Microsoft Azure File Storage and Oracle Cloud Object Storage are both leading cloud storage solutions. Based on user reviews, Microsoft Azure File Storage scores higher for ease of deployment while Oracle Cloud Object Storage is praised for its feature set despite higher pricing.
Features: Microsoft Azure File Storage integrates easily with other Microsoft services, offers robust scalability, and strong security features. Oracle Cloud Object Storage is noted for its robust data management capabilities, high performance, and scalable architecture. It attracts enterprises with complex storage needs due to its advanced features.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure File Storage could benefit from enhanced customer support and more competitive pricing. Oracle Cloud Object Storage users suggest improvements in navigation and transparency in pricing. Oracle’s user base finds a greater need for interface enhancements.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Azure File Storage is often highlighted for its straightforward setup and reliable customer support. Oracle Cloud Object Storage, while robust, can be complex to deploy for newer users but offers extensive documentation and effective customer support. Users prefer Azure's simpler deployment process and more responsive support.
Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Azure File Storage is seen as cost-effective with flexible pricing options and good return on investment. Oracle Cloud Object Storage has higher upfront costs but users feel the advanced features justify the expense, delivering significant ROI for large-scale operations.
The perspective documentation is good.
Microsoft technical support is very prompt.
As and when we require, they are able to provide solutions or guide us toward solutions.
When issues arise, it takes them at least three to four hours to respond.
I have a premium subscription for Oracle Cloud, which ensures a high level of support.
Oracle is more cost-effective than competitors.
We successfully handled a huge transaction during an iPhone launch without any issues.
The scalability of Oracle Cloud Object Storage deserves a perfect ten as it can be scaled easily.
We can adjust the number of CPUs as per our need and reduce the load.
I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure File Storage as a seven out of ten.
We sometimes encounter glitches with bigger files, but everything else works as expected.
The system is stable, especially when set up in a single region.
Some chunking logics need to be better to address issues with processing bigger files.
There is a limitation on the storage capacity, like four terabytes.
The information is not readily available on the internet, so we have to double-check and understand everything.
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.
The retrievability for Oracle Cloud Object Storage could be made simpler through the implementation of a GUI interface to retrieve data.
I would rate it three or three and a half out of ten on the pricing scale.
I would rate the pricing of Microsoft Azure File Storage seven or eight, where one is high and ten is low.
The pricing for Microsoft Azure File Storage is five out of ten, not so expensive and not so low.
The pricing for Oracle Cloud Object Storage deserves a perfect ten as it is very inexpensive.
It is an expensive product.
The pricing for Oracle Cloud is comparable to other cloud providers.
It is satisfying our requirements with encryption and security features in place.
File storage is complemented by OCR with Azure Cognitive Service.
Microsoft Azure File Storage saves time compared to AWS.
High availability, a large dataset, and stability are our main criteria for using this solution.
I find manageability, scalability, and security of the product most valuable.
It also provides multi-region support, enhancing data accessibility and safety.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Azure File Storage | 9.6% |
| Oracle Cloud Object Storage | 3.9% |
| Other | 86.5% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 17 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 24 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 3 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 3 |
| Large Enterprise | 5 |
Fully managed file shares that use the standard SMB 3.0 protocol
Key scenarios:
Scale with no new hardware - eliminates new capital expenditures, opens up data center space and reduces power and cooling requirements.
Elastic storage - shared infrastructure allows for infinite scalability. Eliminates forecasting and long procurement cycles.
Pay as you go and subscription models - purchase capacity with no commitment or reduce costs with longer-term agreements
Simple to manage industry standard OpenStack and RESTful APIs streamline management integration, freeing resources to accelerate other cloud projects.
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.
