We performed a comparison between Google Cloud Storage and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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 stable and has good performance."
"Easy to use object storage solution that's scalable and stable. Its technical support team is customer-friendly."
"Google Cloud Storage is fast, and it's scalable."
"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 feature we've found most valuable is the ability to access our data anywhere, anytime."
"The solution is scalable."
"I could store any type of file using the solution."
"Google Cloud Storage performs well and it's easy to use."
"The most valuable features are that it's reliable, simple, and performs well."
"Unified Manager, System Manager, and Cloud Manager are all GUI-based. It's easy for somebody who has not been exposed to this for years to pick it up and work with it."
"We use the mirroring to mirror our volumes to our DR location. We also create snapshots for backups. Snapshots will create a specified snapshot to be able to do a DR test without disrupting our standard mirrors. That means we can create a point-in-time snapshot, then use the ability of FlexClones to make a writeable volume to test with, and then blow it away after the DR test."
"The most valuable feature is its exceptional performance and storage efficiency."
"Snapshots are one valuable feature within ONTAP, but CVO's appeal is that it acts just like the on-prem solution. It's the same OS, but in the cloud. We can continue to use ONTAP as we did on-premise."
"With NetApp, you can integrate malware scanning or malware protection. This is something valuable that is not offered in SaaS solutions typically."
"The good thing about NetApp is the features that are available on the cloud are also available on-premises."
"It makes sure we have control of the data and that we know what it's being used for. The main thing for us is that we need to know what applications are consuming it and responsible for it. The solution helps us do that."
"The solution should have two factor authentication."
"The solution should offer more free storage."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"The product's user interface is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Google Cloud Storage could be improved by increasing the drive capacity."
"It could be made even more secure and allow for more storage."
"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."
"Its security should be better from the data security point of view. It should be more secure, and it should get tightly integrated with products such as Google Docs and Google Sheets. Microsoft covers different kinds of tools such as Microsoft Office, Microsoft Word, and Microsoft Excel."
"I would like this solution to be brought to all the three major players. Right now it's supported only on AWS and Azure. They should bring it to Google as well, because we would like to have flexibility in choosing the underlying cloud storage provider."
"When Azure does their maintenance, they do maintenance on one node at a time. With the two nodes of the CVO, it can automatically fail over from one node to the node that is staying up. And when the first node comes back online, it will fail back to the first node. We have had issues with everything failing back 100 percent correctly."
"Multipathing for iSCSI LUNs is difficult to deal with from the client-side and I'd love to see a single entry point that can be moved around within the cluster to simplify the client configuration."
"Not a perfect ten because it's not very efficient with upgrades and management."
"It definitely needs improvement with respect to clustering and with respect to more collaborative integrations with Azure. Right now, we have very limited functionalities with Azure, except for storage. If CVO could be integrated with Azure that would help. When there is any sort of maintenance happening in the cloud, it disrupts the service in Cloud Volumes ONTAP."
"We have customers that are still using IBM mainframes and that very old SNA architecture from IBM. There are questions about how you interconnect the data on the mainframe side... But I don't know if it's worth it for NetApp to invest in developing products to include mainframes for a few customers."
"The cost needs improvement."
"Their support and development teams can collaborate better to resolve an issue."
Google Cloud Storage is ranked 3rd in Cloud Storage with 66 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Storage with 60 reviews. Google Cloud Storage is rated 8.8, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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 NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". Google Cloud Storage is most compared with Amazon S3 Glacier, AT&T Cloud Storage, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Workspace and Wasabi, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Portworx Enterprise and Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store). See our Google Cloud Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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.
