• subscribe
September 01, 2011 08:00 AM

Microsoft Windows Azure: Why I Still Haven't Tried It

Microsoft's Windows Azure marketing is still a bit too cloudy for Michael K. Campbell
Dev Pro
InstantDoc ID #140425
Within the next two months I'm hoping to launch a product that requires scalable, redundant, and commoditized hosting for a number of geographically distributed nodes. As of today, I don't think I'll be using Microsoft Windows Azure to host my solution.

Windows Azure and the Cloud


After looking around at various cloud-hosting options for my solution, I've considered the notion of deploying my solution on either a Platform as a Service (PaaS) cloud or going a bit deeper down the "stack" and using an Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), where I'll be looking for full-blown virtual machine (VM) cloud hosting.

I'm no stranger to the cloud. As I discussed in "Amazon's S3 for ASP.NET Web Developers," I've been actively using it for a number of solutions for myself and clients for years now, and I'm sold on the benefits of being able to easily access scalable, redundant, commodity hardware and services as a quick way to decrease development time.

For some reason, I've yet to actually test an Azure solution. Oh, I've tried to test Azure a few times, but some aspect of the service or sign-up always turns me away without actually setting up an account. So, in an effort to try to be helpful, as was my intent in "A Call to Action on .NET Versioning," I thought I'd share some reasons why.

PaaS and Dumbing Down My Apps


When Windows Azure was first released, I had no qualms about being unimpressed. From my perspective, Microsoft was (once again) late to the game while still acting like they'd invented everything.

Even so, I could see the benefit in Microsoft working on Azure. I was quite hopeful and optimistic that Windows Azure and SQL Azure would eventually bring some big things to SQL Server and the .NET Framework. I still believe those big benefits are on the horizon—just as I feel that Microsoft's focus on the cloud is a great move.

When it comes to deploying my .NET applications to Windows Azure, I start running into problems. In my mind, I have to dumb down my apps to get them to work on Windows Azure or SQL Azure. Ironically, I haven't paid enough attention to Windows Azure to know exactly what kind of changes are required to my sites or apps, but I have paid enough attention to know that I will have to make some changes.

What I do know, however, is that the site I'm directed to from Google is Microsoft's Windows Azure site, which is designed to cater to developers. The sad thing is that the introduction to Azure for developers, Introducing Windows Azure, is a page where I can download a whitepaper that happens to have been written over a year ago.

Since I already feel that one of the biggest pains that I have with .NET is jumping through configuration, deployment, framework versioning, and compatibility hurdles, I just can't compel myself to click on a link that's going to give me year-old information on how I have to do that with handcuffs (Azure limitations) on.

Instead, I'm left wondering why there can't be at least an FAQ that makes it easy for me to get a glimpse of what I need to do to get my apps up and running instead of having to download a white paper.

Azure's PaaS Versus My Need for IaaS


The tiny bit of Googling that I did to determine how hard it would be to deploy a Windows service to an Azure host let me know that while Windows Azure offers both web and worker roles. As this blog post "Windows Service in Azure platform" states, you can't deploy both roles to the same machine or hosting slot.

More important, that tiny bit of research let me know that Windows Azure doesn't support Windows Servers. Granted, I'm not at all surprised by the fact that Windows Azure doesn't support services, as they're a special set of operations that are very heavily tied to the OS. So having to modify deployment needs doesn't seem that big of a problem to me if I want to deploy "service-y" solutions.

What did take me back for a second was the fact that if you need worker and web roles, you'll need two distinct instances of Azure to pull that off. The truth is that this is really just a limitation of how Windows Azure is a PaaS, not an entire piece of the infrastructure.

In fairness, a big part of what continues to keep me from using Azure is that it doesn't quite mesh with my needs. It's only fair that I call that out in an article about why I haven't actually tried Azure for a long time now.

In fact, I don't think I would have even bothered with detailing my own weird misgivings about trying Azure if it weren't for the fact that Azure now offers a Virtual Machine Role, an IaaS offering that does meet my needs and speak my language without the need to dumb anything down.



ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • Brian
    8 months ago
    Sep 02, 2011

    I'd recommend starting here: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/

  • Roger_Jennings
    8 months ago
    Sep 02, 2011

    Michael,

    Re "if you need worker and web roles, you'll need two distinct instances of Azure to pull that off," you can have multiple worker and web roles in single Azure instance. The maximum number of endpoints per instance was recently increased to 25.

    --rj

  • thundr51
    8 months ago
    Sep 01, 2011

    Why is everyone ignoring the blue elephant in the room? No ever talks about the VERY high cost!! With Google being so cheap, It's really heard to persuade my bosses that we should stick with .net and MS.

  • Maurice Pelchat
    8 months ago
    Sep 01, 2011

    Some dull T-SQL limitations are still specific to SQL Azure. For example you have no rights to create temp table, something often used in stored procedures. They are many security limitations. Why? I suspect that this is organized as a multi-tenants SQL Server, using clustering for some fail-ver protection. Microsoft should instead dedicate to its customer a full-fledge SQL Server virtual machine instead of a stripped down SQL. Their proposition is like going to cloud by giving up your wings! With proper free tools like YourSqlDba to automate database management and backups, SQL Server is not much work to manage. It is then not obvious to see which option is less costly.

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here