Amazon S3 Reviews

We are using Amazon services to create the SSX and other services.

Cloud infrastructure is the most valuable feature.

We are already utilizing cloud services, and Amazon is providing us with an abundance of options. As we move forward, we must ensure that we are obtaining the best value for our money when it comes to pricing. The price of Amazon S3 has room for improvement.

The current solution is not ideal, as it requires us to log into multiple dashboards and technical services. To improve our centralized monitoring or central idea, we need to create a single centralized system that can provide access to all services.

The stability of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for three years.

I give the stability a seven out of ten.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

We have 50 people using the solution.

The technical support team is good.

Most businesses have different needs, so the solutions we use vary depending on the context and requirements. We can utilize different approaches based on specific circumstances. The initial setup depends on the environment.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

I believe that cloud-based services such as cloud computing and cloud security from Amazon's pipeline services are becoming increasingly popular. These services provide a great technological infrastructure for us and I have no doubts or reservations about them.

We use the solution for data blocking and analysis. It is also used as a storage solution, gene access and maintaining access.

The most valuable features are VNet, virtual machines, and Elastic Kubernetes Service.

We have been using this solution for eight years and are using the latest version. It can be deployed anywhere. We can use a console and data from and on-premises.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution because it is low latency. We have several users and plan to increase usage in the future.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

We used a storage account in Azure and Data Lake.

The initial setup was straightforward. We use Terraform for deployment, and we only need one person for deployment.

We have seen a return on investment because we do not pay overhead costs.

It is expensive for storing, but it is way cheaper for retrieval.

We evaluated block storage.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for file storage. 

It's a very good solution that makes it easy to save. 

It is easy to set up, and it's cheap. We have to pay as long as it's used, however, it's not so expensive. 

The product can scale.

It's reliable and stable.

My company is in several regions with some offices in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. Sometimes we have to concentrate networks to a certain location, like the EU, for example. Therefore, if we set S3 in the EU region from the Middle East or Africa, the latency is an issue and we find it hard to connect to that S3. If we could have a much faster connection, it would be better.

While the price is pretty cheap, it could always be less costly.

I've been using the solution for about three or four years. 

It's very stable and reliable. I'd rate stability almost ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have a team of ten on the solution right now. We may increase usage in the future. 

It's a scalable solution. I'd rate it eight out of ten in terms of the ability to expand. 

I've never used support. I'm not in a position to ask for AMazon support. Therefore, I cannot speak to their level of service.

We were only on-premises previously. We've never used a different cloud solution. 

This is a very simple product to set up. It's not overly difficult. The process is quite clear and straightforward. 

The deployment times vary from project to project. Sometimes, you can deploy everything in a day. Sometimes it takes a week. Checking sessions usually take some time. 

We have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is very reasonable. We do not find it expensive at all. 

We pay a monthly licensing fee.

I'd rate the pricing five out of ten.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd recommend it to other companies or users. 

We use this solution for storing the input-output of our processing. We are customers of Amazon. 

Version control is great, it means we can store incremental data, and get high availability and fault tolerance. If we accidentally delete something we can recover it by using S3. It also enables the option of reverting to old files. 

The read drive speed is not as fast as it should be. If we want to access data, we should be able to do it quickly. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is scalable, there are no limitations on storage. There are around 10,000 users in the company. 

Amazon provides good documentation for this solution so we've never contacted technical support. 

The initial setup is easy. It just requires logging in to AWS, and it's available.

This is a pay-as-you-use, on-demand service. It's not very expensive. 

We went with S3 because of its high availability, fault tolerance and scalability. Those are the three main reasons we chose it. 

Our primary use of S3 is for storing data. I'm a senior associate. 

This solution is valuable in that it helps us store all types of data. It's also easy to delete data when necessary and it's very user-friendly.

The upload speed for data and documents is sometimes slow and it would be helpful if that were improved. The other issue is that downloading data is quite expensive. 

I have used this solution for the past three years. 

We occasionally face stability issues with respect to upload speed but it's very rare. 

The customer support is good but it could be improved. When we raise a ticket, sometimes we have to make a follow-up call because we haven't heard back from them. 

Positive

The initial setup was easy. 

I find Amazon to be more efficient and more scalable compared to other solutions on the market. 

I find this solution good for both structured and non-structured data, as well as data access and encryption. It reads more requests per second than other solutions. 

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

Our company has 30 staff members who use the solution for data storage. 

Uploads are secure and occur instantly.

The solution provides good data movement from Snowball to the S3 bucket. 

It is difficult to retrieve files in an emergency because the public cloud has data limits for immediate downloads so they often take twelve hours. We need better, immediate control of our content. 

The cloud and on-premises solutions should sync all data. 

Infrastructure services could be improved to provide free education related to the solution's features. For example, developers who do not have experience building games could learn how to do so with free support. 

I have been using the solution for nine years. 

The solution is very stable and I rate it an eight out of ten. 

The solution is scalable and there are no limits on data uploads. We upload four TB of data a day. 

Technical support can be challenging because we have to work through account managers. For urgent situations, our tech team contacts support to get assistance. 

I rate support a four out of ten. 

Neutral

The initial setup and creating buckets are very simple. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

Not many products in the market beat the solution in terms of quality or price. 

The solution charges for data downloads. 

We currently use the public cloud but want to use a private cloud because there are speed issues when retrieving files in an emergency. For example, retrieving emergency video files might take twelve hours because the cloud will not allow immediate downloads. A private cloud will allow us to retrieve files immediately without a data limit. 

We are in talks with GreenLake, Atlassian, and Dell to find the best solution that optimizes our cost. There is a retrieval cost associated with the public cloud so we want to optimize these costs and switch to a private cloud. 

The solution offers great quality and price. We are closely evaluating the cost of other solutions to determine if it is worth it to move from a solution that works well for us. 

Cost is a primary concern because we manage three petabits of data. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Currently, I am a cloud solution architect. I consult with developers and set up the architecture needed to deploy a solution. If a solution needs to be deployed within AWS, we sit down with the client and discuss the services that are most appropriate for that solution and design the architecture, which is given to the review board for approval. The AWS services we consume are dependent on the solution. Users from various departments will use the solution, depending on what's being deployed there. 

We have cold storage here, and I think that's useful. When it comes to commercialization, it's cheaper to put data that you won't be using into the data storage. You only use a little bit of the data needed each day for your transition, so you pay less. 

There could be more flexibility in configuration to allow more ways to connect to outside the PPC.

I started using S3 at my previous company, so I have been using it for five years. 

S3 is very stable.

Amazon S3 is highly scalable.

I rate AWS support 10 out of 10. 

Positive

Setting up S3 is straightforward.  At first, it was difficult because I didn't know how to use the solution. Now it takes less than five minutes to deploy S3. 

A solution architect needs to create a plan for what needs to be deployed, and the developer will deploy the solution. Most of the engagement happens before the deployment when the architect and the developer come to an agreement about the approach. One person procures the services, and others will test them and put them into the live environment.

We deployed the solution with the help of a consultant, who helped us implement some of the heavier stuff in the data lake. However, we did the basic stuff in-house because we've got the VPC to do it ourselves. 

The licensing cost is not bad. However, you need an understanding of the solution you're deploying and the services running. You will save money by shutting down some of the services when they're not in use.

I rate Amazon S3 nine out of 10. It's an excellent product. I'm also working with it for my personal use. I'm putting my documents and pictures into the S3 bucket.

I use Amazon S3 as storage and a platform for installing various types of software.

Amazon S3's best features are its reliability and capacity to expand.

Amazon S3's unit of measure for expansion should be smaller.

I've been using Amazon S3 for three years.

Amazon S3 is very stable.

Amazon S3 is scalable.

Previously I used Microsoft and Oracle.

I'd advise those thinking of implementing Amazon S3 to carefully plan their requirements and not use too many servers. I would recommend Amazon S3 to others and rate it eight out of ten.

It is mainly for transferring the files we are using from AWS, where we have to transfer the files from AWS to a non-cloud environment.

The security is the most useful aspect of the product.

We've had no issues with stability.

It can scale well. 

You do need to get training on the setup process. It's not straightforward. 

I've been using the solution for four years now 

The solution is stable and reliable. the performance has been good. It's been problem-free. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It can scale well.

We have about 70 people using the product currently.

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

I don't know much about technical support. I don't deal with that aspect. We have a separate team that handles any issues. 

The initial setup isn't easy. We require training to get up to speed. 

I'm not the person that actually handled the deployment.

I don't have any insights into the exact price of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. We've been pretty happy with its capabilities in general. 

It is not for everybody. Potential users can also evaluate Azure as well as AWS, as both are equally good. If you really need a cloud solution, then obviously there are many in the market. The cost is a top pain factor nowadays.

We predominantly use this solution for our data storage, primarily making DB backups. I'm a lead data engineer.

The product is easy to use, very intuitive, fast and quite flexible. We can manage access and controls using Amazon policies so it's very secure and provides secure implementation methods. All those features help our day-to-day processes and functionalities. 

File versioning could be improved and I'd like to see some additional security features.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

We haven't had any downtime in the years we've been using this product. We also have disaster recovery setups but haven't needed them.

Scalability is pretty good, we have over 100 plus users, and inherently all our applications interact with S3. We use it heavily, it's our main storage medium.

The tech support is very good. We had some help with the configuration and some of our niche use cases and more complex aspects of the implementation. Apart from that, we've rarely needed any S3 support because the UI and the functionality itself are straightforward so you don't need to go beyond the standard documentation provided.

We're a small organization and previously had an on-prem solution that was more expensive for us with a lot of overheads. It didn't make sense to continue using it. 

It's a simple deployment once you get the hang of it. We had two people managing the deployment. You can develop your own templates for repeated actions and automate repeat jobs. It's not complex. We're currently using more than 200 terabytes. We're using three different modes so we're using the solution extensively.

We were able to reduce our licensing costs by exploring the different storage classes and different lifecycle management policies. It's a very good tool to control your costs and automate a few of the routine tasks which typically take significant manual effort when you need to write ad-hoc jobs. The storage is quite cheap although there are some processes that bump up the cost.