We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Google Cloud Storage 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 like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."
"You can change it non-disruptively. You can increase the size and decrease the size online, which is a huge benefit compared to Azure disks. It just works seamlessly. You don't need to stop the instances."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is that I can link with my PC."
"The performance is good."
"The solution is already stable and I have not encountered problems in this regard."
"The solution operates in the background and it is attached to my Gmail account. When I download files to my phone, such as pictures, they automatically go to Google Cloud Storage."
"The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is its ease of use. It fits well with our business use."
"It is flexible and simple to use."
"The combination of Firebase features, including storage, the Firebase database, and authentication, has been the most valuable. Firebase offers Google authentication, which is convenient for our needs. Additionally, Firebase provides email authentication and Gmail authentication, which are easy to set up and integrate into our applications."
"Some of the most valuable features are how convenient and easy to use this solution is. It's very user-friendly and meets all my requirements."
"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."
"Azure NetApp Files could improve by being more diverse to integrate better with other solutions, such as Splunk and the on-premise version. There are some use cases that are not covered natively by Azure. It is not the best solution because it is not external from the cloud which for me is the best type of solution."
"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."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"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."
"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."
"The tool should increase its storage."
"The solution should offer more free storage."
"I'd like the solution to integrate better with other clouds, including the Apple cloud."
"When compared to one of its competitors, Google Cloud Storage does not have or offer a lot of services to its users. So, this is one of the downsides of the solution."
"I would like to see this solution made faster, cheaper, and bigger."
"The user interface could be more intuitive."
"Google Cloud Storage could be improved if they provided more free storage for free accounts."
"The storage could be improved to manage it a bit better. Google Cloud Storage could be more secure, but the security features are okay."
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 8th in Cloud Storage with 15 reviews while Google Cloud Storage is ranked 2nd in Cloud Storage with 66 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2, while Google Cloud Storage is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Google Cloud Storage writes "Flexible, reliable, and beneficial for small sized companies". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and NetApp ONTAP, whereas Google Cloud Storage is most compared with Amazon S3 Glacier, AT&T Cloud Storage, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Microsoft Azure File Storage and Dropbox. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Google Cloud Storage 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.