We performed a comparison between Amazon S3 and Azure NetApp Files based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Public Cloud Storage Services solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is easy to use for anyone with minimal technical knowledge."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon S3 is storage, which provides a personal capacity."
"We can easily connect to the AWS resources."
"Amazon S3 has multiple types of data detection. You can store data on a monthly basis, yearly basis, and long term basis."
"Technical support is excellent."
"The users have nothing to worry about as the solution is well established."
"The initial setup is not difficult or overly complex. It's very straightforward and easy to implement."
"Amazon S3 is reliable."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"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."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"I like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."
"One thing would be automatic replication between buckets, some feature like that."
"We have used the support from Amazon S3. The support is expensive and could be reduced."
"We would like some improvement in the cost of storage via this solution, as it currently has a very high price point."
"I would like to see an easier setup that doesn't require as much training."
"In the next release, I think that it would be good to have wizards that would update into specific applications, for example, a one-touch configuration in Pagemaker."
"I would also like S3 to have the ability to do dynamic websites without the need to do reconfigurations outside of S3. You should be able to switch on dynamic websites in S3, and then it works. I shouldn't need to go elsewhere within Amazon Web Services to get a dynamic website to work."
"We need the mapping to Windows. That feature is needed in S3. That feature is in the Azure cloud where we can map it like a drive. We can map the cloud storage to the effort driving our Windows PC. But Amazon is not providing that feature for the S3 solution."
"The solution's cost should be improved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
Amazon S3 is ranked 1st in Public Cloud Storage Services with 70 reviews while Azure NetApp Files is ranked 7th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 15 reviews. Amazon S3 is rated 8.8, while Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon S3 writes "Cloud Conversations: AWS S3 Overview". 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 S3 is most compared with Oracle Cloud Object Storage, Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and Amazon S3 Glacier, whereas Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and IBM Turbonomic. See our Amazon S3 vs. Azure NetApp Files report.
See our list of best Public Cloud Storage Services vendors.
We monitor all Public Cloud Storage Services 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.
