Site Recovery

199
Total Pages
64
Linux-Friendly Pages
135
Pages with Bias
67.8%
Bias Rate

Bias Trend Over Time

Pages with Bias Issues

864 issues found
Showing 201-225 of 864 flagged pages
Site Recovery Support Requirements for Azure Site Recovery Replication Appliance .../site-recovery/replication-appliance-support-matrix.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Missing Linux Example 🔧 Windows Tools
Summary
The documentation page exhibits a strong Windows bias: all operating system requirements, folder paths, and configuration instructions are exclusively for Windows Server, with no mention of Linux support or equivalents. Antivirus exclusions and folder paths are Windows-specific, and only Windows Server roles and group policies are discussed. There are no Linux examples, requirements, or guidance, and Windows terminology and tools are used throughout.
Recommendations
  • Clarify whether Linux-based replication appliances are supported. If not, explicitly state Windows-only support.
  • If Linux is supported, add a section detailing Linux OS requirements, supported distributions, and configuration steps.
  • Provide Linux equivalents for folder exclusions (e.g., typical installation paths, antivirus configuration for Linux).
  • Include examples of Linux firewall and network configuration, if applicable.
  • Mention Linux-specific considerations for VMware environments, if relevant.
  • Ensure parity in troubleshooting and operational guidance for both Windows and Linux platforms.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Set up Active Directory/DNS disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery ...ticles/site-recovery/site-recovery-active-directory.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Powershell Heavy Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation is heavily focused on Windows environments, specifically Windows Server-based Active Directory and DNS. All examples, troubleshooting steps, and commands reference Windows tools (e.g., NET SHARE, dcdiag, nltest, dnscmd), registry edits, and Windows-specific concepts like FSMO roles, SYSVOL, and DFSR. There are no examples or guidance for Linux-based domain controllers (e.g., Samba AD DC) or DNS servers (e.g., BIND), nor are Linux equivalents for the commands or procedures provided.
Recommendations
  • Add guidance for disaster recovery of Linux-based domain controllers (such as Samba) and DNS servers (such as BIND or Unbound).
  • Include Linux command-line equivalents for diagnostic and recovery steps (e.g., using samba-tool, systemctl, dig, named-checkzone).
  • Provide examples of setting up replication, failover, and recovery for Linux VMs hosting AD/DC or DNS roles in Azure Site Recovery.
  • Mention Linux-specific considerations for network configuration, DNS zone management, and VM failover in Azure.
  • Ensure that troubleshooting steps include both Windows and Linux scenarios, with appropriate commands and registry/file configuration instructions.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Azure Site Recovery Deployment Planner for VMware disaster recovery ...cles/site-recovery/site-recovery-deployment-planner.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Missing Linux Example 🔧 Windows Tools
Summary
The documentation page exhibits a strong Windows bias: all examples and instructions are exclusively for Windows Server or Windows PC environments. The tool requires Windows OS for both profiling and report generation, with no mention of Linux support or alternatives. Prerequisites and download instructions assume Windows-only usage, and dependencies (such as .NET Framework and Visual C++ Redistributable) are Windows-specific. There are no Linux equivalents, examples, or guidance provided.
Recommendations
  • Clarify whether the Deployment Planner tool can run on Linux systems, and if not, explicitly state this limitation.
  • If possible, develop and document a Linux-compatible version of the Deployment Planner tool.
  • Provide Linux-specific instructions for downloading, extracting, and running the tool, including dependencies and environment setup.
  • Offer examples and guidance for Linux administrators, such as using Wine or other compatibility layers if native support is unavailable.
  • List any Linux alternatives or workarounds for report generation (e.g., using LibreOffice Calc instead of Excel).
  • Ensure that future documentation includes parity for both Windows and Linux environments, especially for VMware administrators who may prefer Linux-based management servers.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Troubleshoot the Azure VM extension for disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery .../site-recovery/site-recovery-extension-troubleshoot.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Powershell Heavy Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation demonstrates a Windows bias by consistently listing Windows troubleshooting steps and error scenarios before Linux equivalents, and by providing detailed, step-by-step instructions using Windows-specific tools (services.msc, Control Panel, MSI installers, .NET requirements). Linux instructions are less detailed, lack parity in troubleshooting depth, and do not mention equivalent Linux tools or troubleshooting patterns (e.g., systemd service status, package manager commands). There are no PowerShell examples, but the overall troubleshooting flow and tool references are Windows-centric.
Recommendations
  • Alternate the order of Windows and Linux troubleshooting sections, or present them in parallel for each error scenario.
  • Provide Linux-specific troubleshooting steps with equivalent detail, such as checking waagent status with systemctl, verifying installation via package manager (apt, yum, etc.), and uninstalling/reinstalling the agent.
  • Include explicit Linux commands for checking agent status, uninstalling/reinstalling the agent, and verifying dependencies (e.g., Python version, required packages).
  • Mention Linux equivalents for Windows tools (e.g., services.msc vs. systemctl/service commands, Control Panel vs. package manager).
  • Clarify any differences in extension management between Windows and Linux, and provide links to relevant Linux documentation.
  • Ensure that next steps and troubleshooting links are balanced between Windows and Linux topics.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Disaster recovery of Dynamics AX with Azure Site Recovery ...ain/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-dynamicsax.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation is heavily oriented toward Windows environments, specifically referencing Windows Server, Active Directory, SQL Server, and Dynamics AX components that are Windows-only. All examples and instructions assume Windows-based infrastructure, with no mention of Linux equivalents or guidance for Linux-based workloads. The prerequisites, recovery steps, and component protection are described exclusively in the context of Windows tools and patterns.
Recommendations
  • Include explicit statements about Linux support or limitations for Azure Site Recovery with Dynamics AX.
  • Provide examples or guidance for disaster recovery of Linux-based workloads, even if Dynamics AX itself is Windows-only, to help mixed-environment administrators.
  • Mention Linux-compatible alternatives for components such as DNS, directory services, and database servers where possible.
  • Clarify whether Site Recovery steps (such as VM replication, failover, and networking configuration) differ for Linux VMs, and provide links to Linux-specific documentation.
  • Add a section addressing cross-platform scenarios, such as integrating Linux-based web tiers with Windows-based Dynamics AX tiers.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Run a failover during disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery .../main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-failover.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates Windows bias by providing more detailed and specific instructions for Windows VMs, referencing Windows-specific tools (such as Windows Firewall, RDP, WinHTTP proxy, SAN policy), and listing Windows actions before Linux equivalents. Linux instructions are comparatively brief and lack equivalent troubleshooting or configuration detail. There are also references to Windows update behavior and troubleshooting links that are Windows-centric, while Linux troubleshooting is not covered in similar depth.
Recommendations
  • Provide equally detailed Linux instructions, including steps for configuring SSH, firewall (e.g., iptables, firewalld, ufw), and troubleshooting connectivity issues for Linux VMs after failover.
  • Include Linux-specific examples for common tasks, such as removing static routes, handling proxy settings, and checking for pending updates (e.g., using apt, yum, or systemctl).
  • Reference Linux tools and commands where Windows tools are mentioned (e.g., mention how to check and modify firewall rules on Linux, set up SSH keys, or review boot diagnostics/logs).
  • Add troubleshooting links and guidance for Linux remote access issues post-failover, similar to the Windows RDP troubleshooting section.
  • Ensure parity in the order and depth of instructions for both Windows and Linux, presenting them side-by-side where possible.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Set up disaster recovery for an IIS web app using Azure Site Recovery .../blob/main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-iis.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Missing Linux Example 🔧 Windows Tools
Summary
The documentation is heavily focused on Windows environments, specifically IIS on Windows Server and related Windows-centric tools and patterns. All examples, deployment patterns, and scripts are tailored to IIS (a Windows-only web server), with explicit references to Windows Server versions and PowerShell scripts. There is no mention of Linux-based web servers (such as Apache or Nginx), nor are there examples or guidance for disaster recovery of Linux-based web applications. The documentation assumes the reader is using Windows and does not provide parity for Linux users.
Recommendations
  • Add equivalent disaster recovery guidance for popular Linux-based web servers (e.g., Apache, Nginx) and application stacks.
  • Include Linux-specific examples for scripting post-failover actions (e.g., using Bash, Python, or Ansible instead of PowerShell).
  • Provide instructions for updating configuration files, bindings, and certificates in Linux environments.
  • Mention Linux-supported Azure Site Recovery scenarios and clarify any differences in process or tooling.
  • Ensure that both Windows and Linux deployment patterns are described and illustrated, with equal prominence.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Troubleshoot failover to Azure failures ...covery/site-recovery-failover-to-azure-troubleshoot.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Powershell Heavy Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation demonstrates a Windows bias in several areas: troubleshooting steps for hydration failures provide only Windows/PowerShell scripts, with no equivalent Linux instructions; Windows tools such as PsExec and Internet Explorer are referenced for proxy troubleshooting before Linux alternatives; error resolution steps and examples are often Windows-centric or presented for Windows first, with Linux guidance appearing later or not at all; and some troubleshooting scenarios (e.g., registry changes, driver startup types) are described only for Windows, omitting Linux-specific procedures.
Recommendations
  • Provide equivalent Linux troubleshooting steps and scripts for hydration failures, including commands for modifying driver and service startup types on Linux VMs.
  • When referencing tools like PsExec and Internet Explorer for proxy troubleshooting, offer Linux-native alternatives (e.g., using sudo, curl, or editing proxy settings via command line).
  • Ensure that examples and instructions are presented for both Windows and Linux, ideally side-by-side, rather than focusing on Windows first.
  • Include Linux-specific error messages, logs, and resolution steps where applicable, especially for failover and connectivity issues.
  • Review all sections for Windows-centric language and add Linux parity in guidance, screenshots, and tool recommendations.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Deprecation of IPConfig parameters for the cmdlet New-AzRecoveryServicesAsrVMNicConfig | Microsoft Docs ...ttps://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/azure-docs/blob/main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-ipconfig-cmdlet-parameter-deprecation.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example Windows First
Summary
The documentation exclusively uses Azure PowerShell cmdlets and provides only PowerShell-based examples, which are primarily used on Windows. There is no mention of Linux equivalents, such as Azure CLI or Bash scripting, nor any cross-platform guidance. The focus on PowerShell and Windows-centric tooling creates a bias toward Windows users, leaving Linux administrators without clear instructions.
Recommendations
  • Add equivalent examples using Azure CLI commands, which are natively supported on Linux and macOS.
  • Include Bash script snippets demonstrating how to perform the same operations.
  • Explicitly mention cross-platform support for the cmdlets or provide links to Linux-specific documentation.
  • Clarify whether the described cmdlets can be used on Linux (e.g., via PowerShell Core) and provide installation guidance if so.
  • Present examples for both Windows and Linux users side-by-side to ensure parity.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery About Azure Site Recovery .../main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-overview.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page for Azure Site Recovery demonstrates a Windows bias. Windows-centric technologies (e.g., Windows Server Failover Clusters, SQL Server Always On, AWS Windows instances) are mentioned explicitly and in detail, while Linux equivalents are either omitted or referenced generically. Examples and features are described with a focus on Windows tools and patterns, and there are no Linux-specific examples or guidance. Windows workloads and integrations are listed before Linux, and Linux support is only mentioned in passing.
Recommendations
  • Add explicit examples and guidance for Linux workloads, such as protecting Linux clusters or integrating with Linux-native HA solutions (e.g., Pacemaker, Corosync).
  • Include Linux-specific disaster recovery scenarios and step-by-step instructions for replication and failover of Linux VMs and physical servers.
  • Highlight support for Linux-based applications (e.g., MySQL, PostgreSQL, Apache, NGINX) and their recovery strategies.
  • Balance the mention of Windows and Linux technologies throughout the documentation, ensuring Linux is not only referenced generically.
  • Provide parity in feature descriptions, such as shared disk or cluster support, for Linux where applicable.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Plan capacity for VMware disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery ...es/site-recovery/site-recovery-plan-capacity-vmware.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates a Windows bias in several areas. Registry keys and configuration steps are described exclusively for Windows, with no Linux equivalents or parity. Bandwidth throttling and control are shown using Windows tools (MMC snap-in, PowerShell cmdlets), and examples are provided only for Windows environments. Linux-specific instructions are limited to a brief mention for master target server deployment, with no detailed steps or parity in configuration, monitoring, or bandwidth control. Windows tools and patterns are referenced before or instead of Linux alternatives throughout the page.
Recommendations
  • Provide equivalent Linux examples for bandwidth throttling and control, including relevant Linux tools or configuration files.
  • Include instructions for modifying replication settings on Linux-based process servers, such as configuration files or command-line utilities.
  • Add parity in monitoring and alerting steps for Linux servers, not just Windows.
  • Ensure that registry key instructions are supplemented with Linux configuration guidance (e.g., environment variables, config files).
  • Offer PowerShell alternatives for Linux (such as Bash scripts or CLI commands) where applicable.
  • Present Linux instructions alongside Windows steps, not only as a separate or secondary mention.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Add Azure Automation runbooks to Site Recovery recovery plans ...cles/site-recovery/site-recovery-runbook-automation.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Powershell Heavy Missing Linux Example 🔧 Windows Tools Windows First
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates a strong Windows bias. All code samples and automation instructions use PowerShell, with no mention of Bash, Python, or Linux-native scripting. Azure Automation modules referenced are PowerShell-specific (AzureRM.*), and the workflow patterns (e.g., use of Get-AutomationVariable, Connect-AzureRmAccount) are typical of Windows environments. There are no examples or guidance for Linux users, nor any mention of cross-platform alternatives. The documentation implicitly assumes users are working from a Windows context.
Recommendations
  • Provide equivalent examples using Bash, Python, or Azure CLI to illustrate how Linux users can interact with Azure Automation and Site Recovery.
  • Mention and link to cross-platform tools (e.g., Azure CLI, REST API) that can be used in runbooks and automation scripts.
  • Clarify which steps or modules are Windows-specific and offer alternatives for Linux environments.
  • Add a section describing how to author and execute runbooks from Linux/macOS systems, including authentication and module installation.
  • Ensure sample scripts and deployment instructions are not limited to PowerShell, but include cross-platform options.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Disaster recovery for a multi-tier SharePoint app using Azure Site Recovery ...ain/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-sharepoint.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Missing Linux Example Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools
Summary
The documentation demonstrates a strong Windows bias. All examples, scenarios, and scripts assume Windows Server environments (specifically Windows Server 2012 R2), SharePoint 2013 Enterprise, and SQL Server 2014 Enterprise. There are no references to Linux-based SharePoint alternatives or guidance for non-Windows platforms. Script examples and recovery steps rely on Windows PowerShell cmdlets and Windows-centric tools (e.g., DFSR, AzCopy), with no mention of Bash, Linux CLI, or cross-platform automation. The documentation does not provide parity for Linux users or those running SharePoint alternatives on Linux.
Recommendations
  • Include explicit guidance for Linux-based environments, such as SharePoint alternatives (e.g., Alfresco, Nextcloud) or SQL Server on Linux.
  • Provide equivalent Bash or cross-platform CLI script examples for automation steps, alongside PowerShell.
  • Mention Linux-compatible tools for file replication and backup (e.g., rsync, scp) in addition to Windows tools like DFSR and AzCopy.
  • Clarify which steps are Windows-specific and offer Linux alternatives where possible.
  • Add examples and screenshots from Linux environments to balance representation.
  • Reference Azure Site Recovery support for Linux VMs and provide links to relevant documentation.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Set up SAP NetWeaver disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery .../blob/main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-sap.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates a Windows bias by focusing exclusively on SAP NetWeaver deployments in Windows environments, referencing Windows-specific clustering technologies (Windows Server Failover Cluster, Storage Spaces Direct, Scale Out File Server), and omitting Linux equivalents or examples. There are no instructions, recommendations, or references for SAP deployments on Linux, which is a common platform for SAP. The clustering and high availability guidance is Windows-centric, and Linux clustering tools (such as Pacemaker, Corosync, NFS, or GlusterFS) are not mentioned.
Recommendations
  • Add explicit guidance and examples for SAP NetWeaver deployments on Linux, including supported disaster recovery architectures.
  • Include Linux-based clustering solutions (e.g., Pacemaker, Corosync, NFS, GlusterFS) as alternatives to Windows Server Failover Cluster and Storage Spaces Direct.
  • Provide parity in instructions for setting up disaster recovery for SAP NetWeaver on Linux, including sample scripts and automation options.
  • Reference Linux-specific best practices for high availability and disaster recovery in Azure environments.
  • Clarify which recommendations are Windows-specific and which are applicable to Linux, or provide side-by-side comparisons.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Set up disaster recovery for SQL Server with Azure Site Recovery .../blob/main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-sql.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates a Windows bias by consistently referencing Windows-specific technologies, tools, and procedures. Examples and links are almost exclusively for Windows environments (e.g., Windows Failover Clustering, PowerShell scripts, Task Manager for monitoring), with no mention of Linux equivalents or guidance for SQL Server on Linux. The instructions, scripts, and screenshots are tailored to Windows, and Linux scenarios are not addressed or acknowledged.
Recommendations
  • Add explicit guidance and examples for SQL Server running on Linux, including supported disaster recovery technologies and Azure Site Recovery integration.
  • Include Linux-specific monitoring instructions (e.g., using iostat, sar, or other Linux tools to measure disk write rates) alongside Windows Task Manager references.
  • Provide PowerShell alternatives for Linux, such as Bash scripts or relevant automation tools, and clarify which scripts or automation steps are Windows-only.
  • Reference and link to documentation for SQL Server on Linux high availability and disaster recovery (e.g., Pacemaker clusters, Linux Always On availability groups).
  • Add screenshots or step-by-step instructions for Linux environments where applicable, ensuring parity in visual aids.
  • Clearly state OS-specific limitations and supported scenarios for Azure Site Recovery with SQL Server on Linux.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Archive for What's new in Azure Site Recovery ...icles/site-recovery/site-recovery-whats-new-archive.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Powershell Heavy
Summary
The documentation page generally lists Windows and Linux features and support in parallel, but there is a recurring pattern of mentioning Windows Server versions and features before Linux equivalents, especially in feature tables and support matrices. There are several references to Windows-specific tools and update processes (e.g., servicing stack updates, SHA-2, PowerShell), and some features (like firewall-enabled storage accounts) are described as supported 'using PowerShell only' without Linux CLI parity. In some sections, Windows features are described in more detail or with more links than Linux equivalents.
Recommendations
  • Ensure Linux and Windows examples are presented with equal prominence, ideally side-by-side or in separate, clearly labeled sections.
  • When referencing tools or update processes (e.g., PowerShell), provide equivalent Linux CLI or script examples where possible.
  • Avoid listing Windows features/support before Linux unless there is a technical reason; alternate the order or group by OS type.
  • Expand documentation for Linux-specific scenarios, including troubleshooting, update processes, and feature support.
  • Where links or references are provided for Windows, ensure Linux equivalents are also included.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery About disaster recovery for on-premises apps with Azure Site Recovery .../main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-workload.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates a Windows bias by prioritizing Windows workloads, tools, and technologies (Active Directory, Exchange, SQL Server, SharePoint, IIS, Dynamics AX, RDS) in both the workload summary and detailed protection sections. Windows-centric applications are described in detail, with integration patterns and examples, while Linux workloads are only briefly mentioned in summary tables and lack equivalent application-specific guidance or examples. Windows tools and patterns (e.g., SQL Always On, Exchange DAGs, IIS, RDS) are discussed extensively, whereas Linux equivalents (such as clustering, HA, or application-specific DR strategies) are not covered.
Recommendations
  • Add detailed sections for popular Linux workloads (e.g., Apache, NGINX, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Samba, LDAP) with disaster recovery patterns and integration examples.
  • Provide parity in application-specific guidance for Linux, including how to use Site Recovery with Linux HA/DR technologies (e.g., Pacemaker, Corosync, DRBD, Linux clustering).
  • Include Linux-first or Linux-specific examples and scripts for recovery plans, failover, and failback.
  • Mention open-source alternatives to Windows tools (e.g., for DNS, directory services, web servers) and describe how Site Recovery supports these.
  • Ensure that Linux workloads are not relegated to summary tables but receive equal narrative detail and step-by-step instructions.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Run the Deployment Planner for VMware disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery ...ecovery/site-recovery-vmware-deployment-planner-run.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools Windows First Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation demonstrates a strong Windows bias. All examples for generating the VM list use VMware vSphere PowerCLI (PowerShell), with no mention of Linux alternatives (such as using the vSphere CLI or Python scripts). The tool itself (ASRDeploymentPlanner.exe) is a Windows executable, and report generation explicitly requires a Windows PC or Server with Excel. Directory paths and file operations use Windows conventions (e.g., E:\, UNC paths). There is no guidance for running the tool or preparing input files from Linux or macOS environments.
Recommendations
  • Provide Linux/macOS-compatible instructions for generating the VM list, such as using vSphere CLI, govc, or Python scripts.
  • Clarify whether the ASRDeploymentPlanner.exe tool can be run under Wine or in a VM on non-Windows platforms, or provide a cross-platform alternative.
  • Include examples of directory paths and file operations using Linux conventions (e.g., /home/user/ProfiledData).
  • Mention alternatives to Microsoft Excel for report viewing, such as LibreOffice, if supported.
  • Explicitly state Windows-only requirements early in the documentation and suggest workarounds for Linux/macOS users.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery What's new in Azure Site Recovery ...main/articles/site-recovery/site-recovery-whats-new.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page for Azure Site Recovery updates shows mild Windows bias. Windows versions and appliances are mentioned explicitly (e.g., 'Windows 2025', 'Windows 2022 appliance OVA', 'Windows 11 server', 'Windows Server 2019 as the replication appliance') in several update notes, often before or more prominently than Linux equivalents. There are no command-line examples, but when tools or appliances are referenced, Windows is named directly, while Linux support is listed as a set of distros or kernel versions. There are no Linux-specific troubleshooting or tool instructions, and no parity in describing Linux management tools or patterns.
Recommendations
  • When listing supported platforms, alternate the order between Windows and Linux, or group them by scenario rather than OS.
  • Provide equal detail for Linux appliances and management tools, including explicit naming and links where available.
  • Include Linux-specific troubleshooting steps, diagnostics, or configuration instructions where Windows tools are mentioned.
  • If referencing configuration managers or appliances, clarify Linux support and provide links to Linux-specific documentation.
  • Add parity in examples and tool references, such as mentioning Linux command-line utilities or configuration patterns alongside Windows equivalents.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Unregister a Virtual Machine Manager server script ...articles/site-recovery/unregister-vmm-server-script.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools Windows First Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation is heavily biased towards Windows, providing only PowerShell scripts and instructions that rely on Windows-specific tools (e.g., registry paths, Windows services, Windows Cluster service). There are no Linux or cross-platform examples, and all operational patterns assume a Windows environment.
Recommendations
  • Provide equivalent instructions or scripts for Linux environments, if supported by VMM or Azure Site Recovery.
  • Clarify platform requirements at the beginning of the documentation, specifying if the procedure is Windows-only.
  • If Linux support is not available, explicitly state this to avoid confusion for cross-platform administrators.
  • Where possible, mention alternative tools or approaches for Linux (e.g., using Python scripts, Bash, or other automation tools) for similar tasks.
  • Consider adding a section comparing Windows and Linux management for VMM, highlighting differences and parity gaps.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Common questions about VMware disaster recovery with Azure Site Recovery ...rticles/site-recovery/vmware-azure-common-questions.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Powershell Heavy 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation exhibits a moderate Windows bias. Windows-specific paths, tools, and examples (such as PowerShell and Windows file paths) are mentioned before or more prominently than their Linux equivalents. PowerShell is referenced as a primary automation method, and instructions for manual installation and configuration often use Windows-centric terminology and examples. Linux equivalents are present but typically follow Windows instructions, and some automation/scripting sections lack parity in Linux shell examples.
Recommendations
  • Provide Linux shell (bash) examples alongside PowerShell commands, especially in automation and scripting sections.
  • List Linux instructions and file paths before or alongside Windows instructions, rather than after.
  • Reference cross-platform tools (e.g., Azure CLI) equally or before platform-specific tools like PowerShell.
  • Ensure manual installation steps for components (e.g., Mobility Service, MySQL) include explicit Linux instructions and paths.
  • Highlight Linux support and parity in introductory and summary sections to reassure non-Windows users.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Upgrade Mobility Service and appliance components - Modernized ...s/site-recovery/upgrade-mobility-service-modernized.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 4 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Powershell Heavy Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page demonstrates a Windows bias in several ways: Windows update instructions and tools (e.g., Registry Editor, .msi installers, command prompt) are presented first and in greater detail, with Linux instructions relegated to a single section. Appliance component updates and troubleshooting are described only for Windows environments, with no Linux equivalents or parity. Windows-specific tools and patterns (Registry Editor, .msi, Windows Settings) are referenced exclusively, and Linux examples are missing for appliance management and component upgrades.
Recommendations
  • Provide Linux-specific instructions for appliance component upgrades, including update commands and troubleshooting steps.
  • Include Linux equivalents for registry/configuration changes (e.g., config files, systemd settings) where Registry Editor is referenced.
  • Ensure that Linux update procedures are presented alongside Windows instructions, not after or in a separate section.
  • Reference cross-platform tools or clarify platform-specific requirements for each step.
  • Add troubleshooting guidance for Linux environments, including common issues and resolution steps.
  • Where possible, use neutral terminology and avoid assuming Windows as the default platform.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Deploy the configuration server in Azure Site Recovery ...e-recovery/vmware-azure-deploy-configuration-server.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First Missing Linux Example 🔧 Windows Tools
Summary
The documentation exhibits a Windows bias by exclusively describing the deployment and management of the configuration server as a Windows Server VM. All instructions, screenshots, and examples assume Windows (e.g., Windows Server 2016 installation, use of C:\Temp\ASRSetup for MySQL installer, administrator account references). There are no Linux-based deployment options or examples, and Linux is only mentioned in passing for mobility service credentials. Windows tools and patterns (e.g., folder paths, user accounts) are used throughout, with no Linux equivalents or parity.
Recommendations
  • Provide instructions and examples for deploying the configuration server as a Linux VM, if supported.
  • Include Linux-specific steps for MySQL installation (e.g., using apt/yum, Linux file paths) alongside Windows instructions.
  • Clarify whether the configuration server must be Windows-only, and if so, explain the rationale and any future plans for Linux support.
  • Add parity in credential management examples, showing both Windows and Linux account setup and requirements.
  • Where folder paths or commands are referenced, show both Windows and Linux equivalents.
  • If Linux deployment is not supported, explicitly state this early in the documentation to set expectations.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Fail back VMware VMs/physical servers from Azure with Azure Site Recovery ...b/main/articles/site-recovery/vmware-azure-failback.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page exhibits Windows bias by specifically mentioning Windows VMs and their interaction with VMware tools, without providing equivalent information or examples for Linux VMs. There are no Linux-specific instructions, troubleshooting notes, or references to Linux tools or behaviors. The only OS-specific note is about Windows, and the documentation implicitly assumes Windows as the primary platform for failback operations.
Recommendations
  • Add explicit instructions and notes for Linux VMs, including how failback affects Linux guest tools and any differences in process.
  • Include troubleshooting guidance for Linux VMs, such as agent registration issues or disk handling.
  • Mention Linux-specific considerations for VMware tools (e.g., open-vm-tools) during failover/failback.
  • Ensure parity in examples and notes by providing both Windows and Linux scenarios where relevant.
  • Review and update terminology to avoid implying Windows as the default or only supported platform.
GitHub Create Pull Request
Site Recovery Exclude VMware VM disks from disaster recovery to Azure with Azure Site Recovery ...in/articles/site-recovery/vmware-azure-exclude-disk.md
High Priority View Details →
Scanned: 2026-01-10 00:00
Reviewed by: LLM Analysis
Issues: 3 bias types
Detected Bias Types
Windows First 🔧 Windows Tools Missing Linux Example
Summary
The documentation page exhibits Windows bias by providing more detailed information about Windows failback behavior before Linux, referencing Windows disks specifically, and omitting concrete Linux command-line or tool examples. Windows terminology and scenarios are described first and in greater detail, while Linux is mentioned only briefly and without equivalent technical depth or example.
Recommendations
  • Provide explicit Linux examples and step-by-step instructions, including relevant commands or tools for managing disk exclusion and failback.
  • Balance the depth of explanation between Windows and Linux scenarios, ensuring both are covered equally and with similar technical detail.
  • List Linux failback behavior before or alongside Windows, or present both in a parallel structure to avoid Windows-first ordering.
  • Reference Linux-specific tools or patterns (e.g., shell commands, Linux disk management utilities) where appropriate, not just Windows terminology.
GitHub Create Pull Request
← Previous Page 9 of 35 Next →