


Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Google, Nutanix and others in Public Cloud Storage Services.
Moving infrequently accessed data to cheaper classes like Glacier is beneficial for long-term storage at a lower cost.
I have seen a return on investment, and the ROI that we observed in our organization includes reducing manpower by 20% and achieving zero downtime for storage expansion, which improves overall productivity.
Amazon S3 has a reasonable price as you pay a flat price to use it.
I rate the technical support from Amazon for S3 a ten out of ten.
The customer support for Amazon S3 is very good; they are responsive and knowledgeable, providing quick resolutions, clear documentation, and proactive guidance during migrations or performance tuning.
An engineer is assigned based on the severity of the issue.
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.
Data placed in an S3 bucket is replicated across availability zones in a region, ensuring scalability and availability.
The level of scalability allows storage to automatically scale on demand, without the need for manual intervention.
The scalability of Amazon S3 is excellent as it handles unlimited data and seamlessly supports growth without manual provisioning or performance degradation.
Google Cloud Storage is scalable, but there are limitations.
We successfully handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any issues.
There is zero latency or downtime.
Transitioning between S3 storage classes, like moving data from the standard class to Glacier or Glacier Deep Archive, has been challenging.
Amazon S3 is highly stable.
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.
An improvement could be associating the naming with personal accounts, allowing more familiar or desired names without conflicting with global conventions.
The practice of protecting data could be more streamlined or mandatory.
I would like to see an increase in the data upload limit, similar to DynamoDB, where there is no data limit.
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.
I've used the free tier and haven't been charged yet.
S3 offers multiple classes, allowing you to move data to cheaper classes for cost savings.
Since using Amazon S3, storage costs have reduced by around 35% to 40% through lifecycle tiering.
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 stability and scalability are also impressive, as it allows for increased storage space according to demand.
I appreciate its capability to create static websites and integrate with services like CloudFront, EC2, and DynamoDB.
Security measures like encryption, access controls, and the block public access feature are also important.
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 S3 | 13.8% |
| Google Cloud Storage | 6.7% |
| Microsoft Azure File Storage | 8.1% |
| Other | 71.4% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 33 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 18 |
| Large Enterprise | 39 |
| 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 Simple Storage Service is storage for the Internet. It is designed to make web-scale computing easier for developers.
Amazon S3 has a simple web services interface that you can use to store and retrieve any amount of data, at any time, from anywhere on the web. It gives any developer access to the same highly scalable, reliable, fast, inexpensive data storage infrastructure that Amazon uses to run its own global network of web sites. The service aims to maximize benefits of scale and to pass those benefits on to developers.
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: