We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Microsoft Azure Block 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."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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"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."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"The tool is pretty easy to use."
"We use Microsoft Azure Block Storage to store, upload and download data. We can also use it as a backup."
"It has easy versioning. The versioning is amenable to any changes. It also has great security. It can only be accessed through an API, and only the requested users can access it. It is optimized for data lakes and comprehensive data management."
"What I like best about Microsoft Azure Block Storage is the accessibility because it's very easy for me to access it. You'll find different resources and documentation about the tool if you need to learn how to start."
"One can easily scale with this program."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Block Storage are it stores different types of data traditional data and connectivity through FTP. Additionally, we do not need a high-speed fetching system for operations and filesharing works well for us."
"It can scale."
"We use this solution for backup storage on our on-premise backup."
"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."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"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."
"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."
"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 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 pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"One thing that needs improvement is authentication. They need to improve the integrated Azure Active Directory for the enterprise level. For single sign-on, we can try any authentication or portal for Block Azure Function AKS. For example, if you're an administrator or user contributor, you will generate a token, then your internal middleware connects to any Azure Cloud service. You need to generate different credentials for each service. We cannot use the same token."
"The scalability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"There should be a discount on Block Storage for people who use it more often."
"Microsoft Azure Block Storage could improve the SFTP. The SFTP can be used for exchanging data between two parties and it works but Microsoft is new to this market and they could be a lot better in this area with its features."
"Technical support needs improvement."
"The security is poor, and the sharing model is confusing, conceptually. I'd prefer not to use it. I'd like a user-friendly web interface and a better security model."
"If the documentation could be improved then it would be very good. Right now, if you face a question, you have to guess how it works or you have to test your hypothesis."
"Customer support could be improved, it can be difficult getting appropriate support."
More Microsoft Azure Block Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 15 reviews while Microsoft Azure Block Storage is ranked 7th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 56 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Block 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 Block Storage writes "A stable and widely accepted solution". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and IBM Turbonomic, whereas Microsoft Azure Block Storage is most compared with Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store), Rackspace Cloud Block Storage, Wasabi, Amazon S3 Glacier and Zadara. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Microsoft Azure Block 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.
