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. I believe it could be beneficial for our clients. Sometimes, files are lost, and clients may want to retrieve them. The tool could offer different options. For example, they could charge for three months, six months, or even a year of file history. Integration with other tools like Kafka, Confluence, and Apache would be beneficial. IBM Aspera is already integrated with IBM Cloud Object Storage.
Sun and IBM PSeries HW - Unix Support Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
2024-03-13T07:40:08Z
Mar 13, 2024
One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase. While it is a robust and reliable solution, updating the technology stack could enhance its compatibility with newer frameworks and ensure it remains competitive in the rapidly evolving tech landscape.
I can't mention right now what can be improved because I haven't explored the solution in-depth, so I just use it for the standard one. The UI is a good one till now, but it can be improved. Every time in the software world, there are a lot of improvements needed every time you come up with some new solution, especially in the UI part. So it's the customers who like it. IBM has limited cloud storage. The portability of the storage is needed, like how AWS supports Snow and other portable storage. So that needs to be included. Also, the one thing I mentioned here is that the good one is IBM Aspera for transferring mostly the infrastructure or the data, which was a very fast process. Snow is something from AWS that I would like to be added to IBM.
Senior Backup and Recovery IT Specialist Certified (IBM) at Kyndryl
Real User
2022-04-10T11:09:00Z
Apr 10, 2022
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. I wouldn't use it for business-critical data that customers need to access regularly. It's suitable for storing code data. For example, say you're required to retain data for 10 or 20 years, and nobody's using it, but you need to keep it for legal purposes. Cloud Object Storage is suitable for holding that kind of data. I would like IBM to improve performance. I know that there are other tools that can help you, but you need to buy another license. For example, Aspera can help you with network latency.
What is the difference between objects and files? Objects are large collections of data collecting or storing items. Files are a single potential piece within an object.
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. I believe it could be beneficial for our clients. Sometimes, files are lost, and clients may want to retrieve them. The tool could offer different options. For example, they could charge for three months, six months, or even a year of file history. Integration with other tools like Kafka, Confluence, and Apache would be beneficial. IBM Aspera is already integrated with IBM Cloud Object Storage.
One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase. While it is a robust and reliable solution, updating the technology stack could enhance its compatibility with newer frameworks and ensure it remains competitive in the rapidly evolving tech landscape.
I can't mention right now what can be improved because I haven't explored the solution in-depth, so I just use it for the standard one. The UI is a good one till now, but it can be improved. Every time in the software world, there are a lot of improvements needed every time you come up with some new solution, especially in the UI part. So it's the customers who like it. IBM has limited cloud storage. The portability of the storage is needed, like how AWS supports Snow and other portable storage. So that needs to be included. Also, the one thing I mentioned here is that the good one is IBM Aspera for transferring mostly the infrastructure or the data, which was a very fast process. Snow is something from AWS that I would like to be added to IBM.
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. I wouldn't use it for business-critical data that customers need to access regularly. It's suitable for storing code data. For example, say you're required to retain data for 10 or 20 years, and nobody's using it, but you need to keep it for legal purposes. Cloud Object Storage is suitable for holding that kind of data. I would like IBM to improve performance. I know that there are other tools that can help you, but you need to buy another license. For example, Aspera can help you with network latency.
The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation.
Perhaps in price and they don't have a large number of additional services.