We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Microsoft Azure Object Storage 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."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 critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"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."
"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."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"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."
"Technical support is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is the cost value, which is very important for long term retention."
"We can do data queries easily."
"The product has good accessibility."
"This solution is easy to use, and performance-wise it is better than others."
"It is easy to use, and we use it for backup and remote desktop access. It is working fine."
"The features of Microsoft Azure Object Storage that are most valuable are the ones providing encryption. Access is more controlled using private endpoints and SaaS token keys. Many access control features exist."
"The most valuable feature is the API because it is very flexible."
"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 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 solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."
"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"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."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"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."
"We have experienced a data copy bottleneck with the AZ copy using Microsoft Azure Object Storage, this should improve. It has high CPU consumption. There are a couple of ways to copy files fast, we have tried a few ways. Other than AZ copy, we can use Azure Fluent Storage, which also takes a lot of time to copy files. The AZ copy is faster but it takes a lot of time and CPU operations."
"Azure's technical support could be better - they take a long time to respond, and issues get transferred to multiple engineers, so you have to repeat the whole story every time without getting any proper resolution."
"Technical support should be faster at resolving issues for tickets that we create."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution."
"We would like it if we did not have to use another encryption solution to encrypt the storage."
"A more comprehensive training option is needed."
"The efficiency depends on various operations, and therefore, it should involve multiple vendor support."
"Improvements should be made as per customer requirements."
More Microsoft Azure Object Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 15 reviews while Microsoft Azure Object Storage is ranked 9th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 45 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Object Storage is rated 8.0. 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 Microsoft Azure Object Storage writes "Can be used to safely store big datasets in the cloud at a reasonable price". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and Google Cloud Storage, whereas Microsoft Azure Object Storage is most compared with Oracle Cloud Object Storage, Wasabi and Amazon S3. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Microsoft Azure Object 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.
