"You can change it non-disruptively. You can increase the size and decrease the size online, which is a huge benefit compared to Azure disks. It just works seamlessly. You don't need to stop the instances."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"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."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The interface is very good."
"The solution can scale to fit any requirement."
"General user familiarity with Office 365 products make adopting this solution easy to adopt in production."
"It was quick to synchronize back from Azure to the on-premise server."
"The initial setup is fairly easy."
"Integration with the entire Azure platform."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"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."
"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."
"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 initial setup is complex. Unless you have done it a few times it, it is going to be hard."
"Lacks integration with other platforms."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage is not that scalable. Once you reach the boundaries, you need to migrate to another solution."
"The pricing could be improved. They need to make the costs more transparent so users know what they will be charged and why ahead of time."
"The solution should support all the legacy storage systems."
"The storage account key could be a security issue."
Running performance-intensive and latency-sensitive file workloads in the cloud can be hard. Use Azure NetApp Files to migrate and run complex, file-based applications and simplify storage management.
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 6th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 4 reviews while Microsoft Azure File Storage is ranked 2nd in Public Cloud Storage Services with 6 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Azure File Storage is rated 7.6. 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 Microsoft Azure File Storage writes "A cloud file storage solution that plays well with familiar products but is difficult to configure and build-out". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Microsoft Azure Block Storage, Dropbox and Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, whereas Microsoft Azure File Storage is most compared with Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Amazon S3 Glacier, Amazon S3, Google Cloud Storage and Oracle Database Backup Service. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Microsoft Azure File 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.
