Azure Virtual Machines

It has created on of the Positive Impact in terms of Cost Management.

Reduced costs when migrating legacy machines to the cloud

Reduced costs when utilizing Azure credits or Windows licenses from other Microsoft licensing agreements (like Visual Studio subscriptions)

Reduced overheads through automated backup and monitoring

Saved one of our product launches by enabling instant upgrading of hardware resources

Enabled flexibility in managing our VM farm

Reduced profits slightly due to overall costs

It's so easy to spin up new instances, that it becomes also to easy to have to many of them to manage. Many teams end up with a couple of hundreds of VMs after a short while, making the whole thing very hard to maneuver

Azure VMs are the next step for us to rely on Onprem servers, and leaving the management of the infrastructure to the professionals

The ease of use, is also important when our main focus is to deliver new applications and integrations fast, and not having to worry about infrastructure. We sell bottles, not CPUs

Native Databricks deployment and upgradation was a breeze

Peace of mind with regards fault tolerance and automated backups

Native availability of Windows VMs made it easy to migrate Windows based on prem systems.

Positive - introduced us to the cloud model, instilled trust.

Negative - Azure is massive, need to continually learn to stay relevant.

On par with AWS and much better than IBM etc.

Pay-as-you-go billing system.

Quick to configure and easy to install. No expert required.

Reliable product to resource constraints.

Positive: pricing - reservations are available to further decrease costs

Positive: pricing - you are only paying when VM is up

Allowed developers to use machines without the necessity of purchasing additional hardware.

Paying for computing and storage for distributed systems as opposed to self-hosted hardware would be more expensive.

Better when compared with own infrastructure.

No maintenance charges.

No physical security charges.

Backups are on-time and readily available.

Up-time is as promised by Microsoft.

Virtual Machines are very responsive.

Less cost on the setup.

Per Machine scalability has reduced a lot of cost in non-business hours.

Availability is very important feature which every client prefers

As I already mentioned our organization is huge and multiple different projects are using Azure Virtual Machines as their digital transformation platform and migrations are happing right now.

Positive in term of quick prototype and development time.

Negative regarding cost.

Positive: Quick and easy to learn.

It has met our VM needs for our Microsoft Azure offering.

It required a sensible ramp-up time that was not an impediment to our business initiatives.

Azure is a fully enough featured ecosystem for us to accomplish our goals around the VMs.

We saw a significant cost-saving as a result of exiting our expensive data-center and migrating services to Microsoft Azure Cloud.

We saw further cost savings upon migrating remaining applications from our supplier-hosted Virtual Private Cloud to Microsoft Azure Cloud.

As well as cost-savings from running production services in Azure, we are also able to run short-term cost-effective proofs-of-concept for which the infrastructure can be quickly deleted upon completion of the PoC, and we are no longer charged for it.

We actually saved £76,000 by utilising scaling services correctly from 24 hour uptime servers

WE saved £50,000 by Engaging NORDCLOUD and adding there professional discount with MICROSFT by going under there umbrella and they take over the support services to Microsoft.

Overall on a personal level I believe Cloud recourses are more expensive than Physical kits and the depreciation plan of physical kit really doesn't happen over 3 years, in reality, people still own kits at 20 years, I'm not saying that is good practice to keep the kit for 20 years but the cost model doesn't really work against what really happens in the world, so Cloud services are something that has pro's and cons and it really has to be what your needing and how your company processes work when trying to gain new kit, it can be far easier to commission a new virtual machine in Azure than it can be to get purchasing to investigate raise orders and actually buy the kit you require, once the process is set up for the Azure purchases the route is already in place and happens much quicker, sometimes, it's even been retrospective as its needed and been provisioned, resolving a priority 1 issue and then decommissioned after the event. you would have to look at what your own personal situation is on this and if this is a benefit or not.

The more you use it and more you create VMs, greater will be the ROI.

it is not too expensive to run VMs but i can't tell about the numbers.

i don't manage the financial part.

I do recommend companies to use it, instead of buying their own hardware.

Easy to expand or contract data center as needed.

Easy tools for migrating data center to the cloud.

Allowed us to move quickly to support remote learning.

It achieved what we needed to do. But we don't use it full time as we prefer the simplicity of DigitalOcean or Linode.

It has made work easier for everyone

It is a reasonable price

It is loved by the clients