4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Sep 22, 2016
Implementation and upgrades can be complicated with integrations with SharePoint, SQL Server, and SQL Server Reporting Services. Support from Microsoft was pretty good.
This is a robust tool and with that comes complexity but it is very flexible and the user experience has improved greatly over the years.
Very flexible and easy to learn and use.
Better alignment between their own product teams on releases and versioning.
They continue to add great features and the usability improves with every release.
Sometimes extensive work is required to prove it is a product bug vs. some configuration or implementation issue.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 22, 2016
The overall experience was satisfactory. Microsoft could provide more UI controls for their MVC framework. Currently, it falls short of expectations relative to Web Forms framework and other technologies
MVC framework based web development is easy to develop, manage and re-use.
MVC framework based web development is easy to develop, manage and re-use
Absence of sufficient UI controls for the MVC framework.
As mentioned above.
Evaluate other options.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 17, 2016
Developer-friendly user experience. Fully integrated solution with strong 3rd party add-on community.
Great community support and online documentation.
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 17, 2016
On strong recommendation from Microsoft, we decided to implement .Net Core version 1. This turned out to be a bad decision due to the obvious weaknesses of the technology. The move ultimately cost us about 3 months of lost development time and put the project behind schedule. We were disappointed with the reluctance of Microsoft to admit the deficiencies of the product (which they ultimately pulled).
Trust but verify.
The framework is still very solid.
The roadmap of the product is murky and seems to shift depending on non-corrolated technologies.
Be more transparent.
Rethink our strategy of adopting technologies from a trusted partner.
The Core technology was oversold.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Jun 16, 2016
New features to reduce need for resharper.
Just do it.
Free form structure.
Better shortkey education.
Stay up to date.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed May 26, 2016
We adopted VSTS over a period of 4 months. We initially utilized a pilot area before implementing the enterprise instance. This gave us an opportunity to understand how we wanted to implement the product before conducting a conversion of our source code and test library.
Execute a pilot first before full implementation.
Ease of use.
Licensing structure is confusing and difficult to maintain.
Provide a full suite of services instead of requiring engagement with a 3rd party vendor.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed May 10, 2016
CIO is extremely satisfied.
Microsoft consultants, engineers, and admins are among the best.
Implementation and testing ongoing.
Always available and responsive, quick to provide solutions.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Mar 31, 2016
The met my expectations on service.
Get complete review of products and other vendors before proceeding.
Customer service was good and they answered my questions.
Need to review components to make sure they still function as before.
Complete walk-thru of the product.
Review other vendors before making decisions.
Performed as expected.
I was able to get support when needed and they answered my questions throughly.
The deployment went smooth with no unforseen complications.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Mar 31, 2016
The implementation was straighforward and the interfaces were familiar enough that development could be started immediately. The only drawback was that some classes and objects were deprecated without a lot of documentation on why or what to replace with.
Make sure that all legacy applications are converted unless you plan on maintaining previous versions of visual studios.
Overall great documentation and ease of upgrading.
Better documentation on deprecated classes.
Nothing, the implementation was done well.
Deployment was easy and bug free.
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Mar 14, 2016
Took some effort to understand licensing and capabilities.
Understand your workflows and how they relate to the needed license levels.
Low cost and easy implementation. Can easily walk away from.
Low cost and investment.
Had a better matrix of licenses and the capabilities they offer within the an SDLC workflow.
Allow more time for evaluations.
Seems to meet our QA needs.
Within expectation for a cloud offering
What was expected for a cloud offering.