Azure DevOps (formerly VSTS, Microsoft Visual Studio Team System) is an agile development product that is an extension of the Microsoft Visual Studio architecture. Azure DevOps includes software development, collaboration, and reporting capabilities.
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
CircleCI
Score 9.5 out of 10
N/A
CircleCI is a software delivery engine from the company of the same name in San Francisco, that helps teams ship software faster, offering their platform for Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD). Ultimately, the solution helps to map every source of change for software teams, so they can accelerate innovation and growth.
$15
per month
Pricing
Azure DevOps Services
CircleCI
Editions & Modules
Azure Artifacts
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Basic Plan
$6
per user per month (first 5 users free)
Azure Pipelines - Self-Hosted
$15
per extra parallel job (1 free parallel job with unlimited minutes)
Azure Pipelines - Microsoft Hosted
$40
per parallel job (1,800 minutes free with 1 free parallel job)
Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing …
The moment I have been working with this tool everything has benn operating efficiently. The software development process has borne positive results under scalable environment. The cost of running Azure DevOps Services us much lower as compared to other tools in the market. It …
ADO has better linking than Confluence and is adaptable for a specific need, whereas Confluence might be a bit more rigid, but it's also sort of along the same lines as to what can be done with both tools. ADO also had an ease of use to it and can do a bunch of stuff with it, …
Jira is super clunky and doesn't behave in a modern fashion. monday.com is too flexible and doesn't provide enough feature set. AWS is the most competitive, but it's hard to wrap your brain around all of the features and offerings provided by amazon. ADO does a better job of …
Azure DevOps has a drag and drop editor so that you can quickly drag build steps into a build or release pipeline. This is much faster than looking up the correct yaml syntax. Additionally, its support for Microsoft and Azure is great. If you're on the .net stack or you use …
Microsoft Planner is used by project managers and IT service managers across our organization for task tracking and running their team meetings. Azure DevOps works better than Planner for software development teams but might possibly be too complex for non-software teams or …
Trello is simple to use, but it's only for a Kanban board. Jira might be the same, but I don't really have enough experience with Jira to fully compare them. When I used it, it missed certain functionalities that I was used to in Azure DevOps. Visually it's a lot different too.
Azure DevOps Services have huge functionality and are well supported by Microsoft as well. You will get plenty of features in the marketplace and learning documentation.
Writing the Docker Images, Storing them in Azure Container Registry and then Deploying onto Azure Kubernetes Services is an Easier process which no other software/product is currently providing in the market. Best till date in terms of End to End deployment and maintaining …
Azure DevOps is widely used because of its collaboration and integration with various other tools. Here the assign of the sub task is quite easy compare to Jira. Also Azure Devops can we integrate easily with Git for better code representation and versioning. It reporting is …
Azure DevOps is a completed product and ecosystem. It offers a robust ecosystem that does everything that is needed. The above products do lack features like pipelines tasks, third-party integrations. Besides all cloud benefits, the main advantage of Azure DevOps Services …
Currently, we use both products, however, we use more the Atlassian suite. We have started recently using Azure DevOps for specific implementations and projects. We don't have any plan yet to migrate all our projects to Azure DevOps, we may in the next couple of years. …
We tested alternatives for Azure DevOps over time. We tested GitHub a while ago and back then lack of some features that now hast, like the project boards and private repositories. We will check GitHub next year.
We also tested AWS CodeCommit and found it very cryptic, …
Beside all cloud benefits, the main advantage Azure DevOps Services compared to Azure DevOps Server is the easier remote access for third party team members, and always up to date software. On the other hand, on prem deployment (Azure DevOps Server) makes complex access or …
The greatest strength of Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) is that it's a one-stop solution for all agile project management instead of setting up bits of different software put together for each and every need. Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) has a great ecosystem …
I prefer Azure Devops over all other code repository / ci/cd systems that I've used in the past. All features are integrated into a single service (back log, repo mgmt, deployment pipelines, artifacts, etc.). The tools are easy to use and super powerful.
Our company is already using a lot of Azure services and it makes more sense to start using Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) when we needed a CI/CD tool. We tested different features of Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) and found out that the build and release …
One of the foremost reasons that acted in favor of Azure DevOps was its all-in-one packed web portal which enabled easy access to all the CI/CD tools and kits. Customizable screens, notifications via Teams/mails, project views, etc. Most other tools/products offer only part of …
While GitLab has the same features as Azure DevOps, and a potentially more competitive price, its project management features are a bit more primitive. It could be helpful for small projects, but ultimately for our larger projects we went with Azure DevOps. Bitbucket has good …
Azure DevOps provides a full workflow from planning through to development through to production. After the acquisition of GitHub by Microsoft, GitHub is becoming more fully-featured with the features being ported becoming more polished in the transition. Both are great …
DevOps is more full-featured than its on-prem predecessor or any of the above with the possible exception of the Atlassian suite. I would say those two are roughly comparable. However, the ease of integration is much better with DevOps and other Microsoft products (although …
They are really close. Azure DevOps is better because of the deep integration with Microsoft technologies. Jira is better on the customization side. However, Azure DevOps is really improving on that front. They are releasing new features every other week now. Azure DevOps also …
Based on the cost for feature set that we needed we went with CircleCI. There were also more people on our team that knew how to use CircleCI already compared to other products which made it a preferred choice for ramp up. Other products were not as robust and quick to …
We use CircleCI when we need a good, independent CI/CD provider in an existing workflow. That said, we've begun investing more heavily in GitHub actions as it's closer to where our code is stored. CircleCI is a feature of a workflow, and can be filled by many different service …
CircleCI is a sass product which means you don't need to maintain your own servers. This can also be a negative as you are dependent on their service. This also means you can't ssh into a machine to see what went wrong like you can with Jenkins. However for most users this …
Because the Travis CI features are not very good, it has a lot of problems with concurrency and the uptime of the on-cloud solution was the worst we have ever tried.
CircleCI seemed to have a quicker setup than other similar products, with a good integration with GitHub repos. Projects are quick and easy to set up within the UI, and workflows can then be created off the back of those fairly intuitively. Clever interpretation of commit …
CircleCI is the company that is innovating compared to the other ones. I think it's a great piece of software compared to other open source options that don't have as much functionality and improved capability over time.
While the UI on CircleCI is not my favorite, it's leagues better than Travis CI. I really like Heroku CI much better, but the functionality is much more limited there. If Heroku CI had the same functionality as CircleCI, I probably wouldn't use CircleCI.
Jenkins and Teamcity both have additional features that maybe you require, but they are also a lot more work to get set up and working. There's a much longer learning curve to getting these configured for a simple build. They're not hosted, so you have to maintain the …
CircleCI does a lot of what we need it to do; however, I believe Jenkins is a better Continuous Integration tool. Jenkins has more capabilities and integrations. In addition, Jenkins is a much more widely used tool, which means more developers are familiar with it and have …
Not having to manage / deal with a Jenkins server is fantastic. I don't have much personally against Jenkins. I've set up and run a Jenkins server before. It's just complexity that doesn't really have much to do with the business beyond getting our software to our customers. My …
Since CircleCI gave us its infrastructure we don't have to worry about servers, provisioning and maintenance. Also CircleCI provides us great features to increase speed of builds by adding more containers to the build. Jenkins is the best open source alternative but it requires …
Jenkins is usually self-hosted, Travis CI's infrastructure is largely unreliable (lots of tests time out for no discernable reason), and Semaphore encourages you to configure your CI/CD from a web UI. We like CircleCI because its hosted, our tests run largely as expected on …
It was our CTO who did the evaluation, not me, but as I recall other services weren't as parallelizable. We knew we wanted to run on many containers simultaneously for fast test results.
For us it really came down to CricleCI being the fastest and simples tool to get started with. The GitHub integration is slick and seamless and the scripting config file allowed us to configure our entire build system, including tests, in less than a day. It's very light weight …
Circle was the first CI with simple setup, great documentation, and tight integration with Github. Using Jenkins was too much maintenance and overhead, TeamCity was limited in how we could customize it and run concurrent builds, TravisCI was not available for private repos when …
Travis has full YML configuration in areas where CircleCI is slightly lacking still, which is great, but CircleCI offers more features, settings, and potential performance.
Codeship is simpler to use, you can use it entirely from their UI without modifying your Git repository at …
Travis CI is great for open source projects – it's completely free, but CircleCI offers some support for closed projects as well. CircleCI has cheaper pricing plans, and you are able to customize them as much as you want. At Travis CI you can select only a predefined amount of …
The biggest downside to CircleCI is that it doesn't support parameterized builds, that is testing your code against language version X and Y, or framework version A and B. Beyond that, it is really a great product.
I had used Travis CI in some of my open source projects. However, it was too expensive for us so I looked for an alternative that was in our budget. Scrutinizer is also very useful, but also out of our budget. When we get larger I could see myself using Scrutinizer for quality …
I think these three tools are just as good as the other except that Travis CI supports mobile a lot better but price wise, CircleCI is the best that I have found and is supports the need for a startup. For a long while, CircleCI had Docker support before Codeship but now, …
ADO is well suited for the visibility of day-to-day tasks and responsibilities as well as things such as Features, user stories, etc. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any scenario where it might not be well suited, as you can customize ADO to your liking to a degree.
CircleCI is well suited if you, your developer, or team of developers have already worked with it in the past. They don't need to go through the learning curve of yet another Continuous Integration tool. Circle handles Continuous Integration workflows very well, including pretty complex workflows. With that said, Circle can get expensive if you need to run multiple containers in parallel and might not be as easy to setup as some alternatives, such as Jenkins.
Flexible Requirements Hierarchy Management: AZDO makes it easy to track items such as features or epics as a flat list, or as a hierarchy in which you can track the parent-child relationship.
Fast Data Entry: AZDO was designed to facilitate quick data entry to capture work items quickly, while still enabling detailed capture of acceptance criteria and item properties.
Excel Integration: AZDO stands out for its integration with MS Excel, which enables quick updates for bulk items.
Full customization and scripting abilities. Using tools like bash scripts, SSH, and Node, running almost anything upon committing some code to GitHub becomes possible.
Integration with all of our favorite services. GitHub and Slack in particular are crucial to our business and CircleCI's integration is seamless and full-featured.
Great config file syntax. Many CI services require you to perform advanced configuration in a UI. This is fine at first (and CircleCI offers this for many options available), but when you start needing to manage a large number of projects, committing configuration changes to a Git repository is more consistent and maintainable than making the change many different times manually in a UI.
Need to make the changes so that it doesn't occupy most of the CPU utilization and memory
Execution of Bulky SQl Queries leads to either the SQl being out of exception or the VS being unresponsive
Integration with Microsoft products is easy, but with non-Microsoft products it is more difficult, and you have to make a lot of configuration changes to integrate
With every upgrade of the Visual Studio, like from VS 2010 to VS 2013 , we need to upgrade our hardware/machine, as the VS hardware requirement also increases
If code is getting compiled in one visual studio, like in VS 2010, that the same code could possibly give an error when compiled in VS 2013, due to certain changes in keyword, data format, etc., with the VS upgrade
CircleCI mostly getting built into both upstream platforms (Github/Gitlab) and downstream platforms (AWS, Azure, GCP), in which cases it's often a better fit or can be used as a part of existing tooling
UX can be confusing to navigate and see what's happening.
I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.
Azure DevOps is a powerful, complex cloud application. As such there are a number of things it does great and something where there is room for improvement. One of those areas would be in usability. In my opinion it relies too much on search. There is no easy way to view all projects or to group them in a logical way. You need to search for everything.
It's pretty snappy, even with using workflows with multiple steps and different docker images. I've seen builds take a long time if it's really involved, but from what I can tell, it's still at least on par if not faster than other build tools.
When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.
I haven't personally used their support service, but I have heard from others that they are responsive. I've also seen only one or two downtimes in over a year of use and both were no more than an hour or two.
Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing interfaces, I feel it would be a complete project management system.
Jenkins and Teamcity both have additional features that maybe you require, but they are also a lot more work to get set up and working. There's a much longer learning curve to getting these configured for a simple build. They're not hosted, so you have to maintain the infrastructure and scale yourself. They're both good products if you require more than CircleCI, but if not, skip the extra headache and go with something simple like CircleCI.