We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Azure NetApp Files 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."I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The solution is scalable."
"I think the easiest part is, when you do a comparison, it is the throughput versus the cost. And it's much easier to set up."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"I like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The availability is good, meaning downtime or network issues rarely occur. The system also offers flexibility, allowing for increases in data volume, IOPS, and other capabilities without requiring downtime, which is a strong point. Based on the money spent, we can get performance improvements and high availability."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."
"I would like to see multi-zone redundancy so that I don't have to worry about it. I just back up my data to that one SMB share and I know that it's replicated to a different region."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."
"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."
"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."
"We were looking for a clustered solution that has over-complicated things because we had it in AWS, which is Amazon. There was a solution for clustered NetApp. That meant there would be two NetApps that were not clustered because there was no solution for a cluster. We would like there to be an HA cluster solution."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 5th in Cloud Storage with 10 reviews while Azure NetApp Files is ranked 8th in Cloud Storage with 15 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Offers integration capabilities that improve areas like storage and security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier and Amazon S3, whereas Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Nasuni, Google Cloud Storage and NetApp ONTAP. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Azure NetApp Files 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.