We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, IBM, Amazon and others in Cloud Migration."This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"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."
"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."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"The performance, reliability, and affordability has been most valuable."
"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."
"Azure NetApp Files could improve by being more diverse to integrate better with other solutions, such as Splunk and the on-premise version. There are some use cases that are not covered natively by Azure. It is not the best solution because it is not external from the cloud which for me is the best type of solution."
"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."
"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."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"The management tool within this solution could be improved. We would also like to be able to access services like Azure when using this solution."
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 3rd in Cloud Migration with 6 reviews while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is ranked 17th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 1 review. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is rated 7.0. 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 Storage Spaces Direct writes "Stable software storage solution that offers performance, reliability, and affordability". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Microsoft Azure File Storage, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni and Google Cloud Storage, whereas Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct is most compared with VMware vSAN, StarWind Virtual SAN, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) and Red Hat Gluster Storage.
We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.
