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 most valuable feature of Amazon S3 is storage, which provides a personal capacity."
"It's reliable and stable."
"Amazon S3 is easily accessible, fast and effective. Its performance is good."
"The initial setup is not difficult or overly complex. It's very straightforward and easy to implement."
"We appreciate that this solution is relatively easy to use, straightforward, and reliable."
"Some of the most valuable features are how convenient and easy to use S3 is. It's nicely integrated with AWS and is available on the AWS console."
"An important feature of the Amazon S3's system is that it offers encryption while the files are at rest. This is crucial in ensuring the security of the files being restored and addressing potential security risks. That's what I would emphasize."
"The most valuable feature of the product is storage classes."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"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."
"The critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."
"The most valuable features of the solution is replication to another region and the performance. The solution is stable. The solution is scalable. The initial setup is straightforward."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve test recognition."
"I would like there to be more support without needing to use Transfer Family."
"An encryption mechanism and storage optimization could be added."
"The console could be improved - it's not very user friendly for non-technical guys."
"Could include some additional security features."
"Amazon S3 needs to simplify the backup features."
"I would like to see an easier setup that doesn't require as much training."
"The UI should be more user-friendly."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"I have a hunch that storage could be now the most expensive portion of our monthly bill. So I can imagine that, not this year, but next year we will be talking about looking deeper into ways how we can optimize the cost."
"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."
"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."
"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."
"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
Amazon S3 is ranked 1st in Public Cloud Storage Services with 67 reviews while Azure NetApp Files is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 13 reviews. Amazon S3 is rated 8.8, while Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.4. 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 Microsoft Azure Block Storage. 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.