the Azure Functions apps. It supports programming languages, but there are only a few options. It could have more programming languages. 

View full review »

I would like to have more certified servers for SAP. Our customers need an easier interface to manage Azure. They don't have people who have cloud knowledge. The knowledge group is taking time and they use our services to manage the cloud data. Azure is built for auto services but it's not easy. The interface is not easy to use. I'd like to see them develop a better interface and more graphical information about the resource and the consumer.

There's a machine, the server. The smallest machine that they have has 112 GB of RAM. It is big for a customer. It has around 16 cores and a 112 GB of RAM. Amazon has a server with around 8 cores and 60 GB of RAM. The smallest certified machine for SAP Business One HANA in Amazon Web Services is 8 cores and 60 GB of RAM and Microsoft it's 16 and 112 GB of RAM. It's too big for a small customer. Because this machine is able to manage 50 concurrent users it's too big for a customer with 22 or 30 users. 

View full review »

The microservices and analytics of Azure are good areas that could be improved.

Microsoft Azure has technology compatible with OpenShift from backtrack, but I would like it if they could evaluate another vendor of technology of microservices like Rancher to integrate with.

View full review »

We use Microsoft Server 2019 and 2016. And I didn't like the 2019 client, so we had to downgrade back to 2016. The main issue there was its monitoring system. Our client needed an alternative, and if they were using more Windows products, they also needed to make that downgrade.

View full review »

The alerts management should be improved. Alerts management is very complicated to configure. You have to go through a lot of tests and config action groups to set up those things. It is very complicated, and it can be simplified.

It is good to start with, but as the complexity increases, the usability needs to improve. We are managing only 40 virtual machines, so we are able to make use of the portal.

The VPN part can also be improved. If you want to set up multi-factor authentication for VPN clients, it is not so easy. The documentation is not so simple for multi-factor authentication.

I would like to see Azure Data Factory simplified. It is very complex. If they can simplify the data integration part inside Azure, it would be great. They should design simpler integration. They can also have a new service and keep Data Factory as it is. 

View full review »

I believe the cost management and billing section features could be improved because sometimes it may seem somewhat complicated to find certain settings to set up a threshold for resource consumption and track expenses in real-time.

View full review »

They should include a cybersecurity feature to improve the protection of the systems.

They could do better in terms of the pricing model. Its price keeps on changing. Their technical support can also be better. 

View full review »

I cannot recall anything really specific that needs to be addressed within the solution. There aren't any features that are missing as far as I can tell.

It would be helpful if it offered more integration with other platforms.

View full review »

Scalability is definitely in need of improvement. Azure is a very good solution but it still lacks the performance of other cloud platforms.

View full review »

Viewing the expenses for each service in the Azure Portal is difficult for novices to understand; this could improve.

It's a great platform, but its visual interface is sometimes difficult to understand.

View full review »

There should definitely be some improvement in the UI. It is lacking in terms of where the end user has to click on other icons and go back to the main menu to change some small settings and then go back through many options to the main request. This is something which Microsoft is constantly working on, but still it needs improvement.

Monitoring options should be more sophisticated, as there are dashboards on which a end user is able to pin a lot of charts and a number of web parts, but for example, I would love to have some option like in Operational Management Suite. For instance, some queries and filters Maybe those are already there, but I have not been able to find them. I have to combine the Operational Management suite for Infrastructure, PowerBI for subscription and Application Insight for applications.

Alternatively, I can create a PowerBI dashboard for everything, but this is not for everybody, as it is not always so easy.

Managing of separate subscriptions if you have more than one and in separate domains, it is not so easy to manage. I can’t merge all of my subscriptions, as I am able to have only one enterprise subscription in one account.

View full review »

What we experienced after two years with an Azure suscription is that there is good knowledge in Microsoft Partners for Azure, but generally they are too specialized and couldn't cover everything, because they allways miss something related by example to networking, database, web apps, security, or integration on Azure. So you must contract more than one Microsoft Partner to have a successful project in Azure.

View full review »

The dashboard of Microsoft Azure could be better.

View full review »

The diagnostics should have more logs. We must pay a surcharge for our dependence on the Azure monitor. Each platform comes with its own logs. 

View full review »

The biggest area needing improvement involves the licensing cost. The cost of actually acquiring the solution is of much significance to small to medium enterprises, especially in countries that have a negative currency. The biggest challenge we face in Africa is the lack of awareness among overseas, European and American vendors of the massive impact that the exchange rate has in the South African market. A cost of $20 for you can equal 300 rand for us. This is what most vendors neglect to realize, that a price affixed to something for the European or American market cannot be applied to the rest of the world or to a continent like Africa. The disregarding by vendors of the importance of the exchange rate amounts to ignorance or arrogance.

My issues are not with the product itself, which I think is great, including Microsoft's strategy concerning respecting it and the consolidation. The pricing, in terms of what can be referred to as traditional third world countries, needs to be addressed. 

The main takeaway that vendors should leave with is that they should not neglect the market in South Africa or in Africa. It is not enough for them to want to have a presence or sell a license. They should also show a desire to sell a value proposition.

View full review »

The cost of the product is too high. It would be ideal if they could lower it a bit for their customers.

View full review »

There could be more documentation and video tutorials to incorporate each and every feature. This way one can easily get the knowledge and implement it.

View full review »

Security could be better. Once there was an attack, and we couldn't get to the cloud to see the reports for about five hours. If we want to back up the application in storage, we can't have a firewall. For now, it's secure. I think the main problem was the configuration.

View full review »

It's a bit of a mystery how the storage is going to perform. For example, when you've got a storage device like Hitachi or NetApp, you can run reports on that storage and you can do all this good stuff. I'm not sure if that's the case with Azure. A lot of the stuff is kind of proprietary, at the moment.

The cost is quite high.

You can't control the data as much as you would like to. When it's theirs, it's theirs. With Hitachi, Hitachi has its own policies. You can move data around based on how much it's used into lower-cost discs and whatnot. You might be able to do that with Azure. However, I can't verify that.

The initial setup is complex.

They need to make storage easy and offer more interconnectivity between solutions.

View full review »

The solution needs to be easier to configure in the future. Right now, it's a bit difficult to accomplish.

Technical support could be better. They need to be more responsive.

The documentation should be more accessible. It's hard to find what we need right now.

It would be helpful if there was more data science or AI implemented in future versions.

The product needs to implement more API capabilities.

View full review »

Microsoft Azure can be pretty advanced and difficult to understand. I would like it to be simplified. The licensing especially needs to be simplified.

View full review »

Being a big item, it has it's own share of bugs. I had a great deal of difficulty establishing the account at first.

View full review »

Every area of the product still needs to improve as it can always get better. Windows wasn't where it is today decades ago. There was a continuous improvement and evolutionary changes. Same is expected of Microsoft Azure.

Specifically, I would like to see better Azure Data Analytics and monitoring RF.

View full review »

The documentation is out of date. It needs to be improved and modernized. 

Technical support needs improvement. 

I would like to see more flexibility surrounding what framework you can use for machine learning model creation.

View full review »

1.One is not able to upload custom images in azure and not able to access windows client images. This can be improved

2. It moves your business’ compute power from your data center or office to the cloud. As with most cloud service providers, Azure needs to be expertly managed and maintained, which includes patching and server monitoring.

View full review »

There are so many services available that the interface is a little bit messy, and when you're looking for a specific service, you have to know exactly where to search. Having better visibility in the interface would be an improvement.

View full review »

We would like it to be cheaper. As a customer, we always want to pay less.

View full review »

I can't say that we have any complaints in terms of features or lack of capabilities within the product. Over the last two years, I'd say it's been so far so good.

It would be ideal if they could reduce costs a bit. Right now, we find the product to be expensive.

View full review »

At times, the support is terrible. It is not bad all of the time, but many times when we have contacted them, there are juniors without refined knowledge. We have had instances where it takes a long time to solve just a single problem.

View full review »

The licensing model is not ideal. It is not very useful in predicting actual costs. Sometimes we found that we could not accurately predict how much specific products will cost the company in the future. Just now, for example, we want to start using Log Analytics for Office 365, however, we don't know the final price. It's inconvenient for us as we cannot predict the budget and it puts off making a decision. For Microsoft, it's very disadvantagous.

The solution could use mutual segmentation for servers. It would be ideal if you could constitute something like five or 15 groups among the groups of different computers inside Azure. If you could get something like logical groups of servers outside the mutual servers, it would be an improvement. 

Sometimes we want to start and do a penetration test. If, for example, we're planning new security scanning for our customers. You have to inform Microsoft that you want to start a penetration test. If you have regular scans Microsoft should allow regular scanning, without having to plan and to ask for approval from the Microsoft side every time. When it's meant to be a regular occurrence, it's very inconvenient for us.

View full review »

Stability. Microsoft is implementing changes too fast and sometimes things break.

View full review »

I have found Microsoft Azure has many components to use and it's very difficult to understand every component.

View full review »

The response time and stability of Microsoft Azure need to be improved.

View full review »

Price could always be better. The features come in quickly, so we're comfortable with the feature set that is available to us.

View full review »

The solution could improve by having more security features around my data and the platform.

View full review »

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

View full review »

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.

View full review »

It could be cheaper.

View full review »

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.

View full review »

They should optimize their pricing so that we can use more features. I would also like to see more auditing and more security for the Blob storage feature.

From a technical point, it has very good features for Microsoft products, but for non-Microsoft products, it may have some limitations. I have mostly worked with Windows-based integration, and now I am trying to use it for open-source systems. It is good but not as easy as Microsoft products.

View full review »

They can add more documentation about the solution.

View full review »

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. 

View full review »

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

View full review »

They should enable more other products to enable other commercial products as a Pack services, from the database side, more from the security perspective. Some of the databases don't have the features that Azure SQL has. Those parts have to enabled.

There were also a lot of constraints with the serverless parts. They are far behind compared to AWS.

View full review »

I think the pricing model could be improved. I have that clarity with AWS but with Azure it's not that easy. If I am building a solution on Azure, the first question that stakeholders will ask me is about the cost. If I'm using multiple services of Azure, then how do I figure that out given that it's all on cloud.

Technically, I would say there could definitely be improvement on the AutoML part, which is the machine learning component of Azure. I made a comparison between AutoML versus DataRobot, another vendor that provides machine learning. DataRobot is definitely ahead of Azure AutoML. Of course that could be because I'm using the licensed version of DataRobot versus the free version of AutoML but there does seem to be a gap. 

View full review »

Improvements need to be made with respect to the availability of third-party services.

I would like to see more advanced functionality in terms of information security.

View full review »

It could be a useful process to make the marketing of MS Publisher a little area of improvement for IT professionals learn about this tool.

View full review »

Two years later..... This has been resolved by Microsoft. There is now starting to be the challenge of figuring out which service you want to use and it is no always clear which PaaS is best for the job. This is Microsoft achilles heal across its services.

Predictability and quality need improvement. Make sure things work predictably, as expected, and are documented.

As my organization learned the new tooling that Azure provides we encountered topics where the behavior of the PaaS Resource was behaving slightly different than expected and outlined in the documentation. We usually would open a service request on the topic and be told that it is supposed to work as we expected but there is a problem and Microsoft provided a work around. An example of such a topic was IAM where a contributor on a resource group who were creating a Storage resource were told they were not authorized. The main reason was around the registration of the resource that had to be done by an administrator and manually as a one-time task. Talking to Microsoft they admitted this was an error. This was for us predominant for Storage Accounts but it did occur for some other resources as well.

The second topic we encountered were related to VM’s that would suddenly and without warning would go offline. Response from Microsoft support request was that as long as the SLA is below 99.95% they cannot do anything. Obviously you can expand the resource and the cost using a availability set, fault domains etc. but my expectations was that VM’s would only be taken down for maintenance with prior notification. This one is less critical as I agree that you need to design your VM’s using the high availability features.

View full review »

Regarding improvements:

• MDM: Mobile Device Management (MDM) and Intune features are slowly moving over to Azure. I think as an integrated feature, there will be better ways to manage mobile devices.
• Azure backup: It is still hard to configure and to figure out which Azure backup component to use for backing up different data on various storages.

View full review »

Anything to do with referencing other packages is simply frustrating, this is mostly a problem with the Windows framework and not the hosting service, but it is still the most time consuming and irritating thing about using ASP.NET View full review »

The integration pipeline could be a bit more broad in terms of applications.

Additionally, some companies require third parties to develop on their cloud. it would be interesting to see if it would be possible to provide another company with restricted access to their analytical tech stack.

View full review »

Their backup strategy is a little complex which racks up the VM to other sole storage areas. This should be improved.

View full review »

If you're not aware of how things work with Azure, it's not easy to understand. It's not clear for customers and sometimes even for Microsoft people themselves. The high cost of the solution is linked to that issue.

View full review »

You don't get support from Microsoft very easily as compared to other solutions. For example, AWS. If I reach out to AWS, their PDM team is very quick to respond. The Microsoft Azure team does not.

The downtime could be a bit better. AWS has less downtime.

The solution needs to scale as well as AWS, which scales much better.

View full review »

The solution could improve by providing better tutorials and documentation. There was a point when I was trying to understand how the board works and there was not any documentation that could articulate it properly. We had a whole team who had to go online to check other sources in order to understand.

View full review »

From a security perspective, it could be improved. A little bit of automation would also be nice.

View full review »

I believe that some of the services need to be available on the on-premises version and not only based on the cloud.

There are some security issues in the cloud that cannot be solved. Some countries will not allow you to store certain types of data on the cloud.

View full review »

The technical support could be improved. When we leave tickets, it can take some days before the issue is dealt with. 

View full review »

I would like to see improved migration tools. It is improving week by week. They just need to make sure that they keep up with the new functionality provided in other clouds. 

View full review »

One of the most important areas for improvement is the administrative part of management. It‘s difficult to manage, all aspects of Azure invoicing, and further pricing vs usage comparison and capacity to move under usage resources to a better positioned.

In this matter, it’s necessary to use third party products or to use good self-management economic tools

View full review »

I would like it if Microsoft communicated better about upcoming changes before they roll them out. Sometimes when Microsoft implements changes, they don't notify the users promptly enough. I would like to know about new features, especially Office 365.

View full review »

Maybe Azure could add an address code to create your analysis without SQL or Python because some business users don't want it to code. So it's good to have a service application that connects to the data lake to conduct analysis and simplify the business process.

View full review »

No product is perfect, there is always room for improvement.

The solution to the market and the guidance for the customer should be streamlined.

From a customer perspective, it can be complex. It's a bit abstract for the customer.

They need to provide comprehensive and easy-to-understand guidelines for the customers to implement.

The initial setup could be simplified.

The customization could be improved.

I would like things to be easy for the customers and partners.

View full review »

Integrate as a service. A lot of Microsoft software licensing options aren’t yet in Azure. Also, the ability to integrate with other technologies, such as other options on the market based on RISC Technologies.

View full review »

They are a bit closed on the customization side. If they open the customization then it will be very good.

It covers pretty much the similar problems that we face in many areas of Azure. If we are planning to use some of the Azure applications within our organization, there are some places that we need to complain about a complaint. Because of the design of Microsoft, we were not able to make this complaint. So, we are not able to use that interface.

View full review »

I would like to see a better understanding about business and compute. Basically, knowledge of your to burn your money efficiently.

View full review »

Onboarding customers is a challenge. Sometimes our customers don't know how to deal with the cloud environment. Maybe the customers are more comfortable with the old-fashioned on-premise environment. So it's challenging to move to a new environment in the cloud. Another area where there is room for improvement is maybe security. Also, the interface could use some work. And maybe Microsoft could add some new features for monitoring the environment.

View full review »

The solution could improve by simplifying network management. 

View full review »

The process by which our customers can switch from one subscription to another should be simplified.

View full review »

There was a time when the solution was updated on their side and all of our functions stopped working. This issue could be worked on to prevent it from happening in the future.
They must give us the information of when they are going to updates on the platform side so that we can take the appropriate measures on our side as well.

We would like to see more enhancements in the Azure Migrate services in the future.

View full review »

The solution could be a bit more intuitive and easier to use.

The documentation could be a bit better. It could be more clear and accessible. It would be good to know if the person answering the questions was a Microsoft employee or just another user.

The pricing in our region can be a bit high.

View full review »

Deprovisioning services is complicated. SLA is not competitive. While some prices have been lowered, some increased after GA. Options from beta moved to different categories. View full review »

Few cons on Azure are- 1) Poor debugging and logging management for applications 2) Increased competition for development resources 3) Pricing 4) load balancing causes interruption in many of the stateful applications View full review »

Microsoft Azure could improve by being more user-friendly and the interface could be better.

View full review »

They should create integrations with more platforms.

View full review »

The cost of Microsoft Azure could be lowered.

The subscription licensing is very complex and we would like to have it simplified.

The ease of configuration and use should be improved.

View full review »

I would like to see it more easily accessible.

View full review »

The solution could improve by being more user-friendly.

View full review »

In my opinion, what could be improved is making the actual costs more predictable. It is very difficult to estimate the cost or the budget you are going to need to run your environment in Azure Cloud. You have to be a specialist to understand how you will be charged, which constantly changes.

As for additional features, it would be great if the pricing could be cheaper for those trying to study and use the cloud. Having a discounted pricing scheme or even a free usage scheme, like a sandbox that is free to use on a continuous basis, for those who are studying would help them to actually generate more business later on. The more people learn to use the clouds, the more business they will actually attract.

They will start pushing solutions into the cloud, but if they have no time or opportunity to learn to use it, they will not be confident in proposing cloud solutions. So until they have been able to validate it in a test environment or a learning environment, they won't take the risk and propose a cloud solution.

View full review »

Pricing of outgoing data has capped the ablity for startup products to justify the ROI of Azure application deployment.

View full review »

A few different vendors from Fortinet, from Barracuda, from Forcepoint, all use infrastructure from Azure from time to time. A problem with Azure is that the architecture that they have is not really compliant — not really connecting with the endpoint Cloud. It's a different type of architecture, so that's a mistake from Microsoft. Hopefully, they will fix it soon.

It could be more secure actually. Microsoft Defender is not very secure. The platform is also a bit slow, to be honest. It takes a few seconds to load. Although, it does update quickly now. It's one-click — Microsoft takes four seconds and Google takes two and a half. It's minimal.

Better integration with other vendors and third-party systems would be a nice change.

View full review »

Right now, in Azure, with the solution they offer, it's a bit complicated. 

The application response time in particular consumes a lot of memory in terms of the CPU and application response time.

The control administration, every single control, every single application or service, has its independent dashboard. It's a bit complex to set up. It's simple to set up, however, when you want a metric for tracking or reporting, it's a bit difficult.

We've had issues with the login feature and have been looking into other solutions due to that ongoing problem.

The solution needs a more integrated password feature.

View full review »

In the next release, I would like to see better security.

View full review »

N/A

View full review »

The pricing can be reduced.

View full review »

Its costing can be improved. There should be better cost management.

View full review »

It could be more stable, but we think this is due to Microsoft making changes too often to their setup. We also think the configuration could be easier. Sometimes performance takes a hit on a slow network. Microsoft does not appear to pay enough attention to the platform or the account solution.

View full review »

I would like to see better integration with other products.

View full review »

I would like to see more databases on the cloud, what they call today Big Data should be there. I think it's going in the right direction.

View full review »

Microsoft is not an innovator for this cloud computing platform. Still some of its products, like Dynamics GP 2013 online, are not compatible with iPad, iPhone, and some Android based devices. View full review »

Microsoft Azure could improve by being more secure.

View full review »

An issue I encountered was around the integration of Identity. I lost some important information and I would like to see improvements with this. 

View full review »

The price could be improved as well as the interface speed, and technical support.

View full review »

Stronger R integration in a circular fashion (Azure->R->Azure). Nowadays, it has an unidirectional bias.

View full review »

I would prefer Microsoft Azure to increase the free trial, then developers can take advantage, and it could increase their sales.

View full review »

The initial setup is quite complex because of the number of options that are available.

View full review »

Needs fast Internet connectivity. Fear of being data being hacked or captured. View full review »

Its pricing should be better. In terms of features, I am yet to explore the whole solution, and the current features seem okay.

View full review »

Its subscription price could be cheaper.

View full review »

We need more customization and support for doing so.

I would like to see more customization on the DevOps side.

View full review »

It is pretty secure, but it can always be more secure.

View full review »

Sometimes technical support is not fast as I needed on the first call, but once they are engaged, it is really easy to get an answer.

View full review »

-Systems mirroring is currently not available within Azure, unlike Amazon Web Services. -Lose account control to MS. -MS has calibrations to compute how much you used them, and how you plan to validate it. View full review »

1) It is a well known fact that Microsoft has yet to upgrade its IaaS technologies for providing a near zero interruption triggered by Load balancers. 2) Physical security of data is a major concern for various IaaS service providers, and Azure is no different. 3) Though having data served from multiple data centers improves performance, it has increased the risk of data security. 4) Compared to other IaaS service providers out there in the market, Azure is a bit expensive. View full review »