We compared Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Microsoft Azure File Storage based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is highly praised for its scalability, performance, and ease of use, with seamless integration with other AWS services. On the other hand, Microsoft Azure File Storage is appreciated for its strong security measures and efficient file sharing capabilities, with a focus on scalability and ease of use. Amazon EFS users value the system's reliability and intuitive interface, while Microsoft Azure File Storage users highlight its integration with Azure services and responsive customer support. Areas for improvement for Amazon EFS include enhancing performance and visibility, while Microsoft Azure File Storage could benefit from faster file transfer speeds and a more user-friendly interface. Both products offer reasonable pricing and a positive return on investment, catering to the diverse needs of businesses with efficient file storage solutions.
Features: Amazon EFS stands out for its scalability, high performance, ease of use, reliability, and seamless integration with other AWS services. Microsoft Azure File Storage excels in scalability, ease of use, integration with other Azure services, efficient file sharing capabilities, strong security measures, and cross-platform file management.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Amazon EFS is described as straightforward and easy, with reasonable and affordable pricing. In contrast, Microsoft Azure File Storage has a straightforward setup cost and is considered reasonable and competitive in pricing. Users have expressed satisfaction with the flexibility and options provided by both products., Amazon EFS was praised for its efficiency, scalability, and cost-effectiveness, while Microsoft Azure File Storage showed significant ROI with cost savings, improved efficiency, and seamless collaboration features.
Room for Improvement: Amazon EFS could benefit from improvements in terms of performance and speed, increasing visibility and monitoring capabilities, and providing more flexibility in file system sizes and scalability. On the other hand, users of Microsoft Azure File Storage desire increased file transfer speed, a more intuitive interface, and expanded storage options.
Deployment and customer support: The duration required to establish a new tech solution, such as Amazon EFS and Microsoft Azure File Storage, varies among users. Some users reported spending three months on deployment for Amazon EFS, while Microsoft Azure File Storage had a mix of three-month deployments and setups., Amazon EFS customer service is highly regarded, with users satisfied with helpful and responsive support. Microsoft Azure File Storage also receives positive feedback for its prompt and reliable assistance.
The summary above is based on 37 interviews we conducted recently with Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Microsoft Azure File Storage users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"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."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"EFS is flexible."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"The tool offers a secure way to access storage. You can also easily share the files securely across Azure."
"The solution is user-friendly and integrates easily with web apps."
"The profile management option is another valuable feature that allows us to manage the profiles and secure them."
"Implementing Microsoft Azure has meant that we are using the same solution as our customers who use Azure Public Cloud. This allows us to integrate our application, as well as provide the solution to them."
"First of all, the solution is very secure. Secondly, the solution is very fast. It is reliable and available all the time."
"Azure File Storage gives good value for money, so I don't find it expensive."
"Its simplicity of use is most valuable. It's easy to start working with it and understand it. It's easier to transfer files between different users. I'm able to move files from my device to my manager's device without any issues or without facing any problems in between."
"The most valuable aspect of Azure File Storage is that all the features are available in one place."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"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 user activity needs to be more connected."
"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Sometimes it takes very long to refresh the information."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage is not that scalable. Once you reach the boundaries, you need to migrate to another solution."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage is not that easy to use."
"In our use cases, we see the weakness in mobile internet connectivity."
"I have had issues migrating my data to another subscription."
"The product must provide better security functions."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage needs more integrations. In the future, I also want to see GRC added to the portal. If you enroll or sign up for Azure services, your country may not have GRC available in the portal, so you may have to choose a strange country, for example, Kenya, to activate credit."
"The product name keeps changing. It can be confusing when product names change frequently, especially with Microsoft. Sometimes, if you refer to a product by a certain name last year, it might have a different name six months later."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 5th in Cloud Storage with 10 reviews while Microsoft Azure File Storage is ranked 3rd in Public Cloud Storage Services with 42 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure File Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "With an easy setup phase in place, it offers great integration capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure File Storage writes "Various storage options available, high availability, and quick deployment". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier, Azure NetApp Files and Amazon S3, whereas Microsoft Azure File Storage is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Wasabi, Amazon S3, Amazon S3 Glacier and Google Cloud Storage. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Microsoft Azure File Storage report.
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.