We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Microsoft Azure Object Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Public Cloud Storage Services solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's technical support is good."
"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."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"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."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"EFS is flexible."
"The solution is scalable."
"AzCopy is probably the best feature. It's a scripting app or a scripting function. Whether it's a Linux batch or a PowerShell script, you can essentially just send a file via a line of code with a specific key."
"The reason is that I believe they only offer the corporate interface we use, and perhaps they should consider creating a historical customer interface. I haven't created a virtual machine; instead, I've established a personal GED. This allows me to provide customers with the necessary role functions, enabling them to download files without incurring excessive costs."
"Blob Storage is one of the best resources in Azure for storing unstructured data such as files, video files, audio files, and Excel files."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an easy-to-use and stable solution."
"We can easily create a storage layer in any system."
"This product is very reliable and all of the security that our client requires is available."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"With Microsoft Azure Object Storage, they are an open market."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"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."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"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."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"I would like to see a reduction in pricing so that they can be more competitive."
"We have experienced a data copy bottleneck with the AZ copy using Microsoft Azure Object Storage, this should improve. It has high CPU consumption. There are a couple of ways to copy files fast, we have tried a few ways. Other than AZ copy, we can use Azure Fluent Storage, which also takes a lot of time to copy files. The AZ copy is faster but it takes a lot of time and CPU operations."
"Azure's technical support could be better - they take a long time to respond, and issues get transferred to multiple engineers, so you have to repeat the whole story every time without getting any proper resolution."
"The tool should be a little bit cheaper."
"The cost of support is always expensive."
"The solution's stability should be improved."
"Technical support should be a little bit faster."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Object Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 3rd in Public Cloud Storage Services with 9 reviews while Microsoft Azure Object Storage is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 42 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure Object Storage is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Useful for storing details of projects and has an easy configuration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Object Storage writes "Easy to query, offers great security, and integrates well with other Microsoft applications". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier and Azure NetApp Files, whereas Microsoft Azure Object Storage is most compared with Wasabi, Oracle Cloud Object Storage, Amazon S3, Microsoft Azure Block Storage and Zadara. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage report.
See our list of best Public Cloud Storage Services vendors.
We monitor all Public Cloud Storage Services reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.