We performed a comparison between Google Cloud Storage and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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."The best feature is ease of use."
"Google Cloud Storage performs well and it's easy to use."
"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 solution's customer service and support are helpful since they are responsive...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Its performance and security features are valuable."
"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."
"It's simple to use."
"Google Cloud Storage includes Docs, calendar, Gmail, Google Drive, and Google Meet."
"The most valuable features are tiering to S3 and being able to turn it on and off, based on a schedule."
"The stability has been really good."
"If you have a fair amount of experience with NetApp, you can work on it very easily."
"It gives a solution for storage one place to go across everything. So, the customer is very familiar with NetApp on-prem. It allows them to gain access to the file piece. It helps them with the training aspect of it, so they don't have to relearn something new. They already know this product. They just have to learn some widgets or what it's like in the cloud to operate and deploy it in different ways."
"We use the mirroring to mirror our volumes to our DR location. We also create snapshots for backups. Snapshots will create a specified snapshot to be able to do a DR test without disrupting our standard mirrors. That means we can create a point-in-time snapshot, then use the ability of FlexClones to make a writeable volume to test with, and then blow it away after the DR test."
"ONTAP has been very stable for us, specifically in the cloud environment. It allows us to have high availability as well as standalone systems if that's what we want within our specific workloads. Also, on-premise has been a very stable environment. We have very few outages and when we do, we work with support to get systems back online in a timely manner."
"The most valuable features of this solution are SnapShot, FlexClone, and deduplication."
"The fast recovery time objective with the ability to bring the environment back to production in case something happens."
"The cost of additional storage could be cheaper."
"The tool should increase its storage."
"It was a little more complicated when compared to Apple."
"The product's user interface is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution should offer more free storage."
"While the solution seems to be secure, I worry that, with the cloud, there is a chance of hacking. It would be ideal if they could be more transparent about the processes they go through to keep our data secure in the cloud and on their systems."
"User management could be better. It's complicated process to delete users and maintain the structure of documents created by deleted users."
"Google Cloud Storage could be improved by increasing the drive capacity."
"I would want more visibility and data analytics where we can see anomalies within the shares within the GUI."
"The cost needs improvement."
"I would like to see something from NetApp about backups. I know that NetApp offers some backup for Office 365, but I would like to see something from NetApp for more backup solutions."
"The dashboard is a little bit clunky. I like to see it a little bit more on the simplistic side. I would like to be able to create my own widgets and customize what I want to see a little bit more versus what is currently there. That would be helpful so that when I log in, I go straight to my widget or my board without going to multiple places to get to what I need to find or build."
"Cloud Volumes ONTAP's interface could use an overhaul. Sometimes you have to dig around in Cloud Manager a little bit to find certain things. The layout could be more intuitive."
"There is room for improvement in tier one support, especially with potential language barriers and communication challenges."
"Some of the licensing is a little kludgy. We just created an HA environment in Azure and their licensing for SVMs per node is a little kludgy. They're working on it right now."
"The key feature, that we'd like to see in that is the ability to sync between regions within the AWS and Azure regions. We could use the cloud sync service, but we'd really like that native functionality within the cloud volume service."
Google Cloud Storage is ranked 2nd in Cloud Storage with 66 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Storage with 60 reviews. Google Cloud Storage is rated 8.8, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Google Cloud Storage writes "Flexible, reliable, and beneficial for small sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". Google Cloud Storage is most compared with Amazon S3 Glacier, AT&T Cloud Storage, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Microsoft Azure File Storage and Wasabi, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Portworx Enterprise and Red Hat Ceph Storage. See our Google Cloud Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP 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.
