We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Azure NetApp Files 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."The solution is scalable."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"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."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Cloud Storage with 9 reviews while Azure NetApp Files is ranked 7th in Cloud Storage with 12 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Useful for storing details of projects and has an easy configuration". 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 EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier and Amazon S3, whereas Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Nasuni, Google Cloud Storage and NetApp ONTAP. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Azure NetApp Files report.
See our list of best Cloud Storage 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.
