We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Amazon S3 Glacier, and Microsoft Azure File Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Google, Nasuni and others in Cloud Storage."The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"EFS is flexible."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"Its elasticity and flexible pricing are the most valuable. For Amazon EFS, you are charged based on the storage. It is also very fast and stable with a very simple and intuitive interface."
"The solution’s storage management is good and dynamic. The product is highly stable. The solution is highly scalable. The customer service and support is good. The initial setup is straightforward. I recommend the solution."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We like that the price is cheaper."
"The main advantage of Glacier is its low cost. It is incredibly cheaper than other storage options, especially for objects you don't access frequently. Glacier would add value if you have a staging area for objects you only need to access occasionally. Since we have data in terabytes between S3 buckets, we can significantly reduce our storage and cost footprint by using Glacier."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is a scalable and easy-to-manage solution with good read-write capability."
"The solution is secure."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is a very cheap storage, where we store infrequently used data."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most significant aspect of Microsoft Azure File Storage is its life cycle functionality, which enables us to transfer files to various storage options, such as hot storage, full storage, and archive. This feature is crucial since we can apply a life cycle method to files that have not been in use for an extended period, and then move them to a cheaper cold storage option to save costs. Since the newest files are stored in the hot storage, it met our specific requirements. Consequently, older files can be transferred to archive and cold storage."
"It helps us with geo-redundancy."
"I like that we can copy and download data using Azure. It's not just for file storage; we can also use it for large data sets or to host static web applications."
"This solution supports all file formats."
"Azure File Storage gives good value for money, so I don't find it expensive."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The functionality is easy."
"The solution is user-friendly and integrates easily with web apps."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"I am unsure if the product provides good integration capabilities. From an improvement perspective, I want the tool to provide easier integration features."
"The solution's cloud storage is very expensive, and users may not be able to afford cloud storage."
"The response times could be faster. When you are with Amazon and use Glacier, you expect a response time between four to seven hours to retrieve the data."
"The solution's pricing is too expensive and could be improved."
"A couple of times, we faced outage issues that caused us problems."
"Although Amazon S3 Glacier is cheap, its data retrieval cost is very high compared to other solutions."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The product’s pricing must be improved."
"Sometimes it takes very long to refresh the information."
"Lacks integration with other platforms."
"Importing and exporting data needs to have a bit more documentation."
"In our use cases, we see the weakness in mobile internet connectivity."
"A lot of things could be better, especially when it comes to accessing File Storage for monitoring. Azure Copy is fine, but there could be additional integration and security features for those who want more privacy and control over access to Azure."
"It would be good if they added some features that make the solution easier to access for everyone."
"The product name keeps changing. It can be confusing when product names change frequently, especially with Microsoft. Sometimes, if you refer to a product by a certain name last year, it might have a different name six months later."
"Considering the enterprise licensing required for the solution, the cost of the solution is an area where the product needs improvement."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
