We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Object Storage and StarWind Virtual SAN 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."The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."
"The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments."
"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."
"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."
"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the reliable storage replication, which enables me to create a robust infrastructure to run our business."
"The customer support provided by StarWind is excellent."
"StarWind saved us about 80% of our storage costs over our old solution."
"I like StarWind's high availability. The failover is almost immediate, so the end users have no idea the guest VM moved at all. We can failover all guest VMs onto a single hypervisor, place it into maintenance mode, install updates, and reboot a hypervisor all during the daytime and remotely, with confidence the process will be successful."
"Integration with virtualization platforms helped us to resolve many issues we were facing while using the physical storage."
"When using new (warranty) servers, you can forget about the storage service for several years. The users will not even notice the failure of two servers out of three."
"The management interface on the software is very simple. It is insanely simple compared to most SANs. The interface is also powerful when used to complete tasks that an IT administrator needs to complete."
"This was a great implementation for a small to mid-size business."
"IBM has limited cloud storage."
"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."
"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."
"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."
"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."
"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."
"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."
"StarWind Command Center's single-pane management solution only works with Hyper-V."
"The Command Center, a free guest VM for management and monitoring, leaves something to be desired. It could have more accurate real-time information and better reporting visuals, which seem to be an afterthought."
"Proper training sessions should be included with the licensing."
"The interface of the management console of the StarWind Virtual SAN is complex, and it's difficult for the novice user to interact with the management having less knowledge or training in the product."
"They need to improve the speed of the interfaces, thus allowing for better traffic on the network."
"Management tools could be improved, sometimes the usage seems to be slowed down and confusing. A native web interface could also be an option. I love to see in the future port of the software on a general Linux distribution like RedHat or Ubuntu in order to avoid windows license costs. I would also like to see features like erasure coding implemented. On the VSAN software, I would like to see some improvements in the storage pools (eliminate the usage of the file as a data container and use the raw partition)."
"The setup and documentation for the installation with the free version could definitely be improved."
"I would like to see more user-friendly dashboards in future versions."
IBM Cloud Object Storage is ranked 10th in File and Object Storage with 7 reviews while StarWind Virtual SAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 182 reviews. IBM Cloud Object Storage is rated 8.0, while StarWind Virtual SAN is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Object Storage writes "Offers the ease with which you can move data between on-premises storage and the cloud and then retrieve it back on-premises when necessary". On the other hand, the top reviewer of StarWind Virtual SAN writes "Excellent support, great performance, and good redundancy". IBM Cloud Object Storage is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, MinIO, Dell ECS, IBM Spectrum Scale and NetApp StorageGRID, whereas StarWind Virtual SAN is most compared with VMware vSAN, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, StorMagic SvSAN, Red Hat Ceph Storage and DataCore SANsymphony. See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. StarWind Virtual SAN report.
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.
