We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and HPE Cloud Object Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Google, Nasuni and others in Cloud Storage."The availability is good, meaning downtime or network issues rarely occur. The system also offers flexibility, allowing for increases in data volume, IOPS, and other capabilities without requiring downtime, which is a strong point. Based on the money spent, we can get performance improvements and high availability."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"The critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."
"It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something."
"One of the features offered and used by many clients is file-sharing."
"This is a scalable solution that is available when we need it."
"I would like to see multi-zone redundancy so that I don't have to worry about it. I just back up my data to that one SMB share and I know that it's replicated to a different region."
"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We were looking for a clustered solution that has over-complicated things because we had it in AWS, which is Amazon. There was a solution for clustered NetApp. That meant there would be two NetApps that were not clustered because there was no solution for a cluster. We would like there to be an HA cluster solution."
"I have a hunch that storage could be now the most expensive portion of our monthly bill. So I can imagine that, not this year, but next year we will be talking about looking deeper into ways how we can optimize the cost."
"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."
"Our customers in Canada cannot use it because it has to be compliant in the same country."
"Technical support is not available locally for us."
Earn 20 points
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 8th in Cloud Storage with 13 reviews while HPE Cloud Object Storage is ranked 24th in Cloud Storage. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.4, while HPE Cloud Object Storage is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Cloud Object Storage writes "Simplifies our processes and environment and helps with costs and scaling because we don't need hardware and scale on demand". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and Google Cloud Storage, whereas HPE Cloud Object Storage is most compared with .
See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Storage 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.
