We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Object Storage and NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Google and others in Public Cloud Storage Services."We have had a good experience with customer service and support."
"The product has good accessibility."
"It is a stable solution and serve our purposes"
"The file retention and object retention have been most valuable."
"This product is very reliable and all of the security that our client requires is available."
"I appreciate the scalability of this solution; it is fully scalable and excellent for certain tasks."
"AzCopy is probably the best feature. It's a scripting app or a scripting function. Whether it's a Linux batch or a PowerShell script, you can essentially just send a file via a line of code with a specific key."
"Object Storage's best feature is that it's easy to deploy."
"In terms of its storage snapshot efficiencies, the service is highly efficient. We are only doing things in small batches right now because we have not converted all of the data, but we have tested them in the Google Cloud and they work efficiently."
"High availability is very important to us because we have a production environment. High availability is the highest priority for us to continue keeping our systems running."
"Storage was taking up maybe 10 to 20% of my life at the startup, and now it takes up zero. I was personally running all the infrastructure for the company. Now that we've moved to NetApp, I don't have to worry about making sure it's up and running. It's made my life personally much better."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution."
"We have experienced a data copy bottleneck with the AZ copy using Microsoft Azure Object Storage, this should improve. It has high CPU consumption. There are a couple of ways to copy files fast, we have tried a few ways. Other than AZ copy, we can use Azure Fluent Storage, which also takes a lot of time to copy files. The AZ copy is faster but it takes a lot of time and CPU operations."
"We experienced an outage issue recently, which affected its overall stability and reliability."
"Object re-use should be improved in order to get better performance and reduce the cost."
"The stability could be improved."
"Object Storage's integration with other backup software could be improved."
"The solution can be quite slow."
"In future releases, I would add something like a better lifecycle management system, and for integration purposes, I would add some stuff related to newer concepts like data products and databases. I would like to have a seamless flow between those things."
"It would help if they increased the area in which they employ artificial intelligence, by starting to do assessments on the environments, to project those. They're not using any AI tools, currently, on the administrative side."
"The user interface has room for improvement. We would like this service to be more integrated with Azure, which is very easy to manage and use. It was easy to create volumes and add capacity pools in Azure, but in Google Cloud, we can only create separate volumes. We need more management or configuration options in the user interface."
"I would like for the sales team to get in contact more often and let me know what I should be doing next, what we should be doing about new features. So it would be nice if I heard a little bit more from him. From a technology perspective, I have no complaints."
More Microsoft Azure Object Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →
More NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Microsoft Azure Object Storage is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 44 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is ranked 18th in Public Cloud Storage Services. Microsoft Azure Object Storage is rated 8.0, while NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Object Storage writes "Easy to query, offers great security, and integrates well with other Microsoft applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud writes "Enables us to fine-tune storage and capacity on the fly as our needs grow or shrink over time". Microsoft Azure Object Storage is most compared with Oracle Cloud Object Storage, Wasabi, Amazon S3 and Nutanix Unified Storage, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is most compared with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and Amazon EFS (Elastic File System).
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.
