We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Object Storage and Scality RING based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."
"One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."
"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."
"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."
"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."
"The most valuable feature of Scality RING8 is its performance and good interface."
"I think it's the economic factor. This solution has the lowest cost for storage systems."
"Another feature I like is the life cycle management that helps me with data storage efficiency."
"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."
"IBM has limited cloud storage."
"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."
"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."
"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."
"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."
"Scality RING8 could improve by having more features. We have to use two automation tools to meet our needs. We would prefer to use only one."
"When we used this solution in 2015, it was not scalable at all. I don't know if they have improved on that, but at the time, scalability was just horrible."
"Scality RING is not easy to learn for someone new. It is a little bit difficult. There are a lot of components to it, and you also need to understand them to work with it effectively."
IBM Cloud Object Storage is ranked 12th in File and Object Storage with 6 reviews while Scality RING is ranked 13th in File and Object Storage with 4 reviews. IBM Cloud Object Storage is rated 7.8, while Scality RING is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Object Storage writes "Helps to store files, trigger actions, share files, and secure them with authentication". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Scality RING writes "Offers UTIPI (Unified Tiered Infrastructure Per IOPS) feature in billing but lacks extensive testing ". IBM Cloud Object Storage is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, MinIO, Dell ECS, IBM Spectrum Scale and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, whereas Scality RING is most compared with Dell ECS, MinIO, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Qumulo and Hitachi Content Platform. See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Scality RING report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object Storage 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.