IBM SoftLayer vs Microsoft Azure Object Storage comparison

IBM and Microsoft are both solutions in the Public Cloud Storage Services category. IBM is ranked #23, while Microsoft is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 0.6% mindshare in PCSS, compared to Microsoft’s 2.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

IBM SoftLayer

Read 2 IBM SoftLayer reviews

223 Views
134 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Read 56 Microsoft Azure Object Storage reviews

569 Views
558 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

IBM SoftLayer

Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

IBM SoftLayer and Microsoft Azure Object Storage are two key players in cloud storage. While IBM SoftLayer wins on customer service, Microsoft Azure Object Storage has the upper hand in scalability and advanced features.

Features: IBM SoftLayer users highlight robust security features, high performance, and reliability. Microsoft Azure Object Storage reviews frequently mention scalability, integration capabilities, and advanced analytics.

Room for Improvement: IBM SoftLayer users suggest enhancing its interface, improving API capabilities, and better cost management. Microsoft Azure Object Storage reviews indicate a need for better cost management, simplified billing processes, and improved customer support efficiency.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM SoftLayer is praised for its straightforward deployment model and responsive customer support. Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers a flexible deployment model but receives mixed reviews on support efficiency.

Pricing and ROI: IBM SoftLayer users report fair setup costs and satisfactory ROI but express concerns about long-term expenses. Microsoft Azure Object Storage is seen as more expensive initially, but the extensive features and long-term benefits justify the investment.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM SoftLayer vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM SoftLayer vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,202 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

IBM SoftLayer

Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services

23rd

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of IBM SoftLayer is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is 2.4%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Public Cloud Storage Services Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Microsoft Azure Object Storage	2.4%
IBM SoftLayer	0.6%
Other	97.0%

Public Cloud Storage Services

Featured Reviews

reviewer1032702

Global Principal Cloud Architect at NTT DATA

Stable with excellent speed and agility

The most valuable aspect of the solution is simply to have the ability to host in a cloud form and out of the data center - the IBM big iron solution. It's the speed and the agility that really sell SoftLayer. The ELT versus ETL extract, transform and load versus extract, load, and then transform, the ELT method is what really sells SoftLayer. The ability to extract act from your current location, load into your future location, with limited change, and then be able to take the transfer actions slowly and methodically after you're in your new location is the part that really makes this awesome. The stability and scalability are quite good.

Read full review

Akram Zabat

Consultant - Architecture Solution at Onepoint

Provides versatile data storage solutions with a simple setup and easy to use

It's similar to S3 for AWS. The ability to store everything inside Blob or Object storage and use it for archiving data is beneficial. For example, you can transform data from relational databases, flatten it, and store it in Object storage to save space within the databases. If I want to save data and do not require legacy access, it's a good solution, for instance, to migrate archives from databases to Object storage. This can also be used for business intelligence purposes. Having a storage solution for data makes it the best place to store it. Azure has its own solution for StatsQ Web Apps.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability is the solution's most valuable aspect for our organization."

"The ELT versus ETL extract, transform and load versus extract, load, and then transform, the ELT method is what really sells SoftLayer."

"The most valuable feature is the API because it is very flexible."

"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that it is on the cloud."

"The features of Microsoft Azure Object Storage that are most valuable are the ones providing encryption. Access is more controlled using private endpoints and SaaS token keys. Many access control features exist."

"Azure cloud services are quite an easy solution with many tools to operate, such as the CLI, software development kit, and the portal."

"The most valuable feature is the cost value, which is very important for long term retention."

"Microsoft products are much more industrial strength and enterprise-ready than any other services out there."

"This solution is easy to use, and performance-wise it is better than others."

"Blob Storage is one of the best resources in Azure for storing unstructured data such as files, video files, audio files, and Excel files."

More Microsoft Azure Object Storage pros

Cons

"For us, the versioning was an issue."

"The interface is hard to use for us. It should be simplified."

"One potential area for improvement is the replication process."

"We experienced an outage issue recently, which affected its overall stability and reliability."

"One of the things that are currently important is consistency. To achieve this, another database called Cosmos DB is available. We want to have a similar consistency to the one in Cosmos DB but at a cheaper price."

"The improvement needed for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is to reduce the transactional charges, as these read and write operation charges are higher."

"The product is expensive."

"The cost of support is always expensive."

"Since the solution is messy and heavy, it needs to be faster in terms of speed and latency."

"Currently, the Microsoft Azure Storage Explorer is just a Windows app. I don't know if it's available on mobile, such as iOS or Android. I don't know if the app is mobile-friendly. It should be mobile-friendly."

More Microsoft Azure Object Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The price will be more competitive when we increase the time spent using the tool. For our company's size range, I think the price is okay."

"I'm not aware of the licensing cost, as my customer handles it. In Taiwan, it's reasonably priced."

"The pricing is competitive."

"The pricing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is high and needs some reduction. It's a seven out of ten, price-wise, because it currently limits your consumption, so the solution should have better pricing."

"The solution's cost is on a pay-per-use basis."

"The tool's licensing costs are annual. It should be made reasonable."

"Object Storage is competitively priced."

"The cost of this solution is high compared to others, although there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

More Microsoft Azure Object Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Comms Service Provider

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	22
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Microsoft Azure Object Storage?

The layout of Microsoft is professional.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Object Storage?

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. They also get multiple servic...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Object Storage?

The improvement needed for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is to reduce the transactional charges, as these read and write operation charges are higher. If reduced, we could engage more customers. M...

See all answers

Comparisons

Oracle Cloud Software Appliance vs IBM SoftLayer

Compared 56% of the time

Amazon AWS vs IBM SoftLayer

Compared 44% of the time

More IBM SoftLayer Competitors

Oracle Cloud Object Storage vs Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Compared 44% of the time

Amazon S3 vs Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Compared 34% of the time

Amazon S3 Glacier vs Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Compared 22% of the time

More Microsoft Azure Object Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Public Cloud Storage Services

September 2025

Download IBM SoftLayer product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Azure Object Storage

September 2025

Download Microsoft Azure Object Storage product report

Also Known As

CloudLayer

Microsoft Azure Blob Storage, Azure Object Storage, MS Azure Object Storage

Overview

SoftLayer provides cloud infrastructure as a service from a growing number of data centers and network points of presence around the world. Our customers range from Web startups to global enterprises.

Products and services include bare metal and virtual servers, networking, turnkey big data solutions, private cloud solutions, and more. Our unique advantages include the industry's first Network-Within-a-Network topology for true out-of-band access, and an easy-to-use customer portal and robust API for full remote-access of all product and service management options.

IBM

REST-based object storage for unstructured data in the cloud

Store infrequently accessed data in a low-cost cool storage tier
Store frequently accessed application data in a hot storage tier
Stream video, audio, and other media to web, mobile, or desktop applications
Power big data analytics
Access your data more securely, both over the wire and at rest

Microsoft

Sample Customers

Whogohost Ltd., Skypicker, Infinity Computers and Communications Company, Grace Co. Ltd., Keyword, Uvionics Tech, Tennis Australia, immixGroup, Salesbox, Cxense ASA, Avnet Inc., Komsomolskaya Pravda, Seekr

Umbraco, Xbox, Radioshack, 343 Industries, McKesson

Buyer's Guide

IBM SoftLayer vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage

September 2025

Free Report: IBM SoftLayer vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM SoftLayer vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM SoftLayer vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage report.

See our list of best Public Cloud Storage Services vendors.

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.