We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Azure NetApp Files based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"The solution is scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"EFS is flexible."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something."
"I like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"I think the easiest part is, when you do a comparison, it is the throughput versus the cost. And it's much easier to set up."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"The availability is good, meaning downtime or network issues rarely occur. The system also offers flexibility, allowing for increases in data volume, IOPS, and other capabilities without requiring downtime, which is a strong point. Based on the money spent, we can get performance improvements and high availability."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"Azure NetApp Files is expensive."
"We were looking for a clustered solution that has over-complicated things because we had it in AWS, which is Amazon. There was a solution for clustered NetApp. That meant there would be two NetApps that were not clustered because there was no solution for a cluster. We would like there to be an HA cluster solution."
"I would like to see multi-zone redundancy so that I don't have to worry about it. I just back up my data to that one SMB share and I know that it's replicated to a different region."
"The main area for improvement is in the support ticket system. Since it's a SaaS platform, support tickets are managed by Microsoft or NetApp backend. This can sometimes lead to cross-functional challenges for organizations."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."
"Azure NetApp Files could improve by being more diverse to integrate better with other solutions, such as Splunk and the on-premise version. There are some use cases that are not covered natively by Azure. It is not the best solution because it is not external from the cloud which for me is the best type of solution."
"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 6th in Cloud Storage with 10 reviews while Azure NetApp Files is ranked 5th in Cloud Storage with 15 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Offers integration capabilities that improve areas like storage and security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier and Oracle Cloud Object Storage, whereas Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Nasuni, NetApp ONTAP and Google Cloud Storage. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Azure NetApp Files report.
See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Storage 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.
