Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

I appreciate the scalability of this solution; it is fully scalable and excellent for certain tasks. One thing I particularly like is the block solution, where files are divided into parts and sent through the firewall in parallel, making it incredibly fast. However, there have been some issues with disconnections, especially when downloading large files. It works perfectly for handling many smaller files, though. The initial storage options, like data lake storage, are diverse and cater to various needs such as big data analytics. As a certified professional architect expert, I find it crucial to understand specific requirements to make the most of these solutions.

Our current Azure setup faces challenges with API connectivity, particularly due to misconfigurations related to changes in Azure Graph. Version disparities in APIs and duplicated features have been flagged by Microsoft, complicating security updates. To enhance efficiency, we need improvements in the configuration process, ensuring a smoother integration of our solutions with Azure services. Additionally, naming and access control have been a bit challenging. While we start by setting private access for files in Blob Storage, syncing becomes an issue when making the Blob solution publicly accessible. It is like the Linux system, where granting access to an upper folder doesn't automatically cover internal files. Unlike Windows, here we need to be more specific about access, making it a bit tricky to manage.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure Object Storage for over ten years.

I would rate the stability as a nine out of ten. It is very stable.

Scalability is one of the strongest aspects of the product. I would rate it as a nine out of ten. We have approximately 10,000 end users of the product.

When it comes to technical support, the UK team has been good and responsive, especially with premium support. However, the Indian support team's performance is not as strong, and I would rate them around five out of ten. Advanced support, on the other hand, tends to be more efficient and timely in assisting.

Neutral

Before Microsoft products, we worked with other vendors like AWS for scalable storage solutions. The choice between AWS and Microsoft Azure largely depends on the client's existing setup – for instance, if they were using AWS before, we often stuck with that. However, in cases where object storage was a priority, we found Microsoft Azure's Blob Storage to be a fitting solution. It is all about adapting to the client's needs and the specifics of their setup.

We haven't been actively maintaining the product from our end. Currently, our technical team comprises 20 engineers.

The pricing for the product can be reasonable, especially for standard usage. I would rate it as a six out of ten in terms of costliness. However, costs can escalate if you are using storage accounts for resource-intensive cases. It is important to assess the nature of your usage and whether a more cost-effective solution exists. 

Using Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the specific use case. For storing numerous small files in the cloud, object storage like this is excellent -persistent, flexible, and generally a good fit. However, for tasks involving deep data analytics or databases, it is more of a case-by-case decision. Evaluating your specific needs and how well the solution aligns with them is crucial. Overall, I would rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

We have implemented the solution for some of our customers as a static file storage platform. One of our customers has a website, and they have to save some of the images the users are sending to the website. Another customer uses the product for backup purposes. They have a first backup on their on-premises software. After that, they copy the backup data to Azure Object Storage.

Versioning is a valuable feature. We use the immutable storage feature on Azure. AWS also provides such features.

The tool should be a little bit cheaper.

I have been using the solution for three to four years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

The product is stable.

The product is scalable. Veeam Backup systems are using the solution as a second backup.

We also use Amazon S3. Some of our customers want cheaper storage solutions. So, we use other cheaper local solutions sometimes.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It did not take more than an hour. To deploy the solution, we must prepare Azure Storage on Azure Portal. If the end-user or the customer doesn't have an Azure subscription, we create a subscription from our distributor channel. Then, we create the storage for our customers after granting the necessary permissions. For Veeam customers, we go to the Veeam management dashboard, create a backup job in the configuration settings, and point to Azure Object Storage.

We deployed the product in-house.

The solution has a monthly licensing fee.

I recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers hassle-free usage. It is easy to configure. 

The product is expensive.

I have been working with the solution for a year. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has more than 100 users who use it 24/7.  

Microsoft support's turnaround time is high, and its documentation is good. Sometimes, the person who is assigned a ticket is not an expert. 

Neutral

I rate the product's setup a nine out of ten. The deployment team had around 20 members. 

Encryption feature is an add-on. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is used to install big datasets in the cloud at a reasonable price.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage provides a platform for uploading or downloading big datasets.

The solution's stability should be improved.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for three years.

I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage a seven out of ten for stability.

Since Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a cloud-based solution, it is easily scalable.

The solution is used extensively by our organization’s IT team.

The solution's initial setup is easy.

The solution's deployment took just a few minutes. You have to install and run the setup file and then connect that to the specific bucket. You have to provide keys to get access and get access to the specific area, and you can start uploading or downloading.

With Microsoft Azure Object Storage, you pay for the data you have stored there. You can download the application from Microsoft free of charge.

I am working with the latest version of Microsoft Azure Object Storage. Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a cloud-based solution.

Since Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a cloud-based solution, users should ensure they have a good bandwidth for uploading. Most internet service providers provide far better download speed than uploading speed. If you use the solution frequently, ensure that your uploading speed is updated with your downloading speed.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a very good solution if you need to safely store large datasets on the cloud.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten.

We use the product for all kinds of images and static data. 

The tool's most valuable feature is performance. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage needs to increase its response time from 25,000 per second to 40,000 or 50,000. 

I have been using the solution for nine years. 

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has 100 users for Microsoft Azure Object Storage. 

The solution's support is good enough for us. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage's deployment is straightforward. 

We deployed the solution in-house. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is not expensive. 

I rate the product a ten out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for backups, archiving, and SFTP storage.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an easy-to-use and stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution. The cost management part is a little complex, and if we don't configure it right, it can be pretty expensive.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for a few years.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. Around 200 users are using the solution in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

The solution’s technical support should be improved.

We have previously used different solutions. We switched to Microsoft Azure Object Storage because most of our landscape is on Azure, and it's easier to have everything in one place than using a different vendor. So, it's convenient for us.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution can be deployed in one or two weeks.

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

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten.

The storage account is one of the primary components in all implementations, including cloud implementations. It is a common resource in Azure.

We mostly work with Blob Storage, and it is a very good resource for unstructured storage. Blob Storage is one of the best resources in Azure for storing unstructured data such as files, video files, audio files, and Excel files. Currently, Blob Storage is the cheapest and best solution, with very good features for unstructured data.

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. Although Cosmos DB is known to be expensive, it has a guaranteed consistency level of 99.99%. I want Microsoft to explore how they can provide the same consistency level as Cosmos DB but at a lower cost. Speaking of consistency, we are currently using GRS or GZRS as our storage redundancy types. It would be great if we could achieve the same guaranteed consistency level as with Cosmos DB. It would be of great use if we could apply the same approach to our storage account.

Currently, I do not have any suggestions regarding Blob Storage. The storage account allows for storing VHD, which is a type of blob, along with other blob types, such as append blobs and page blobs. These blob types are already well-matured designs, and I don't have any suggestions. The storage account also offers different tiers, such as cool, hot, and archive tiers, as per the access. These features meet the needs of data and application engineers for storing data. Mostly, it has all the features to meet the current requirements, and it is one of the well-designed resources from Microsoft.

I work with an Azure storage account that includes a blob bin and file storage. I have used Azure Blob Storage for almost five years. Also, I am not sure if we are partners with Microsoft since I joined a month ago.

For stability, I rate it a nine out of ten. This is because it offers one of the best features. Also, I have not faced any complaints regarding the storage account in my five years of experience. There might be other resources I feel that I couldn't access or have some service-related issues. But, I didn't face any issues with the storage account.

I rate the solution nine out of ten in terms of its ability to scale. Since it is a management service, we should not bother about scaling. This is because we have a very good scaling policy for management services. As I recently joined the organization, I am not aware of how many employees are currently using this solution.

The technical support you receive depends on the plan you choose, whether it is the basic plan, standard plan, or premium plan. In my current organization, we have a premium plan for which the technical support is awesome. I raised three tickets with the technical support team while using the premium plan and received the best support from Microsoft. So, I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

I am working with AWS, Azure, and GCP, but my major contribution to the cloud is towards Azure.

It is a very simple process.

Currently, it is a flexible price policy.

Amazon S3 is equivalent to Azure Storage accounts, as they offer almost the same features. Based on my experience, I find Azure to be a more comfortable tool to work with compared to Amazon S3. The UI is better designed, and I could easily understand the features and other things. Therefore, even though the two solutions are similar, I rate the storage account solution higher than Amazon S3.

It is one of the best features or resources, especially for people who want to use Blob Storage for unstructured data. For us, it is a very cost-effective resource since we can understand it easily. I haven't experienced any issues with this solution for the past five to six years. I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for our data streams and logs. We bring all our live data streams and store them in Microsoft Azure Object Storage. When the files are added to the folder, the Lambda series will kick in, and then we will run and train the models with new data and publish the results. The outputs will be written to Snowflake.

What I like most about Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that you have many ways to access it.

I have no complaints about Microsoft Azure Object Storage, but maybe its market size could be more extensive, and its backup speed enhanced. My company is still building an amenity, so I have yet to review what went wrong with the current stack. My team will document anything that's not developed as technical learning.

One limitation of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that you can only use it if your data does not change. If your data is in a file, you also use Microsoft Azure Object Storage. The solution is not meant for data that you need to update.

I've been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage since 2011.

My rating for Microsoft Azure Object Storage in terms of stability is nine out of ten.

The scalability of Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the use case and how an aspect of the solution can be leveraged as data storage on public storage. Still, based on my use case, Microsoft Azure Object Storage is scalable.

My experience is with Microsoft Azure Object Storage developer support for real-time issues, particularly support from the Microsoft Azure portal. It's a seven out of ten support-wise because it could be far better. I'm aware that many issues can arise from availability, but my team was able to manage, so I rate it as seven. Otherwise, I would have given the support a four or five.

Neutral

I used AWS and found Microsoft Azure Object Storage more mature than AWS because, database-wise, Microsoft Azure Object Storage is more well-known, so I prefer it over AWS, and my company went with it.

From a service point of view, on the other hand, AWS is better than Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure Object Storage in terms of integration and data storage. AWS is also more comfortable for memory and virtual machines, but Google Cloud is better for data workflows.

I found Microsoft Azure Object Storage simple to set up, but it depends on how well you know the service. If you know the service, then setting it up is pretty straightforward, but if you do not know Microsoft Azure Object Storage, you first need to understand how it's meant to be implemented. For me, setting up the solution is easy.

We do the deployments for Microsoft Azure Object Storage. We test the development in-house, as we have our infrastructure.

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 pricing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage should be more flexible for clients.

I evaluated AWS and GCP.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is currently deployed on a private cloud, but my company will eventually deploy it on the public cloud.

My company doesn't have direct users accessing Microsoft Azure Object Storage because the target is to write data on it on the object bucket.

I can recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to others, but I'll base my recommendation on the use case.

Based on what I'm using it for, my rating for the solution is nine out of ten.

My parent company has a partnership with Microsoft Azure Object Storage.