Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Azure NetApp Files vs Oracle Cloud Object Storage comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Azure NetApp Files boosts performance, eases deployment, reduces downtime, and optimizes costs, despite higher initial expenses than on-premises.
Sentiment score
5.1
Oracle Cloud Object Storage is valued for secure backups and ROI, with high ratings despite minimal financial impact.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Azure NetApp Files receives mixed feedback on support, praised for integration and ease, but some users seek more specialized assistance.
Sentiment score
4.6
Oracle Cloud Object Storage receives mixed reviews for support, with praise for response time but criticism for expertise and delays.
They have top-notch people.
I have a premium subscription for Oracle Cloud, which ensures a high level of support.
Sometimes, the expertise of those who come on call is not adequate.
Oracle is more cost-effective than competitors.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Azure NetApp Files is scalable, flexible, and cost-effective for large setups, but pricing concerns exist for smaller setups.
Sentiment score
7.4
Oracle Cloud Object Storage offers scalable, flexible, and easy-to-manage storage solutions with smooth configuration and resource adjustments for varied workloads.
We can adjust the number of CPUs as per our need and reduce the load.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Azure NetApp Files is rated highly for stability due to its reliability and consistency under increased workloads and migrations.
Sentiment score
7.2
Oracle Cloud Object Storage is highly stable and reliable, consistently meeting user expectations with satisfactory performance ratings.
The system is stable, especially when set up in a single region.
 

Room For Improvement

Azure NetApp Files needs improved features, cost efficiency, easier deployment, regional integration, and strengthened security to meet user demands.
Oracle Cloud Object Storage needs better security, customization, integration, and usability, with improved billing, support, and load balancing.
I would like for them to have more compression so that it can avoid using more storage.
The product can be difficult to use compared to how it is marketed.
I would like to know about integration with other Oracle Cloud services and whether it is easy to integrate Oracle Cloud Object Storage with other Oracle Cloud solutions.
I could not find a load balancer in OCI similar to the support provided by Microsoft Azure and AWS.
 

Setup Cost

Azure NetApp Files pricing is premium yet justified by features like management, scalability, and flexible licensing options.
Oracle Cloud Storage offers flexible pricing options with perceived security benefits, though some users find it expensive.
It is expensive, especially with NetApp Ultra Storage.
It is an expensive product.
The pricing for Oracle Cloud is comparable to other cloud providers.
We have to pay the price, and the cost is higher.
 

Valuable Features

Azure NetApp Files enhances performance, scalability, and management with integrated features for backup, recovery, and seamless Azure integration.
Oracle Cloud Object Storage is valued for scalability, security, ease of use, multi-region support, and managing large datasets.
The most valuable feature is that the sixty-terabyte database snapshot can be done in less than two to three minutes.
I find manageability, scalability, and security of the product most valuable.
It is stable, requires high availability, and works with large datasets seamlessly.
It also provides multi-region support, enhancing data accessibility and safety.
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure NetApp Files
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (8th), Cloud Storage (9th)
Oracle Cloud Object Storage
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
11th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 7.9%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Cloud Object Storage is 3.8%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Public Cloud Storage Services
 

Featured Reviews

AjayKumar13 - PeerSpot reviewer
Fast, reliable, and helps meet our SLAs
The most valuable feature is that the sixty-terabyte database snapshot can be done in less than two to three minutes. It is faster. It is quicker. It is reliable. You don't need to take the snapshot. Snapshots are compressed. It doesn't take storage from the back end. It takes three minutes to do sixty terabytes of the database. You don't have to go to the tape and store it outside, which takes hours and hours. It also uses a lot less of the storage. It's very easy to restore or copy the snapshots to other locations for disaster recovery. There are a lot of benefits. In terms of the snapshot's rapid restore capability, we were testing the load of performance testing, and we needed to rebuild the DR site. If I need to rebuild the DR for a standby database, it takes sixty terabytes to copy onto the another site, which will take at least a day. Now, the snapshot is easy. We just copy the snapshots, and then we do the cross-region application. The snapshots came along with that, and that's where we were able to build the DR site within a few hours rather than days. All together, instead of a four-day process, instead of a day.
PriyankShrivastava - PeerSpot reviewer
A workhorse that enables high availability but support has room for improvement
There is always room for improvement. When a product is marketed, many claims are made, but in reality, it does not always perform as expected. The usability and real-time capabilities could be enhanced. The product can be difficult to use compared to how it is marketed. Technical support also lacks a timely response.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Azure NetApp Files compare to NetApp ONTAP?
Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology. The platform combines the file capabilities of Azure and NetApp to move critical file-based applications to ...
What do you like most about Azure NetApp Files?
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 ...
What do you like most about Oracle Cloud Object Storage?
The solution's most valuable features are its speed, unlimited space, and simplicity of use.
What needs improvement with Oracle Cloud Object Storage?
I am inquiring about the lifecycle management capabilities of Oracle Cloud Object Storage and want to know if it is useful and helps to optimize processes. Additionally, I would like to know about ...
 

Also Known As

NetApp ANF, ANF
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Restaurant Magic
Brinks
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure NetApp Files vs. Oracle Cloud Object Storage and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.