We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Google Cloud Storage 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."Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"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."
"You can change it non-disruptively. You can increase the size and decrease the size online, which is a huge benefit compared to Azure disks. It just works seamlessly. You don't need to stop the instances."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."
"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."
"The solution is stable and has good performance."
"There is a free-to-use version. This is the version I use."
"It is flexible and simple to use."
"The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is its ease of use. It fits well with our business use."
"From a stability standpoint, the solution is excellent. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It's very practical and reliable."
"Easy to use object storage solution that's scalable and stable. Its technical support team is customer-friendly."
"Everything I store in the solution is available on all of my devices."
"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"Azure NetApp Files is expensive."
"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 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 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."
"While the solution seems to be secure, I worry that, with the cloud, there is a chance of hacking. It would be ideal if they could be more transparent about the processes they go through to keep our data secure in the cloud and on their systems."
"The tool should be cheaper."
"I don't find the solution very user-friendly."
"I would prefer more support for alternative operating systems like DSD. The performance could be better because sometimes there are glitches. The price could be better."
"Google Cloud Storage could improve by increasing the storage from 15 GB. If I want to have more storage I need to pay extra money."
"I would also like to be able to use my own tools and packages within this solution and also have a tool to visualize the data with graphics."
"The solution must provide some accessibility features."
"User management could be better. It's complicated process to delete users and maintain the structure of documents created by deleted users."
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 8th in Cloud Storage with 14 reviews while Google Cloud Storage is ranked 2nd in Cloud Storage with 66 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2, while Google Cloud Storage is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Google Cloud Storage writes "Flexible, reliable, and beneficial for small sized companies". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and NetApp ONTAP, whereas Google Cloud Storage is most compared with Amazon S3 Glacier, AT&T Cloud Storage, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Microsoft Azure File Storage and Oracle Cloud Object Storage. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Google Cloud Storage report.
See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors and best Public Cloud Storage Services 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.
