We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Object Storage and MinIO based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."
"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."
"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."
"The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments."
"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."
"One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."
"MinIO can work with attributes and folders, and it has the ability to use a stream approach for files. I have moments that should work exclusively. It also has some management features you can use, like exclusive locks that you can perform on one record or a collection."
"Reliable erasure coding."
"The container installation features are good. The S3 feature provisions the storage buckets making it easy. It allows me to spin up the public buckets with open-source technology."
"The ability to spawn a MinIO Tenant on demand and shut it down right after is most valuable."
"The initial setup was very easy - one click, and it was installed."
"Nice web interface, easy to use, with a low memory footprint."
"The product does save time for our company."
"Good interface and a good approach to development and testing environments."
"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."
"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."
"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."
"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."
"IBM has limited cloud storage."
"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."
"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."
"The monitoring capability is really bad and needs to be improved."
"Limited storage provided in the free version."
"The solution lacks documentation."
"The MinIO dashboard is minimal as there are only a couple of features inside the dashboard for a basic user. I would like this to be more robust with more click-around features."
"The solution should have high availability. Also, support should be quick."
"The product's security is open by default, without any SSL."
"The only downside I see is that you do not have a complete picture of an object."
"The tool’s pricing needs to improve. We also encountered challenges while deploying the tool in Kubernetes. The documentation also was not too great. We have currently deployed the solution in a stand-alone fashion."
IBM Cloud Object Storage is ranked 9th in File and Object Storage with 7 reviews while MinIO is ranked 1st in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. IBM Cloud Object Storage is rated 8.0, while MinIO is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Object Storage writes "Offers the ease with which you can move data between on-premises storage and the cloud and then retrieve it back on-premises when necessary". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MinIO writes " A tool for storage purposes that helps businesses save time". IBM Cloud Object Storage is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, Dell ECS, IBM Spectrum Scale, NetApp StorageGRID and Cloudian HyperStore, whereas MinIO is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, NetApp StorageGRID, Dell ECS, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Zadara. See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. MinIO report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object 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.