We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure File Storage and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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 storage in this solution is excellent."
"The solution is easy to use."
"We have not explored the desktop performance analysis of the file storage, but the user interface, API, and the response that we receive over the file storage are very good. We have a lot of customers that connect to the client-side, click the images, and upload them. The beauty of the solution is that we can mount the file storage into a critical server as well as an external drive. The speed that we receive with the images is pretty good."
"Its simplicity of use is most valuable. It's easy to start working with it and understand it. It's easier to transfer files between different users. I'm able to move files from my device to my manager's device without any issues or without facing any problems in between."
"It is very easy to use SSTP and some traditional code to move the data into a database because we can easily use the permissions and we don't have any integration or conversion issues."
"Azure File Storage gives good value for money, so I don't find it expensive."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure File Storage is the cloud file storage capability."
"Implementations with other products are easy."
"SnapMirror helps mirror metadata and data volumes between endpoints in a data fabric."
"The initial setup was straightforward. We started with a small pilot and we then moved to production with no downtime at all."
"CVO gives us the ability to access data as quickly as possible, which is critical because of the mission set we handle. Some things cannot wait. For example, we tried having the data in the cloud itself, but it took too long for us to retrieve it from cold or deep storage. If we have it ONTAP or on-prem, it's so much easier to pull it within minutes."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of file storage."
"The ability to do a straight SnapMirror from our on-prem to the cloud with no other data transitions is excellent."
"If you have a larger amount of data than normal in cloud, it is easy to provision and maintain. Waiting for the delivery of the controller, the configuration of enclosures, etc., all this stuff is eliminated compared to using on-premise."
"In terms of administration, the portal which provides the dashboard view is an excellent tool for operations. It gives you volume divisions, usage rates, which division is using how much data, and more. The operations portal is fantastic for the support team."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it makes our data readily available and we don't have to go through a lot of trouble to access it."
"The solution should support all the legacy storage systems."
"The upload speed has room for improvement."
"There is room for improvement in helping customers understand and integrate Azure File Storage into their operations."
"A lot of things could be better, especially when it comes to accessing File Storage for monitoring. Azure Copy is fine, but there could be additional integration and security features for those who want more privacy and control over access to Azure."
"Maybe Microsoft can make it more economical because it is a costly affair."
"The product must provide better security functions."
"Importing and exporting data needs to have a bit more documentation."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage is not that scalable. Once you reach the boundaries, you need to migrate to another solution."
"In the next release, I would like to see more options on the dashboard."
"How it handles erasure coding. I feel it the improvement should be there. Basically, it should be seamless. You don't want to have an underlying hardware issue or something, then suddenly there's no reads or writes. Luckily, it's at a replication site, so our main production site is still working and writing to it. But, the replication site has stopped right now while we try to bring that node back. Since we implemented in bare-metal, not in appliance, we had to go back to the original vendor. They didn't send it in time, and we had a hardware memory issue. Then, we had a hard disk issue, which brought the node down physically."
"When it comes to support provided by NetApp, they have room for improvement. Every time we go through their support, we end up answering the same routine questions."
"It would be fantastic if NetApp could offer a solution that's as user-friendly as Google Drive for seamless cloud storage integration."
"They definitely need to stay more on top of security vulnerabilities. Our security team is constantly finding Java vulnerabilities and SQL vulnerabilities. Our security team always wants the latest security update, and it takes a while for NetApp to stay up to speed with that. That would be my biggest complaint."
"One difficulty is that it has no SAP HANA certification. The asset performance restrictions create challenges with the infrastructure underneath: The disks and stuff like that often have lower latencies than SAP HANA itself has to have."
"We've just been dealing with general pre-requisite infrastructure configuration challenges. Once those are out of the way, it is easy."
"We want to be able to add more than six disks in aggregate, but there is a limit of the number of disks in aggregate. In GCP, they provide less by limiting the sixth disk in aggregate. In Azure, the same solution provides 12 disks in an aggregate versus GCP where it is just half that amount. They should bump up the disk in aggregate requirement so we don't have to migrate the aggregate from one to another when the capacities are full."
Microsoft Azure File Storage is ranked 1st in Public Cloud Storage Services with 40 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 6th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 60 reviews. Microsoft Azure File Storage is rated 8.2, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure File Storage writes "Various storage options available, high availability, and quick deployment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". Microsoft Azure File Storage is most compared with Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Azure NetApp Files, Wasabi, Amazon S3 and Amazon S3 Glacier, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Cloud Storage and Portworx Enterprise. See our Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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.
