[blibble]

> MS stack will be high quality

I've yet to experience a MS product that I would consider to be "high quality" (including Azure)

[kcartlidge]

> I've yet to experience a MS product that I would consider to be "high quality" (including Azure)

Most aren't. Some are. As with all software/ecosystem providers.

[throwawaybbqed]

Azure is not bad compared to the options. Also, MSFT is throwing a lot of brain power at it (notable systems researchers from MSR). Curious what you consider is better?

[blibble]

most of my bad experience with Azure is the control interface, which is worse than AWS/GCP in every way

random incomprehensible error messages, near constant UI timeouts and terrible UI performance and experience (artifact deployment has been "skipped"? why? no way to know), etc

the Windows VMs are also extremely slow compared to my employer's non-azure VM, with the Azure VMs having double the VCPUs, disk IOPS and RAM (despite having the same "stack" deployed on it)

[hackerfromthefu]

I haven't experienced these UI problems despite regular use of Azure.

The VM speed I can't comment on.

[yokoprime]

Why the same quote and reply with both your accounts?

[blibble]

it's possible that more than one person thinks that Microsoft products are less than high quality