We performed a comparison between Google Cloud Storage and Nasuni 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."There's no implementation process."
"Google Cloud Storage includes Docs, calendar, Gmail, Google Drive, and Google Meet."
"The solution's customer service and support are helpful since they are responsive...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"One of the most valuable features of the solution is its ease of use."
"What I like most about Google Cloud Storage is that it's very stable, very quick, and very useful."
"Google Cloud Storage's most valuable feature is the native algorithms are available. Some of the algorithms are not available for the use cases that we had in Microsoft Azure. We didn't find any native algorithms and that's the reason why we decided to use the machine learning algorithms in GCP."
"The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is that I can link with my PC."
"It is flexible and simple to use."
"The solution gives us a breakdown and summary of every resource and each volume within every resource. It tells us the code within a given volume, so I can go in there and look at the size of the files that are stored there. Nasuni gives me the big picture and allows me to connect things like Power BI to any endpoint. I can take that tabular information from Nasuni and look at it in a graph."
"Nasuni is tremendously easy to manage. It eliminates many of the administrative challenges associated with physical hardware storage, and you don't need to worry about any hardware failure or products reaching the end of their lives."
"The most valuable feature is that we have redundancy in our data. It's nice to know that it is cached both locally on the filters, as well as stored on that cloud."
"We use Nasuni's continuous file versioning feature and it fully protects us. With the ability to version files and have continuous recovery, it helps in terms of resiliency. If we have an incident then we would be able to easily recover from it by using the technology."
"The biggest and most impressive thing for us is the operational recovery (OR) and disaster recovery (DR) capabilities that Nasuni has. If a filer goes down, or an ESX server goes down, then we can quickly recover."
"The most valuable feature is the storage in that it only keeps the last-used data locally, while everything else is backed up to the cloud. That way, we never really have to worry about file space in each office or the replication to the other file servers for DR."
"Nasuni has helped to eliminate on-premises infrastructure. We were using about eight to 10 different types of vendors or small storage boxes for provisioning and shared access for users. We got rid of all those. That has eliminated operational overhead and footprint at our data center. We don't have to worry about any hardware or monitoring particular devices, and hundreds of devices have been decommissioned. Now, for provisioning, everything is on Nasuni. I assume this has made a big difference in costs."
"The Nasuni management dashboard is helpful because, on the administration side, I'm able to view all of the different filers that we have in the UK, rather than check each one of them individually."
"My use case of this solution is fairly minimal. However, I am concerned about privacy on a cloud platform. Many people are not migrating to a cloud service because they are still concerned about putting data in cloud-based storage."
"User management could be better. It's complicated process to delete users and maintain the structure of documents created by deleted users."
"I am not sure about the reliability of the solution."
"I don't find the solution very user-friendly."
"The solution could improve by adding an automatic removal of duplications feature."
"The cost of additional storage could be cheaper."
"It's actually quite complete and we don't have any issues with the solution."
"Google Cloud Storage could improve by being more user-friendly."
"We forecasted that the data at my client's organization would grow by about ten percent annually, but we are migrating more data because we are bringing in some servers that had not previously been within the scope of our license. We expected it would take us two years to reach a specific amount of data, but we hit that mark in one year. The licensing cost skyrocketed, so we need to renegotiate. It puts us in a bind because we are reliant on Nasuni for our service strategy. We can't deny our customers, but we also struggle to pay for that."
"I would like to see Nasuni provide the ability to mirror a Nasuni appliance from one site to another. They could maybe have a standby appliance that is mirrored in a different location for disaster recovery purposes. We can recover if data and a Filer are lost because of a possible ransomware event, but even that takes time to recover. If we had the ability to have a mirrored appliance, we could flip over to that mirrored device and resume instantly rather than repopulate the local appliance with data from the snapshot history in the cloud. This is another feature that we would really like to see, if possible."
"Migration from existing systems, specifically StorSimple, could be improved, but that solution will be end-of-life by the end of the year. Also, the documentation could be more accessible."
"There is some room for improvement when it comes to monitoring. We are not using Nasuni monitoring. We are using our own monitoring through Xenos. Nasuni can provide better monitoring capabilities for us to monitor all the filers and NMC so that we don't have to use a third-party tool."
"When users from one office save their changes, their peers in another office can see the changes within minutes. Of course, this is an area for constant improvement and we hope that they can still reduce the amount of time it takes to replicate changes."
"One thing to consider is that Nasuni will have the same limitations that a traditional file storage solution will have, although that is because they are taking the place of a traditional architectural model. For example, Office 365 supports collaboration on documents such as Excel files and Word documents, but because Nasuni is a traditional file server, in that sense, it can't make use of that functionality."
"I would like to see improvement in the training Nasuni provides. Compared to some of the other vendors out there, like Microsoft, where you can find how-to videos, Nasuni only has a lot of PDF documents that you have to go hunting for. It's workable, it certainly isn't a problem, but video walkthroughs would always be helpful."
"The customer portal could be improved, but it has been a while since I've used it. They might already have improved it."
Google Cloud Storage is ranked 3rd in Cloud Storage with 66 reviews while Nasuni is ranked 2nd in Cloud Storage with 35 reviews. Google Cloud Storage is rated 8.8, while Nasuni is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Google Cloud Storage writes "Flexible, reliable, and beneficial for small sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nasuni writes "We have less downtime and fewer trouble tickets from users who cannot access their shared files". Google Cloud Storage is most compared with Amazon S3 Glacier, AT&T Cloud Storage, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Workspace and Microsoft Azure File Storage, whereas Nasuni is most compared with WekaFS, Panzura, Azure NetApp Files, PeerGFS and Dell PowerScale (Isilon). See our Google Cloud Storage vs. Nasuni 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.
