We performed a comparison between Amazon S3 and Microsoft Azure File Storage based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users of Amazon S3 mention that the solution is missing the mapping to Windows feature like Azure File Storage has. It also received mixed reviews on service and support. For these reasons, Azure File Storage is the more valued solution.
"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."
"The users have nothing to worry about as the solution is well established."
"The most valuable features of Amazon S3 are the performance and hibernation data options. Additionally, there is a feature that provides faster website access that is helpful."
"The solution easily connects with the cloud, hardware, or other services to move data."
"The most valuable features are unlimited storage, scalability, and performance."
"The most valuable feature is the storage."
"The most valuable feature is the sharing capabilities."
"The multi-zone replication is great."
"The most significant aspect of Microsoft Azure File Storage is its life cycle functionality, which enables us to transfer files to various storage options, such as hot storage, full storage, and archive. This feature is crucial since we can apply a life cycle method to files that have not been in use for an extended period, and then move them to a cheaper cold storage option to save costs. Since the newest files are stored in the hot storage, it met our specific requirements. Consequently, older files can be transferred to archive and cold storage."
"Very user-friendly and intuitive."
"It was quick to synchronize back from Azure to the on-premise server."
"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."
"It's a scalable solution."
"The tool offers a secure way to access storage. You can also easily share the files securely across Azure."
"I like that Microsoft Azure File Storage works fine and is quick to deploy. It's also easy to connect to it, particularly when connecting it with my on-premise file servers."
"The initial setup is fairly easy."
"The solution's cost should be improved."
"Sometimes we have to concentrate networks to a certain location, like the EU, for example. Therefore, if we set S3 in the EU region from the Middle East or Africa, the latency is an issue and we find it hard to connect to that S3."
"The UI should be more user-friendly."
"Amazon S3 should have more frequent updates."
"You do need to get training on the setup process."
"It could maybe use more integration."
"If a certain resource is left unchecked, you can easily use a lot of it and drive up costs."
"The installation could be more straightforward for inexperienced users."
"A lot of things could be better, especially when it comes to accessing File Storage for monitoring. Azure Copy is fine, but there could be additional integration and security features for those who want more privacy and control over access to Azure."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage should improve its pricing."
"I have had issues migrating my data to another subscription."
"The support could improve."
"Considering the enterprise licensing required for the solution, the cost of the solution is an area where the product needs improvement."
"Importing and exporting data needs to have a bit more documentation."
"One thing that Azure File Storage could help us with is some kind of impact assessment. When we talk to some of our larger customers who have between 500 and 1,000 applications, we normally do an assessment of all these applications and then tell them which ones are ready to be lifted and shifted, and which ones need to re-architected. It would really help if Azure File Storage could come up with a better way to give estimations of the total investment required, including all costs incurred during the migration."
"It's a bit complex to set up. Other than that, there is nothing to improve."
Amazon S3 is ranked 1st in Public Cloud Storage Services with 67 reviews while Microsoft Azure File Storage is ranked 3rd in Public Cloud Storage Services with 42 reviews. Amazon S3 is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Azure File Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon S3 writes "Cloud Conversations: AWS S3 Overview". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure File Storage writes "Various storage options available, high availability, and quick deployment". Amazon S3 is most compared with Oracle Cloud Object Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier, Google Cloud Storage and Wasabi, whereas Microsoft Azure File Storage is most compared with Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Azure NetApp Files, Wasabi, Amazon S3 Glacier and Google Cloud Storage. See our Amazon S3 vs. Microsoft Azure File Storage 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.
