Microsoft Azure File Storage Reviews

I am working in the telecom domain, mainly using Microsoft Azure File Storage for customer relationship management, order processing, and related tasks. The client is Optus, and we are trying to automate the order management-related system.

It is purely focused on data management related to storage in Microsoft Azure File Storage.

We are working with both Microsoft Azure File Storage and object storage products.

We have usage files, CDR files, from the stream, mainly regarding customer usage. These files contain information such as call volume and internet usage. We save these CDR files in Microsoft Azure File Storage for customer relations and customer data. We want to ensure it is secure. For file transfers between systems, we are using this storage to move files from source to destination. We also handle other files, such as business case files. The users transfer data from one system to another system, and we are using this as a management system.

We are using AWS as well, and the main difference is that Microsoft Azure File Storage is more user-friendly for configuration-related and admin-related activities. We do not have to perform many complex activities, making it simpler compared to AWS. Security-wise, there are some concerns because it is in the cloud. The customers need to double-check, and they are not giving complete approval when it comes to security.

I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage's security compliance features seven or eight out of ten. It is secure, but since it is in the cloud, we have to convince customers when providing solutions. Many questions were raised while providing the architecture and solution for this file transfer management system. We convinced them because we have the feature and showed a demo, but it is still a prototype. We have to get approval before starting the work.

The data redundancy options in Microsoft Azure File Storage are good. I am facing some challenges in convincing customers, and additional information would be helpful to address these challenges.

Microsoft Azure File Storage saves time compared to AWS. We tried the prototype in AWS as well, but Azure is easier. Regarding cost, it is slightly less compared to AWS.

The functionality of Microsoft Azure File Storage does not pose any issues, though basic users find it complex and require training.

Regarding stability, I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage 8.5 to 9.

Scalability in Microsoft Azure File Storage is impressive. We recently handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any problems.

I need to read more about the main points for improvement for Microsoft Azure File Storage. I am trying to convince customers with the features we had in AWS.

The availability of file storage information requires significant research and learning. The information is not readily available on the internet, so we have to double-check and understand everything.

Having more information or tutorials about Microsoft Azure File Storage would make it easier for us to grasp.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure File Storage for approximately 8 to 9 months.

I would rate the stability of Microsoft Azure File Storage 8.5 to 9.

Scalability in Microsoft Azure File Storage performs well. We successfully handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any issues.

I would rate the tech support and vendor support for Microsoft Azure File Storage nine or ten out of ten. There are no problems with support.

Positive

We act as a partner. I work for Accenture, and we already have the license for Microsoft Azure File Storage. We use that license, but I am not involved in the purchasing process.

The initial setup for Microsoft Azure File Storage is medium difficulty. It is somewhat user-friendly but requires time to complete.

Our company works directly with Microsoft Azure File Storage.

I would rate the pricing of Microsoft Azure File Storage seven or eight, where one is high and ten is low.

We identified Microsoft Azure File Storage as the best solution because AWS is more complex. AWS requires many configurations and settings compared to Microsoft Azure File Storage. From a learning perspective, Microsoft Azure File Storage is comparatively simple.

I need to verify Microsoft Azure File Storage's Identity Management integration. Based on my experience, I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage 8 out of 10.

I mostly use Microsoft Azure File Storage to store the files. The majority of our work is mainly using Databricks, so within Databricks, we store our data. I use Microsoft Azure File Storage for that. I am only working with Microsoft Azure File Storage as an end user for storing my files.

The main benefit of Microsoft Azure File Storage is that we have a lot of solutions from Microsoft. That was one of the reasons why we chose the Azure cloud because we have a lot of Microsoft stack and those can be integrated well within Azure. That is one of the architectural considerations we took into account when deciding to stay with Microsoft instead of going for GCP or AWS.

The key benefit from Microsoft Azure File Storage is that we work in one Azure environment. We have Power BI and other Microsoft tools that are already well integrated within Azure, and since we purchased a lot of licenses, we get a discount along with various other architectural constraints. Existing tools might not integrate well, which might cause challenges if we go for another vendor.

I really appreciate Microsoft Azure File Storage mostly because it is cheap to store the data. That is one of the reasons.

In my opinion, Microsoft can improve Microsoft Azure File Storage by closing the open questions that a lot of customers have raised.

There were previously some issues that I cannot recall exactly.

The price for Microsoft Azure File Storage could definitely be lower.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure File Storage for a couple of years, between two to three years.

For stability, I would rate it a seven. I do not have exact downtime with Microsoft Azure File Storage, but there are a few technical issues that need to be fixed within the Azure ecosystem.

For scalability, I would rate it an eight.

For technical support from Microsoft, I would rate it a seven as it is good, but not that exceptional. The response time for technical issues is acceptable, but it takes a lot of time for them to fix it.

Positive

I can compare Microsoft Azure File Storage with other vendors such as AWS S3 and Cloudera with HDFS, but I am not familiar with the exact GCP file storage name.

The initial setup for Microsoft Azure File Storage is simple. Compared to the traditional one, it is simple.

I am a partner with Microsoft.

When you refer to integration in terms of Microsoft Azure File Storage, what exactly do you mean? Can you elaborate? The security compliance features of Microsoft Azure File Storage are taken care of by a separate team. The security team takes care of the identity management integration for Microsoft Azure File Storage, so I am not that much aware of that. My overall review rating for Microsoft Azure File Storage is seven.

In general, I have been working with file storage for more than seven years.

Not only logs; we even have a daily backup for the production server, and we are keeping those backups there itself.

I don't have anything to report because from the beginning itself, we have been working with Microsoft, and I think it's pretty much easy to configure, allowing us to do all those tasks.

I don't have much exposure to AWS or G Suite or anything else, so that's the reason I prefer Microsoft Azure File Storage.

AI nowadays is being used by most people, and as of now, we are mainly doing automation for storing, and everything is scripted.

It's not a big challenge; it's a one-step process, where if we run the script, the storage happens automatically to store all the log files and everything.

We are using the Key Vault as security in storage, and we are satisfied with that.

I don't have exact details about potential improvements for Microsoft Azure File Storage at this time because we are mainly working for IT, but except IT, we also have our developer team and testing team, and I would need to see how they are thinking about it.

Based on our use case, I think maybe that cost is actually more. That's the main challenge; when going to Microsoft, that cost tends to be greater. If they could work on that, it would help.

We're not currently using NSV or something similar, which is a virtual firewall.

It's not complex at all; it's easy to use actually. It's easy to configure all those file storage settings.

For stability, I would rate it around 7.5 out of ten.

I can give the scalability ability a rating of 8.5.

Microsoft technical support is very prompt; I immediately got support, so that would be a 9.5.

Positive

AWS comes next as a competitor.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is definitely the better solution for us compared to AWS.

It's medium; for medium businesses, it will be okay.

I might not have much detail about vendor details because currently, my manager takes care of all the vendor details.

We don't have any specific preferences. Most of our resources are around 90% Microsoft Azure and 10% AWS.

In Azure, we are utilizing products such as storage, Azure VPN, and site-to-site VPN.

I'm primarily working only with Microsoft Azure File Storage. On a scale of 1-10, I would rate this solution a 9.

We need to store data over there. We process documents through Kofax.

Time is a major benefit, as well as ease of processing. With configuration, it happens quite easily, and we can finish tasks early.

File storage is complemented by OCR with Azure Cognitive Service. This enhances the processing capabilities significantly. The storage solution saves time and makes document processing seamless, allowing us to handle tasks swiftly.

Some chunking logics need to be better to address issues with processing bigger files. It should allow better methods for handling large files.

I've used the solution for a year.

I would rate stability at eight. We sometimes encounter glitches with bigger files, but everything else works as expected.

Scalability is quite good. The instances are robust, so there are no issues as of now. I rate it nine.

Microsoft's technical support is good. They are helpful whenever needed.

Positive

I have used GCP. GCP is better as it provides more options and can integrate easily.

The initial setup was quite simple. Although we needed assistance at first, we managed with the provided documentation afterwards.

Initially, we needed help from Microsoft consultants for sorting out the setup.

The price is almost the same as the competition. I would rate it three or three and a half out of ten on the pricing scale.

GCP is the main competitor.

The overall solution is rated eight out of ten, and I can recommend it to other users.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure File Storage for the last four or five years.

We are using Microsoft Azure File Storage for application integration and user access.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is user-friendly, and the file share service we are using has no issues. It is user-friendly and easy to use.

Everything is on an immutable basis regarding File Storage's security compliance features for my organization.

The identity management integration with Microsoft Azure File Storage is easy to use; whoever is in the organization on Active Directory can easily use that file share storage.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is very useful for application integration, making it great for integrating any application to dump data and collect data on the fly. There is no issue accessing that, making it beneficial for us and from the end-user point of view as they can centralize their data in a single location, with multiple users able to access the same.

I am not using the file sync option with Microsoft Azure File Storage.

Currently, there is nothing that we are searching to improve or enhance.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure File Storage for the last four or five years.

As for stability and performance, I have had no downtimes or crashes currently.

I have not faced any scalability issues with Microsoft Azure File Storage.

If we face any issues or challenges, we can escalate them to Microsoft; otherwise, there are no issues with the service from Microsoft.

I would rate customer service and technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

Before Microsoft Azure File Storage, I have used on-premises IBM and HP storage.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure File Storage was straightforward for me; I did not face any challenges there.

We completed the deployment ourselves without needing integrators or consultants.

The cost of Microsoft Azure File Storage depends on the storage account, whether it is premium or standard; there is a cost difference, with the cost being higher for premium and lower for standard storage.

I find the pricing good and competitive.

For data redundancy, we are working on a single point of failure and IT continuity, as well as DR readiness.

We are using DLP and Orca for enhanced data protection features overall in our organization.

We purchased Microsoft Azure File Storage only from Microsoft as it is a Microsoft product.

I rate Microsoft Azure File Storage an eight out of ten because there are some challenges that might differ from company to company. There are some challenges with standard and premium storage. Sometimes, we face latency issues in standard storage, which explains my rating.

Overall rating: 8/10

In our organization, we use Azure File Storage for storing Azure virtual desktop (AVD) files. The profiles for these virtual desktops are stored in Azure File Storage.

Because we migrated to the cloud, Azure File Storage provides an excellent option for hosting VDI profiles after using on-premises storage like those from NetApp.

Azure File Storage gives us easy access to cloud solutions at the storage level. We appreciated the similarities between Azure File Storage and NetApp storage. 

It is satisfying our requirements with encryption and security features in place, and we are quite satisfied with the options provided by Azure Storage.

The transparency of cost should be improved. We would appreciate having more transparency regarding pricing, which would help us determine our efficiency in working with cloud solutions. Pricing flexibility is essential.

I have been using Azure File Storage for almost four years to be precise.

There are no issues with stability. Azure File Storage has been pretty stable.

The solution is easily scalable, and I would rate its scalability as eight out of ten.

Microsoft's technical support could be improved. Their response time is usually high, and it takes considerable time to get a response.

Neutral

We used to utilize on-premises storage for systems like NetApp before moving most VDI profiles to the cloud.

The initial setup of Azure File Storage is straightforward and easy to deploy. The documentation available through Azure is comprehensive and easy to follow.

NetApp is often compared with Azure File Storage due to some similarities in storage solutions.

Overall, I would rate Azure File Storage eight out of ten. I would recommend it to enterprise-level operations based on my experience.

We use it for ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) processes. We get files from different tools related to our micro-processing, copy them into Azure File Storage, and then consume them for parsing and loading.

It's good overall. We just use Azure File Storage as a way to keep files for our ETL process. Other than that, I haven't had any other exposure to it.

I would like to see more updates around File Storage.

We just started using Azure File Storage.

Fortunately, I never faced any challenges. We are going to use this feature effectively.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It's scalable. I think, as per our billing standards, it's unlimitedly scalable.

I never got a chance to contact support.

I used NAS storage and Windows File Shares.

The initial setup is very seamless. It's available in the Microsoft documentation. I think with minimal effort, we could set it up.

As for the current licensing and payment structure, it's almost pay-as-you-go. Monthly is okay. But maybe we'll get a better price if we have a long-term contract and pay monthly.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten. It's like any other Microsoft product. Microsoft is developer-friendly.

I love Microsoft products, so I'll always suggest using Microsoft tools and technology services.

I find using Microsoft Azure File Storage for log management critical, as we use a lot of data being ingested by the log management system from various systems. These items go into the File Storage, and we have certain policies, such as seven days for the log data. It depends upon the client; if they are willing to pay more, we can provide a higher duration. The policies are based on the client's needs.

The integration of Microsoft Azure File Storage with other Azure services is simple, as they have very elaborate documentation and Copilot support. Anything and everything can be figured out and implemented as soon as possible. Integration-wise, it is very easy.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is scalable enough and I can say it is a good product, so I am satisfied with it.

The pricing of Microsoft Azure File Storage is a bit high. We need to know the nuances of using it; we can use everything for log storage, which will have terabytes of data stored. We need to be conscious about whether we are going to have cold storage or hot storage. Based on that, our pricing will differ. Pricing-wise, we need to get the experience before we can decide on the pricing. Upfront, they need to be more transparent on the pricing for the service selected.

The pricing structure of Microsoft Azure File Storage should be more transparent because there are two types of storage, live and cold. Cold storage is much cheaper, but the live or hot storage is a bit costly.

I have been using Microsoft Azure File Storage for more than five years.

I would rate Microsoft's technical support as pretty much good; I would say it is excellent. As and when we require, they are able to provide solutions or guide us toward solutions. I would rate them nine out of ten.

Positive

The integration of Microsoft Azure File Storage with other Azure services is simple, as they have very elaborate documentation and Copilot support. Anything and everything can be figured out and implemented as soon as possible. Integration-wise, it is very easy.

I am not sure how Microsoft Azure File Storage is supporting our AI and data analytics initiatives because there is another team working on the AI initiative. Currently we have a vector DB, and I am not sure whether it uses File Storage or something else. We are using some kind of vector database to store our embeddings related to the organization's IP.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure File Storage to other companies.

I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage ten out of ten.

I am not sure what additional features could be included in Microsoft Azure File Storage to make it even better because I have not extensively worked on it; our purpose is very simple currently. It can be extended to multiple use cases as required, and I think we may get some feedback later. Currently, it is doing what it is supposed to do, and I am not sure what features are required to make it better. It is sufficient for what we are using.

Positive

Microsoft Azure File Storage enables seamless integration with enterprise interfaces like ADF to exchange data with external applications via HTTP protocols. This allows business users to easily transfer files or access files generated from other systems in SaaS or PaaS environments. For instance, you can use specific connectors to directly generate data from Salesforce and store it in Azure Storage. Additionally, Azure File Storage provides endpoints and a comprehensive API for managing data access.

Microsoft Azure File Storage allows business users to connect to storage using Azure Active Directory features for authentication and security. This facilitates storing, transferring, and accessing data securely. It's a valuable feature appreciated for its simplicity and ease of use.

I have been using Microsoft Azure File Storage for three years.

The product is stable. I rank Microsoft Azure as number one, AWS as number two, and IBM Cloud as number three.

500 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The deployment is simple.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is a paid service, like most cloud services. Various payment plans are available, including pay-as-you-go and reserved instances for lower costs. You should reserve resources in advance to manage expenses efficiently.

Cloud providers like Microsoft Azure, IBM Cloud, and AWS often offer similar services, although they may present them differently. For instance, Azure Blob Storage is different from Azure File Storage. While the core functionalities may align, pricing, features, and performance differences exist among these services.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is a useful feature. I haven't encountered any issues with its connectors or integration into enterprise systems. While I've recently faced challenges with other technologies, Microsoft provides reliable services. 

Microsoft Azure File Storage provides robust security features to protect data at rest and in transit. While it utilizes TLS certificates for secure file transfer, additional security measures can be implemented through custom encryption algorithms or encryption methods. This allows for tailored security solutions to meet the specific needs of enterprise companies, ensuring data remains protected during storage and transit.

We recommend Microsoft Azure File Storage because it offers secure access to your data from anywhere. Cloud providers prioritize security, which is crucial for all companies today. Securing data in transit and at rest is a significant challenge, and Azure provides robust solutions. Additionally, the cloud is the future of computing.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.