ASP.NET vs Azure App Service

• NET is a rich framework which provides vast amounts of functionality, which helps speed up development
• NET is supported by an array of high-quality tooling from Microsoft, such as TFS and Visual Studio
• There a large community of experienced ASP.NET developers which means patterns and practices are well documented and there is also plenty of discussion opportunities within the community, such as conferences, meetups, and forums.
• The large user base means that recruitment can be easier

Read full review

• Single source for ALL of our apps.
• Revision control is easy with the info we embed into the apps.

Read full review

• Starting a new ASP.Net project can sometimes seem daunting to get all the initial libraries in place unless you use a predefined scaffold. This is getting better.
• You are tied to the Microsoft/Azure platforms for deployment of ASP.Net applications. However, Net Core helps alleviate this.
• Language choices (VB, C#, F#, C++) can seem a little daunting at times.

Read full review

• Abstraction of computing resources like Heroku does with dynos.
• Azure Portal overall is pretty bloated and that affects managing Azure App Service applications.

Read full review

• It has allowed us to quickly develop a powerful line of business functionality for our customers, using common technologies and leveraging third-party components.
• Interaction with user desktops and local machines has been problematic to overcome when trying to integrate with desktop applications such as MS Office.

Read full review

• Azure App Service has allowed us to quickly deploy high-budget projects very quickly, netting us a healthy profit vs the cost to develop. (We make, on average, about 10x what it costs to get up and running per project thanks to how easy it is to implement a skeleton framework.)
• Costs are low to run the services thanks to the scaling functionality that comes with Azure App Service. We can utilize less resources during slow times and save hundreds of dollars per month vs costs of traditional servers.

Read full review