Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

The major use case for Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the solution. If clients are using it for storage, it could be file storage or storing code for archives, so it is dependent on the solution or the types they have as part of their requirements.

The capabilities of Microsoft Azure Object Storage depend on the storage capacity, the storage quota, and the policies that have been provided as part of the compliance.

I monitor performance metrics using the cloud-native tools.

Regarding lifecycle management policies, it is beneficial. We have the lifecycle which is solving the purpose of the customer, focusing on maintenance and how they are transforming the storage requirement.

For areas of improvement, they have all the features from Azure Monitor and Azure Cost Manager, which provide insights into consumption, and the policies are already taken care of, but it needs enhancement in security aspects. Security alerts and integrations could be improved as part of lifecycle management, especially for archives and restoration requirements, along with automations that we can plan.

For GRS, they should offer it by default because many providers are entering the market and providing similar features, making it quite competitive from a price point of view.

There are some limitations related to quotas and storage requirements. For drastic demands, we may need to provide quotas and other requirements to Microsoft for them to manage forecast and capacity planning. If there are sudden ad hoc needs that involve petabytes, there should be storage availability in the data center hosting that storage. This relates to temporary spikes in storage needs; for example, if storage is needed for a week with huge requirements, Microsoft should adapt to these requirements effectively.

I am not using it directly, but our customers for whom we are providing the solution are using it, which varies on a case-by-case basis and could be five years or two years.

Regarding the stability of the product, it is generally stable, but from a security standpoint, there is a question mark due to past cyber attacks, so I would rate it a seven for that.

While Microsoft Azure Object Storage is generally a scalable product, there are some limitations. Most of the time, it fits the requirement, but for drastic demands, we may need to provide quotas and other requirements to Microsoft for them to manage forecast and capacity planning.

Technical support from Microsoft is good. If I were to rate support on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is the best, I would give it a seven.

Positive

I have dealt with AWS.

The installation of the product is quite easy. For Azure, AWS, and even Google, installation is straightforward because automation is already in place, allowing easy deployment and integration with any file server and the requirements involved.

I am not using anything for mobile development. We proceeded with a cloud-native solution for that particular project with Microsoft Azure, so Mendix was not selected, and we went ahead with a no-code solution from Azure.

I am both selling this product and acting as a service provider integrator.

I am aware of the GRS feature, which is Geo-Redundant Storage. It depends on the criticality of the applications and the requirements, so they select LRS or GRS based on what they need.

I work with Azure Blob storage. Most of my clients have their solutions in both the cloud and on-premise; it's hybrid.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage a seven.

I have used Microsoft Azure Object Storage, which is a blob storage service. Our customers use the services that we provide for blob storage.

Our customers use applications, and Microsoft Azure Object Storage improves the application performance and reliability, enabling faster processing for critical business workloads. This reduces the cost and operational overhead with scalable, secure, and easy to manage cloud storage.

One of my customers has an application called HR1, which is an HRMS. In that application, they upload documents to the storage, such as storing resumes, offer letters, ID proofs, pay lists, appraisal documents, and appliance records securely and at scale. We perform backups in Microsoft Azure Object Storage only. Backup and archival services are provided. Some HR1 applications also store media, including large attachments such as training videos, employee onboarding materials, and policy documents. Reports are also saved in object storage. Disaster recovery is included as well.

Object storage is being used by the customers through endpoints, but not the public endpoints.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage improves the application performance and reliability, enabling faster processing for critical business workloads. It also reduces the cost and operational overhead with scalable, secure, and easy to manage cloud storage.

Switching from public storage to Microsoft Azure Object Storage resulted in cost savings and enhanced security. This application is used on a day-to-day basis, making it useful while providing significant cost savings. In addition, it is secure.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is stable. The scalability of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that it provides a scalable solution.

The customer support for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is not good. If a good engineer is assigned, then it functions well. However, every time we are doing troubleshooting, it is not Microsoft.

Being a Microsoft partner, I have been providing Microsoft Azure Object Storage services for the last fifteen years.

If I have any question or doubt regarding Microsoft Azure Object Storage, then I can raise a ticket to Microsoft and proceed with the activity.

The customer support for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is not good. If a good engineer is assigned, then it functions well. However, every time we are doing troubleshooting, it is not Microsoft.

I would rate the customer support a seven on a scale of one to ten.

Positive

I did not use any option before choosing Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is deployed on-premises in my organization.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is very good. I am a Microsoft partner, so everything I am saying is useful from my perspective.

I only had an on-premises solution, which is NAS, Network Access Storage. After that, I moved to Microsoft Azure Object Storage. The customer has also moved to Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

I have seen a return on investment as it saves both time and money with this agile technology.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is very good.

AWS S3 is available, which is also very good and cost-effective.

I definitely recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage. I would rate this product nine on a scale of one to ten.

My use case for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is for storing some static images and some unstructured files.

What I have found most valuable about Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that I can store structured and non-structured files. Apart from that, I can store storage and static contents, and if I want to share this with some external vendors, I can share that.

For disaster recovery purposes, I am using the Geo-redundant storage (GRS) feature.

Regarding Microsoft Azure Blob Storage, I find the archival tier useful for saving costs.

I use Microsoft Azure Blob Storage for life cycle management policies to automate the archiving of least used objects or files.

Based on my experience, I am very much satisfied with the monitoring and performance metrics of my Microsoft Azure Blob Storage, as it is very performance optimized.

Based on my experience with Microsoft Azure Object Storage, integrating with on-prem Active Directory is still tricky so far, so if they can do something to make this easier, that would be an improvement.

Regarding technical support from Microsoft, I find the unified support is not as per my expectation. Most of the issues I log do not get resolved on the first attempt. It takes two or three attempts for a resolution, whereas previously, when there was support from the Microsoft field engineers, issues used to get resolved on the first attempt. My experience with unified support has been quite bad.

When it comes to functionality, I am mainly satisfied with my experience, but I do not have any specific suggestions for Microsoft.

I do not have any idea about additional functions that Microsoft can add to the product.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure Object Storage for more than six years now.

From one to ten, I rate the stability for Microsoft Azure Object Storage around seven to eight.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is very much scalable.

In general, the main competitor for object storage is S3.

Currently, AWS S3 is my preferred option.

The main reason why AWS S3 is better, in my opinion, is that it is simpler and widely used in the industry so far.

The initial setup process for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is simple and not very tricky.

I have purchased Microsoft Azure Object Storage directly from the Azure portal.

Regarding pricing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage, I find it reasonable; if I talk about blob, it is a reasonable price.

It is reasonable money for the product.

I am still using Microsoft Azure products.

I am using many of these resources, such as file storage, object storage, and OpenAI from Azure.

I am working with object storage, and I have not yet started with OpenAI.

I have not yet integrated with Azure Databricks and Azure Functions for real-time data processing.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage a seven.

I have approximately three to four years of experience with Microsoft Azure Object Storage for solutioning purposes.

The benefits of using Microsoft Azure Object Storage include being able to keep all unstructured data in the storage, allowing users to access it from anywhere by configuring the storage explorer in their system, based on the policies we apply during the implementation.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage has positively impacted our customers' organizations primarily by enabling them to move from file shares to cloud solutions. When talking about storage accounts, customers utilize Azure file as a replica of the file server, allowing them to access file shares or storage accounts from their systems, making it easy to use while automatically syncing data with the cloud.

The improvement needed for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is to reduce the transactional charges, as these read and write operation charges are higher. If reduced, we could engage more customers. Microsoft changes these charges on a daily basis, and many customers currently using the Hot tier find the charges to be on the higher side, prompting us to move to the transactional tier.

As of now, we do not face any challenges with Microsoft Azure Object Storage because we have an expert team involved in the deployment.

My team spends approximately half an hour on the installation of Microsoft Azure Object Storage configuration for the end customer.

There are three to four people in my team who are responsible for the implementation duties.

The return on investment or cost savings after implementing Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends primarily on the pay-as-you-go model. While reserve instances could provide cost savings, they do not fulfill the customer's requirements, so we are opting only for the reservation for virtual machine levels.

The licensing cost of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is cheaper compared to other competitors, such as Google or third-party solutions, which easily engages customers. They also get multiple services that provide dedicated storage in terms of OneDrive along with SharePoint, giving customers an additional benefit.

The geo-redundant storage, GRS feature in Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the redundancy the customer chooses, such as LRS, ZRS, or GRS, which we can configure as per their requirement.

The decision on which tier to use for Microsoft Azure Object Storage data is totally dependent on the customer requirement. If they want to keep data that is not accessed frequently, we configure it in the Cold or Archive tier, while if the data is accessed frequently, we configure it in the Hot tier.

The integration of Microsoft Azure Object Storage with other Azure services totally depends on the customer requirement. For example, we are currently deploying Databricks as per the customer's needs.

Our customers utilize lifecycle management policies, which we define based on how the customer manages their data. For example, we can provide a default policy of seven days continuous backup, and then monthly or weekly backup policies we define during the backup scenario.

Lifecycle policies, which we define for Microsoft Azure Object Storage, help in automating data transitions and deletions for archival storage, allowing us to set up policies so that if data is unused for a month, it is automatically moved to the archive, and this is configurable based on the customer requirement.

Our customers monitor the performance metrics of Microsoft Azure Object Storage with the help of monitoring tools that allow them to monitor their resources performance.

We do not use any additional third-party tools to monitor, as we configure Azure Monitor to monitor the complete resources.

I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage ten out of ten.

We mainly focus on Microsoft Azure Data Lake. We use Microsoft Azure Stream Analytics, but not on a wide level.

We have multiple use cases for Microsoft Azure Object Storage. We are storing streamline data on Microsoft Azure Blob Object Storage. Our media files for AI/ML models, data, and PDF files are uploaded to Blob Storage due to their elasticity features. Previously, our data was stored in our data center with SAN, but due to elastic capability, we moved to S3, and then due to organization group level changes, we moved from S3 to Microsoft Azure.

In one scenario, we integrated Microsoft Azure Blob with our IoT device where our related blog is capturing on the blog. When I generated a SAS token for the blog, I forgot to create a policy, and the default expiry date was set to 60 seconds. It did not prompt anything regarding the SAS token generation of the blog, which was cumbersome. It would be easier if I created a policy for the user level and then added access policy for the user of the blog. For direct creation of SAS tokens with default seven-day validation, it did not prompt whether data was uploading or downloading correctly. This created issues regarding alert notifications, as I wanted to configure alert notifications over the blog for different containers and alert mechanisms.

Object Storage and Geo-redundant Storage are features I appreciate most.

Hot and Cool storage options allow us to implement different budgeting systems. When creating our data budgeting, we can implement archive mode for less frequently used data. While retrieving data from archive mode takes some time, it provides a cost-effective storage solution.

For security solutions in Microsoft Azure, I particularly appreciate Microsoft Azure AI foundation. Since I work mostly with AI/ML, data piping, data integrations, and ETL tools, these features are valuable. Additionally, O365 Copilot features are very beneficial.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage can be improved in terms of performance. When using Data Lakes for analytics and frequently pulling data from our source database to Microsoft Azure Blob Storage, there should be faster methods to download large data from Microsoft Azure Storage Blob to different locations. I did not receive much support in addressing this issue.

We have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for approximately three years.

The system can be complex according to my understanding. There are challenges with high volume data availability and performance. The downloading of high volume data and scalability processes face performance issues related to high data volumes.

There are challenges with high volume data availability and performance. The downloading of high volume data and scalability processes face performance issues related to high data volumes.

I am not currently working with SonicWall part or several API index on this model.

ROI depends on business-to-business scenarios. From my business perspective, it is not significant, but for other business perspectives, ROI can be affected by high volume and high concurrency conditions.

Previously, we stored our data in our data center with SAN, but due to elastic capability, we moved to S3. Then, due to organization group level changes, we moved from S3 to Microsoft Azure.

I am just a customer. This was a product level discussion, not a group level discussion. We are moving our entire workload to Microsoft Azure.

For pricing, it is good because we pay based on usage, though performance for large-scale data generation practice, particularly downloading data, could be improved.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

I have been working with this solution for more than one year, focusing on infrastructure. My goal was to provide tools to developers and my team to help them utilize the Azure platform effectively. 

Specifically, I aimed to deploy products like Kubernetes servers on Azure, which includes blob storage, file storage, and table storage for my clients.

It's similar to S3 for AWS. The ability to store everything inside Blob or Object storage and use it for archiving data is beneficial. For example, you can transform data from relational databases, flatten it, and store it in Object storage to save space within the databases. 

If I want to save data and do not require legacy access, it's a good solution, for instance, to migrate archives from databases to Object storage. This can also be used for business intelligence purposes. Having a storage solution for data makes it the best place to store it. Azure has its own solution for StatsQ Web Apps.

In terms of compliance and security, everything is fine. I do not know of any immediate needs for improvement. However, one potential area for improvement is the replication process. Some clients choose local redundant storage, however, when they want to switch to multi-region patterns, they must back up data, perform the replication, and then restore the data. This process could be streamlined.

I have been using the solution for more than one year, focusing on infrastructure.

I would rate stability eight out of ten based on the replication.

The storage is very scalable, so you can effortlessly scale it. I would rate it ten out of ten.

I would go with a rating of seven or eight out of ten. Sometimes, I have issues with the Microsoft portal, which interrupts the service. It's not the service itself. If I want to change something on my resources or directly access it via the portal, there is not a service level agreement of 100%, and sometimes it's quite difficult to access.

Neutral

The initial setup is quite simple. We are using Terraform to set it up, including role-based access control within Object storage. We have many rules for everything related to replication in the zones, such as the SDRF and CRS. The setup is quick and intuitive, taking less than a few minutes. 

Deployments take longer due to validation steps and gates required for processing deployment, rather than the deployment of Azure resources themselves.

I don't have fixed values or added value to share, however, database storage is much more expensive than Object storage. If I want to save all my data and don't need it for legacy purposes, it's a good solution to migrate archives and data from databases to Object storage and keep them in cold access.

I can't share a lot about the costs. I am focused on the technical aspect. It's a pay-per-use solution and a good idea for proof of concept and value. If I want to test a product before deploying it in my data center or even in the cloud, this might be a good solution. There are many access tiers available. It's not as developed as in Adobe. That said, it is a good solution overall.

Azure cloud services are quite an easy solution with many tools to operate, such as the CLI, software development kit, and the portal. They are very easy to use and suitable for enterprise purposes. In contrast, AWS requires coding knowledge and more experience. 

I would rate this solution nine out of ten.

We have two types of storage that we are primarily using: Blob storage and file storage. File storage is mostly used for structured data that is consumable by users directly, such as file reports and Excel files. Blob Storage is mainly for binary data, bigger objects, and unorganized data that we manage.

Due to the ease Microsoft Azure Object Storage provides, we don't need to procure the hardware. It gives scalability, even though it is manual, so we don't worry about procuring the hardware again when we need to increase the size. It helps save costs.

One valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that it provides REST API access to your data, allowing easy data consumption. Additionally, it offers encryption for data at rest and in transit as a standard feature, which enhances security. Another key feature is out-of-box storage management, removing the need for us to manage storage capacity and maintenance. Scalability and data redundancy across zones and regions are also noteworthy.

A feature that is missing in Microsoft Azure Object Storage is auto-scaling. It would be great if Microsoft could provide rule-based auto-scaling. Additionally, the assignment of problems to the appropriate team needs improvement as sometimes it goes to a team that is not relevant, leading to delays.

I have been working on object storage and other Microsoft Azure services for almost five years. Overall, I have been with Microsoft for more than six years.

The stability of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is quite good. There was recently a global outage unrelated to Object Storage. Therefore, on a scale of one to ten, I would rate its stability as nine.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage provides seamless scalability and extends real-time storage up to one hundred TB for premium shares. However, it lacks automatic scaling, which would make scalability perfect. Thus, I rate it nine out of ten.

Customer service and support are generally responsive, especially considering problem criticality. While we have on-field POCs for escalation, there can be delays in issue assignment, so there is room for improvement. I rate the support nine out of ten due to some waiting periods.

Positive

Previously, we used on-premises storage solutions like NAS file shares and other storage solutions from Microsoft, such as data storage databases, but not object storage.

The initial setup time is minimal, taking no more than half an hour, provided the code and configuration are ready. We use infrastructure as code to deploy all our services, simplifying the process.

I lead a team of engineers responsible for deployments. Initially, I was involved in deployments, but now my team handles them, ensuring we are well-versed with hands-on experience.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage provides significant financial benefits over time by eliminating the need for hardware procurement and offering scalable storage solutions.

The cost depends on various factors such as the storage class, data size, and number of requests made. There are options like 'pay as you go' and reservations, which offer good discounts for future storage needs. Overall, it is one of Microsoft's more affordable services, and I rate the pricing ten out of ten.

Prior to using Microsoft Azure Object Storage, we utilized on-premises storage solutions like NAS and other Microsoft storage solutions but not object storage.

It is beneficial to use Microsoft Azure Object Storage due to its SaaS or PaaS nature, which offers procurement flexibility, data replication, and high availability.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use it for a lot of different use cases. Besides general backup and data retention, we use it for various analytics purposes. We build custom analytics solutions and use Blob Storage for configuration and OTA software updates for each solution. 

On the consulting side with AWS, we store custom objects related to training in S3 buckets. All of this is managed and controlled through relational databases.

We use it more for colder storage compared to Cosmos DB or DocumentDB.

We design and build custom solutions. We mostly use Azure for our cloud and go straight through. If we don't use the customer's network, we use cell routers.

I design and build industrial IoT equipment, so that's part of what we do.

Cost is the most valuable feature. Otherwise, I'd be using a NoSQL database. 

Blob Storage is also much better suited for large files like videos and anything in the multi-gigabyte range. Different services access it in different ways, but none are particularly harder than the others.

There is room for improvement in customer service and support. 

I have been using it for eight years. 

Support's not great, but Microsoft products are much more industrial strength and enterprise ready than any other services out there. That's why we use them and learn how to use them, even when they change things without much advanced notice. We proactively educate ourselves on how to use it once it's changed. I don't pay for premium support. But at a basic level, Microsoft products can be pretty aggravating to work with.

I prefer not to rate it. I don't think a number would accurately describe the experience. We still use it, and it's still valuable. But the experience with Microsoft products, from storage to Teams and everything else, can be quite aggravating.

In terms of cloud storage in general, low cost is the number one thing. They all have good SLAs, and that's the most important factor.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I think it is not an improvement from the tool, but we were able to arrange our layers on the data lake using objects and a best practice for speeding them up or for making partitions in objects to protect against security vulnerabilities and increase the performance of data access. I don't think there are improvements in our company from the use of the tool. It is just the best practice that we are using in our company.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage makes some valuable compliance certifications for healthcare, and we need to obey the compliance part. In the healthcare sector, we have HIPAA, and in Brazil, we have LDPD compliance, which is similar to GDPR compliance. When we have to make proof of data access, proof of deletion, or datasheet reading, we can do it all easily with Azure.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is like other cloud providers. It is just a simple object storage and the first kind of cloud product in the market. Amazon started off with S3, but our company didn't see any advantages against other competitors with the product specifically.

I believe AI will be available in the tool, but we don't know whether such a feature exists. We didn't use AI in our case to see if our team and our customers would see the difference during deployment.

The tool doesn't offer Microsoft Copilot and Microsoft AI. It would be great to see Microsoft Copilot and Microsoft AI in Microsoft Azure Object Storage. When you speak about Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a new kind of database. You have the better parts from two worlds, which are the vector and index features, and you can use them for your products without any migration or any other condition. It will be good to be tested.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for three years. My company develops solutions, so I am a Microsoft customer.

The scalability of the tool has no limits.

Considering that we have many direct and indirect users, I would say there are 100 users.

In the future, we want to multiply the number of users of the tool by ten times.

For my team, the first level of support from the tool could be better. For the technical account, the tool's consultants are very good as they bring in some of the best practices into our company, and so we have the solution's validated design. I think the type of support depends on the customer, but for our use case, we try to follow all the product's recommendations. I rate the technical support a six to seven out of ten.

Neutral

I use Azure Service Fabric, some storage pools, and all things related to Microsoft.

The product's initial setup phase is similar to the processes required to follow for other tools in the market. I think Azure's initial setup phase is harder than Amazon or GCP.

The product's installation phase has some limitations. I have to set up more parameters on Azure than other tools. I had some issues with the tool's setup phase.

Most of the time, when we deploy the tool on a complete rack and stack, we write every line in Terraform. I think every time you need to deploy the tool, the first time, you have to keep it totally focused, so it is a manual process.

The solution is deployed using a public cloud. We may change our model to a multi-cloud one, but it is not like a hybrid model.

I think the ROI depends on the product. When it comes to Microsoft Azure Object Storage, it doesn't deliver entire value to our customers. The product made is totally fit, but for the market, I think we are not able to get hold of the market fit.

The price will be more competitive when we increase the time spent using the tool. For our company's size range, I think the price is okay.

The tool's maintenance is not complex. We have deployed an observability platform on Microsoft Azure Object Storage, and all the parameters in our dashboards are not complex.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

The main use case that I have in my company is to store some scanned documents from our customers.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the tool's price since it is not expensive. The tools that support using Azure Blob Storage, like the open source storage accounts like Azure Storage Explorer, are really easy to use and user-friendly. When it comes to life cycle management, you have many pricing tiers associated with storage costs. You can use policies to change between the pricing tires, and it is really easy to use the policies.

For me, there are many things that are only possible to be used in the CLI for easy copying. I think if the tool puts features that only exist in the easy copying area through Azure Storage Explorer, so introducing such features in Microsoft Azure Object Storage can make it more user-friendly.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for five or six years. I am a customer of the solution.

I didn't have any problems, so I didn't use the tool's technical support. I found everything that I needed on the internet or using the CLI, so I never had to use the tools' support. I rate the tool a six out of ten.

Neutral

I have only used Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward, but if you don't pay attention, you will have to delete and create another storage because some options cannot be changed.

The product's deployment phase is easy.

The solution can be deployed in a couple of minutes.

For any kind of cloud provider, when you use the correct tools instead of just putting virtual machines inside the cloud, you will always have a good return on investment. I don't see Azure to be very different from AWS.

I didn't have any problem with the tool's durability, so I guess it is okay. We have used it for many years, and there hasn't been a single case of missing documents, as it always works perfectly.

Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2 is a tool my company started to use with Azure Databricks, and it has been a good experience till now. When it comes to pricing, Azure Databricks uses a large amount of data, and the price is okay even with a lot of data to manage.

Microsoft, in general, is complicated because there are some tools that we have great support for, and there are some tools that you simply don't. For example, I worked with an application gateway, and the support wasn't great. There are lots of people working with me. When there were some issues in the application gateway, we had to figure it out for ourselves, and the the support wasn't able to help us. There are other tools for which the support is good.

Speaking about AI and Microsoft Azure Object Storage, Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2 helps us to update Azure Data Lake Storage sources, and when you enable the option in the storage account, you can connect a lot of tools, like Azure Databricks or Azure Machine Learning Studio, so you can use them as a source of data for your models. The tool helps us since it is easy to use. The tool is pretty straightforward. You don't have to think about the tool, as it just works fine.

I recommend the tool to others.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.