We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files 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."Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"The most valuable features of the solution is replication to another region and the performance. The solution is stable. The solution is scalable. The initial setup is straightforward."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"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."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"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."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is flexible and has all the features we need."
"The product has good accessibility."
"The index search and block storage are valuable features."
"You can peer into different levels of the archive."
"The most valuable feature is the API because it is very flexible."
"This product is very reliable and all of the security that our client requires is available."
"Blob Storage is one of the best resources in Azure for storing unstructured data such as files, video files, audio files, and Excel files."
"This solution is easy to use, and performance-wise it is better than others."
"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"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 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."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"The solution's stability should be improved."
"One of the things that are currently important is consistency. To achieve this, another database called Cosmos DB is available. We want to have a similar consistency to the one in Cosmos DB but at a cheaper price."
"The pricing of the solution can be improved."
"Uploading files from the UI has presented some issues. When editing work and once you delete a file, it takes some time to recreate the same file."
"Its user interface could be better."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"The administration of the solution is not as easy as we would like it to be."
"Technical support should be faster at resolving issues for tickets that we create."
More Microsoft Azure Object Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →
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 12th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 12 reviews while Microsoft Azure Object Storage is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 42 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Object Storage is rated 8.0. 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 Microsoft Azure Object Storage writes "Easy to query, offers great security, and integrates well with other Microsoft applications". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Nasuni, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Google Cloud Storage, whereas Microsoft Azure Object Storage is most compared with Wasabi, Oracle Cloud Object Storage, Amazon S3, Microsoft Azure Block Storage and Zadara. See our Azure NetApp Files 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.