Google Cloud Storage and Microsoft Azure Object Storage are prominent competitors in the cloud storage category. Google Cloud Storage appears to have an upper hand in ease of use and support, whereas Microsoft Azure Object Storage is preferred for its extensive features and integrations, making it more comprehensive for larger enterprises.
Features: Google Cloud Storage offers efficient performance, scalability, and strong data security measures. Microsoft Azure Object Storage provides flexibility, deeper integration with other Azure services, and advanced analytic tools.
Room for Improvement: Google Cloud Storage can improve its cost management tools, offer more comprehensive documentation, and enhance user interface features. Microsoft Azure Object Storage could benefit from streamlining complex configurations, reducing latency issues, and improving its user-friendly interface.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Google Cloud Storage has a straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers a more complex setup but benefits from a broader support network and in-depth technical assistance.
Pricing and ROI: Google Cloud Storage users find the pricing competitive with clear cost structures, leading to favorable ROI. Microsoft Azure Object Storage's pricing can be higher but is justified by its features and enterprise-level capabilities, providing worthwhile ROI.
I have seen a return on investment as it saves both time and money with this agile technology.
We have self-studied to learn the services.
For SAP loads, Google provided a specific team, which resulted in good support.
I think the technical support by Google is good; the articles and troubleshooting are adequate.
If I want to change something on my resources or directly access it via the portal, there is not a service level agreement of 100%, and sometimes it's quite difficult to access.
The customer support for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is not good.
Technical support from Microsoft is good.
Google Cloud Storage is scalable, but there are limitations.
The storage is very scalable, so you can effortlessly scale it.
The downloading of high volume data and scalability processes face performance issues related to high data volumes.
Most of the time, it fits the requirement, but for drastic demands, we may need to provide quotas and other requirements to Microsoft for them to manage forecast and capacity planning.
There was no direct experience with any instability during my involvement.
The downloading of high volume data and scalability processes face performance issues related to high data volumes.
From a security standpoint, there is a question mark due to past cyber attacks.
They cover a broad range of products, which might affect their ability to compete well in certain niches.
In the future, I would like to see additional features in Google Cloud Storage such as integrating Gemini to function as a chat for finding information, or OCR, or reading the content in my files for searching purposes.
When using Data Lakes for analytics and frequently pulling data from our source database to Microsoft Azure Blob Storage, there should be faster methods to download large data from Microsoft Azure Storage Blob to different locations.
They need enhancement in security aspects. Security alerts and integrations could be improved as part of lifecycle management, especially for archives and restoration requirements.
The improvement needed for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is to reduce the transactional charges, as these read and write operation charges are higher.
Depending on your setup, Google Cloud Storage is economical, especially if you do not need high stability and scalability.
Google Cloud was cheaper compared to AWS and Azure.
It's a pay-per-use solution and a good idea for proof of concept and value.
The licensing cost of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is cheaper compared to other competitors, such as Google or third-party solutions, which easily engages customers.
Regarding pricing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage, I find it reasonable.
We do not experience any disruptions, and the service meets our needs and requirements.
The user interface of Google Cloud Storage is easy and consistent across all their products.
It has helped optimize costs because I store it in free tiers, resulting in no charge.
Since I work mostly with AI/ML, data piping, data integrations, and ETL tools, these features are valuable.
When talking about storage accounts, customers utilize Azure file as a replica of the file server, allowing them to access file shares or storage accounts from their systems, making it easy to use while automatically syncing data with the cloud.
The ability to store everything inside Blob or Object storage and use it for archiving data is beneficial.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Google Cloud Storage | 7.9% |
| Microsoft Azure Object Storage | 3.0% |
| Other | 89.1% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 31 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 17 |
| Large Enterprise | 35 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 23 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 11 |
| Large Enterprise | 21 |
Google Cloud Storage is praised for its fast performance, seamless integration, high security, and scalability. Users store and access large amounts of data easily, backup files, host websites, and collaborate on projects. The platform's reliability and cost-effectiveness make it a top choice for data storage and management.
REST-based object storage for unstructured data in the cloud
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.
