We performed a comparison between Adobe ColdFusion and Microsoft Azure App Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rapid Application Development Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We save enormous amounts of time in development using this tool."
"I would like to say that its best feature is its different kinds of connectors. We have lots of in-built connectors."
"My client has been able to improve productivity with the use of the tool. The solution has them develop several tools that addressed their specific needs. They have become more efficient and safe with the use of the product."
"The ability to write SQL queries was very helpful as we did not need to bother our DBAs in writing stored procedures for simple tasks."
"Apart from providing a mature, reliable, consistent platform, Adobe also offers outstanding customer service and product support."
"No need to import libraries from outside the environment."
"I find it to be the easiest server-side technology for website development. It easily integrates with virtually everything– from web APIs to NoSQL databases to RSS and XML services."
"This tool was very easy learn, yet powerful enough to manage many sites on a single instance."
"The stability of Microsoft Azure App Service is good."
"The solution can scale."
"It's a platform as a service, so we don't have to manage the infrastructure to hold the websites."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the easy deployment, the scalability, and the Azure maintenance."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure App Service is autoscaling and resource grouping. Additionally, the integration works well, it is easy to do."
"What I found most valuable in Microsoft Azure App Service is that it's a PaaS. I also like that it supports Docker and multiple frameworks so that you can work on Java, Ruby on Rails, PHP, and Python."
"The most valuable feature is that it's an ideal solution when it comes to lifting and shifting monolithic applications from on-premises to Azure Cloud. It allows for a quick shift into the cloud without having to analyze and design very specific infrastructure and services for monolithic applications hosted primarily on-premises. Let's say that the team does not want to really redesign monoliths in a microservices-based application and that they want to make a quick move towards adopting the cloud tech stack. Then, Microsoft Azure App Service is probably the best option."
"One of our reasons to use the product is its cloud service. Our usage is mainly on the cloud and we like the benefits that we can get from the cloud. You can easily do the literal shift of your application easily. You can jump into the cloud very quickly."
"The solution needs to improve its adaption capability with a third-party company. I want to see more communities or open knowledge resources with the tool."
"Installation of the server software was formidable due the number of configurable options."
"ColdFusion’s third-party authentication is currently limited to just a couple of companies, like Google and Facebook, and a few third-party SAML authenticators. From my personal perspective, adding LinkedIn and Microsoft would greatly benefit me."
"Need to be able to Be able to inject Python, Java, Groovy, or PHP code into a CFML page."
"There is not much third party authenticators in this solution"
"Previously when I was trying to create some data, it was very difficult to get real-time data from Workfront."
"I would like to see faster adoption and templates that we can use."
"I want more transparency in billing. It would be better if we could understand and control the billing to customize it. Also, Microsoft should provide more guidance about the widgets and subsets of various products. The Microsoft portfolio is so huge that it's sometimes difficult to choose the correct option. There's always a chance we are paying more than necessary."
"Microsoft Azure App Service has a lot of complexity because there are a lot of options and functionality. It is simple to become confused, there are many technical elements to learn before you can utilize the solution. If they could make the solution easier to use it would be a benefit."
"The outbound connectivity is not great."
"Microsoft Azure App Service could improve by having better integration and connectivity with other platforms. The solution has good integration with other large companies' solutions but there are smaller service platforms companies where there could be integrated better."
"When trying to scale up, it has a limitation, specifically an upper limitation. In general, scalability should be improved."
"The pricing is average. It could be lower."
"Initially, there were some rare instances when the server went down because it was deployed on Linux."
Adobe ColdFusion is ranked 21st in Rapid Application Development Software with 6 reviews while Microsoft Azure App Service is ranked 8th in Rapid Application Development Software with 38 reviews. Adobe ColdFusion is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure App Service is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Adobe ColdFusion writes "An easy-to-setup tool that can be used to automate repetitive tasks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure App Service writes "A solution with great server management and helps improve performance". Adobe ColdFusion is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Oracle Application Express (APEX), GitHub CoPilot, Appian and ServiceNow, whereas Microsoft Azure App Service is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Oracle Application Express (APEX), ServiceNow, Pega BPM and Ionic. See our Adobe ColdFusion vs. Microsoft Azure App Service report.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software vendors.
We monitor all Rapid Application Development Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.