


Find out what your peers are saying about Dropbox, Google, NetApp and others in Cloud Storage.
While the time to respond was good, the time to resolve was not optimal, as it took more than a week.
Amazon's support model is consistent across services.
Training and support depend on the plan you have, with centralized support being very helpful in case issues arise.
We have self-studied to learn the services.
For SAP loads, Google provided a specific team, which resulted in good support.
I think the technical support by Google is good; the articles and troubleshooting are adequate.
The perspective documentation is good.
Microsoft technical support is very prompt.
As and when we require, they are able to provide solutions or guide us toward solutions.
Its auto-scaling feature is a crucial point, providing high scalability that I would rate at ten out of ten.
Elastic File Systems allow me to scale up or down easily.
It is very cost-effective, and there's no need for initial charges.
Google Cloud Storage is scalable, but there are limitations.
We successfully handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any issues.
Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS.
While I experienced an EFS mount dropping, it was related to server issues rather than EFS itself.
There was no direct experience with any instability during my involvement.
I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure File Storage as a seven out of ten.
There are a few technical issues that need to be fixed within the Azure ecosystem.
We sometimes encounter glitches with bigger files, but everything else works as expected.
Database-type workloads do not run properly on Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) because at the end of the day, it is a network file system and requests must travel from one place to another and then return.
Enabling AI-driven or automatic features would be beneficial for new or nontechnical users.
In my project, there are challenges related to AWS, such as ensuring proper security measures with IMS code and encryption.
They cover a broad range of products, which might affect their ability to compete well in certain niches.
In the future, I would like to see additional features in Google Cloud Storage such as integrating Gemini to function as a chat for finding information, or OCR, or reading the content in my files for searching purposes.
Some chunking logics need to be better to address issues with processing bigger files.
There is a limitation on the storage capacity, like four terabytes.
The information is not readily available on the internet, so we have to double-check and understand everything.
EFS could cost around $30 to $50 per month for similar usage.
Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS.
Elastic File Systems can be expensive due to the nature of data transfer costs.
Depending on your setup, Google Cloud Storage is economical, especially if you do not need high stability and scalability.
Google Cloud was cheaper compared to AWS and Azure.
I would rate it three or three and a half out of ten on the pricing scale.
I would rate the pricing of Microsoft Azure File Storage seven or eight, where one is high and ten is low.
The pricing for Microsoft Azure File Storage is five out of ten, not so expensive and not so low.
Its ease of integration with other AWS services enhances our infrastructure, while the shared storage access improves reliability and processing continuity for our applications.
They help me process data while maintaining low latency, which is crucial for efficient data processing.
The most valuable feature of Amazon EFS is its auto-scaling capability.
We do not experience any disruptions, and the service meets our needs and requirements.
The user interface of Google Cloud Storage is easy and consistent across all their products.
It has helped optimize costs because I store it in free tiers, resulting in no charge.
It is satisfying our requirements with encryption and security features in place.
File storage is complemented by OCR with Azure Cognitive Service.
Microsoft Azure File Storage saves time compared to AWS.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) | 3.2% |
| Dropbox Business - Enterprise | 7.3% |
| NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP | 6.1% |
| Other | 83.4% |
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Google Cloud Storage | 6.7% |
| Amazon S3 | 13.8% |
| Amazon S3 Glacier | 10.9% |
| Other | 68.6% |
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Azure File Storage | 8.1% |
| Amazon S3 | 13.8% |
| Amazon S3 Glacier | 10.9% |
| Other | 67.2% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 6 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 8 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 31 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 17 |
| Large Enterprise | 35 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 18 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 25 |
Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) provides simple, scalable file storage for use with Amazon EC2 instances in the AWS Cloud. Amazon EFS is easy to use and offers a simple interface that allows you to create and configure file systems quickly and easily. With Amazon EFS, storage capacity is elastic, growing and shrinking automatically as you add and remove files, so your applications have the storage they need, when they need it.
When mounted to Amazon EC2 instances, an Amazon EFS file system provides a standard file system interface and file system access semantics, allowing you to seamlessly integrate Amazon EFS with your existing applications and tools. Multiple Amazon EC2 instances can access an Amazon EFS file system at the same time, allowing Amazon EFS to provide a common data source for workloads and applications running on more than one Amazon EC2 instance.
It’s designed for high availability and durability, and provides performance for a broad spectrum of workloads and applications, including Big Data and analytics, media processing workflows, content management, web serving, and home directories.
Google Cloud Storage is praised for its fast performance, seamless integration, high security, and scalability. Users store and access large amounts of data easily, backup files, host websites, and collaborate on projects. The platform's reliability and cost-effectiveness make it a top choice for data storage and management.
Fully managed file shares that use the standard SMB 3.0 protocol
Key scenarios: