Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is being used for Big Data Processes. 

It is a stable solution and serve our purposes. 

The pricing of the solution can be improved. 

I am using the solution for three years. 

It is a stable solution. I rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. Around hundred users are using the solution presently. We extensively used the solution. Even that we process data, we have large amounts of data. We intentionally use it, but we use it from the processing perspective, not from the end user listing. 

The technical support team is very good. 

The initial setup is easy. For the deployment we have we have Data Form Scripts. So there are  CDs for deploying everything in the in the cloud. Three to four software engineers  are required for the maintenance of the solution. 

The solution was implemented by a third-party vendor. 

The pricing can be improved. There is an yearly licensing cost for the solution. There are some reserve instances that are additional to the licensing cost. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

We use this solution to store images and Excel files.

We used to use an on premise file system and the maintenance of on a premise server is difficult. This is why we migrated to Azure storage. Using this solution has reduced our maintenance time and cost. 

The file retention and object retention have been most valuable.

Uploading files from the UI has presented some issues. When editing work and once you delete a file, it takes some time to recreate the same file. If I have an ABC file and if I delete it and I want to recreate the file again with the same name, it is not immediate. There is at a least 30 seconds or one-minute delay.

We have been using this solution for three years.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. We have specifically configured it for scalability. 

We have reached out for technical support but not directly related to Azure Storage. We had a Logic app and we tried to connect it to Azure Storage. They provided a solution but it was not a limitation of Azure Storage and rather a limitation of the Logic app.

I would rate the support for this solution a nine out of ten. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. We had no issues with the deployment because we used GitHub Action, Azure DevOps, terraforms as well as AMS scripts to build and deploy. Deployment did not take more than a minute.

We have used a pricing calculator to find out the general pricing for our clients. 

I would recommend this solution to those who already have an on-premise file system and who want to migrate to a cloud-native solution. This solution offers scalability at a lower cost and additional benefits compared with an on-premise file server.

It's primarily used by our data science team. They use it to augment any of the works that they probably cannot do very well in KNIME.

It's a very powerful tool, however, we don't use it to the right level. We are still learning the tool. We have this very powerful engine that we are not yet utilizing to the next level. At the moment, we're just trying to see whether we have automated ML scripts that we can adopt to train a model, for example. Really we're using it for proof of concept. We haven't deployed anything to production.

It's easy to use.

We're still testing the solution. It's too early to make any suggestions as to what may be missing.

We've been using the solution for two years. 

The stability is quite good. there are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze, it is reliable. 

We've never had any problem with scaling. It is scalable. Being a government institution and having that contract signed at the government level, we just have to request additional resources or storage capacity. It's very good.

Technical support is very good. 

We initially started our journey on KNIME and we run KNIME side by side, so data scientists can have the ability to do their models either in Lime or, if they choose to, they can also do that in Azure.

The solution is very easy to set up. It's not overly complex. 

We've got this Microsoft contract and we have round-the-clock Microsoft engineers who are able to actually assist us with any problems.

We're customers and end-users.

It's a very powerful tool. I love the fact that Microsoft was really committed to improving it. Therefore, from the early days that we started using it, we can actually see that continuously there are changes and improvements. They do listen to their customers. They really try to make sure that they have a best-in-class product.

Microsoft would be very good for very big organizations. In terms of KNIME, the good thing is you can actually scale it down with a small organization that doesn't want to really go really big. They both work and they're complementary. 

I would rate it eight out of ten.

Our use case is related to a data lake. It is just a file collection.

I am using its latest version. It is in the cloud through a private company.

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.

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.

I've been using it every day for four years.

It is stable.

I haven't hit any limitations yet, and I'd say it is scalable. There are probably different scaling solutions, such as a data lake or a data warehouse. Those would be the next version of this, as opposed to binary large object storage.

We have less than five users.

It's a Microsoft product. They're the best software company in the world. So, the support is quick. It is immediate. Sometimes, it is too quick but pretty helpful. They'll get you through the problem. Their support is definitely very good.

It is easy to set up. You just sign in. You have to have a cloud subscription. Once you deploy a disk or any sort of object that can be manipulated in the cloud on a cloud-based model, all you do is sign in, and access should be granted to that resource.

It was implemented in-house. I take care of its deployment and maintenance.

It has a pay-as-you-go model. So, you are only paying for what you store. It's an attractive model. You don't pay for a set; you pay for what you actually use.

It's definitely one of the top Azure Cloud objects out there for file storage and accessing files. Especially if you're using the Microsoft ecosystem, it's definitely one of the best tools for cloud storage for files.

I would rate it a nine out of ten just because of the mobile presence.

We are using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for storing customer content. Our applications are running on Kubernetes, and the content is stored on the Microsoft Azure Object Storage. For example, we are using the queues for email. We have a couple of web jobs that are running that pick up the object from the queues. Additionally, we are using it for the files.

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

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.

Microsoft Storage Explorer is used for connectivity but it needs to be improved.

On the backend side, it is not an easy implementation, and if they introduced a solution roadmap, that would be great.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for approximately six years.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is somewhat stable, but some improvements need to be applied. I can remember, it was down one time. We have faced a lot of issues since our application is tightly coupled with storage. More than 700 customers were affected during that time period. A lot of queries came, and lots of tickets were created for us because the storage was down.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage can scale in terms of users using the solution.

I am in a team of 50 and I am the manager of the team. In our company, all the project teams, and developers are using Microsoft Azure Object Storage mostly in the repair. We have approximately 300 to 500 developers using the solution.

I have contacted the support when the Microsoft Azure Object Storage could not be accessed. They did the recovery but it took them some time, approximately 10 hours.

We have only used Microsoft solutions.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure Object Storage for me is easy, but it depends on the person. If you do not have much experience it is not as easy. The whole process of implementation took 15 to 20 minutes. We have automated a lot of the processes.

When doing the deployment of Microsoft Azure Object Storage we have experienced some issues with our scripts and the automation.

We have one person in my team that is managing Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

The licensing cost of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is monthly. We have two types of licenses. One is the EA enterprise license and the other is a CSP license.

My advice to others is if you're going to be copying the data in Microsoft Azure Object Storage it will be slow.

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

I worked in Azure Cloud mostly on the Databricks side, with SQL Server or Synapse Analytics, or streaming analytics. It's a blob storage solution. We use the storage account, either the blob storage or the ADLS Gen 2.

We can do data queries easily. If it's a JSON document or XML document, mostly we deliver the APIs, calls, and all. The document is stored as an object stored in the Blob Storage. Then, using the Databricks, we try to process that JSON and then load it into a Delta Lake table. That is where we interact mostly with Object Storage.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

If we look at the different versions of that ADLS, it really does not have a hierarchical storage mechanism. If you want to store any document, you have to go and create one blob storage account, in case you want to store any hierarchical data. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's all scalable. It has lifecycle management where I can define a rule so that I can easily archive or move the data from the cool tier to the hot tier based on the uses and then I can also send it into the cool tier so that it can be frequently accessed. If I do that, the cost can also be minimized.

Technical support is great. We have a partnership basically with Microsoft. For my organization, Microsoft is the partner vendor. Whenever it is required, support is readily available to us.

Positive

I'm also familiar with Amazon S3. 

The initial setup is straightforward. You just have to create a storage account. You can automate that also. You have different mechanisms. You can use Azure templates, like SQL, or you can use the Terraform as well. To automate the creation of that object storage or any account. Or, if you have different APIs, like Python-based API, you can easily create what you need.

If we compare most of the other cloud vendor solutions, for example, S3 Object, S3 with the Blob Storage, more or less, both have the same capabilities. However, from a security perspective, Azure is very good. Azure offers AD integration with the storage account. That is something I find as a good feature compared to the other clouds and integration with all the Azure services is a really useful feature.

We're a gold partner with Microsoft.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten due to the ADLS integration and the different authentication mechanisms that we have.

We need to make sure that the data which we are storing in those storage objects is highly secured. That is where Azure is providing us with the best features. We can go with the different mechanisms like its Nexus security or the AD authentication. Or, they also provide us admin encryption, including the transparent keys. With transparent encryption, we can encrypt based on customer-based keys. Those are also some good features that make it a really great product.

The solution is being used for daily purposes. 

Improvements should be made as per customer requirements.

It is a scalable solution. 

Technical support is excellent.

The initial setup is complex.

The pricing is competitive.

Overall I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I used the solution for email and messaging.

The layout of Microsoft is professional. It is suitable for office purposes.

The product hangs sometimes. The password retrieval process was very difficult.

I have been using the solution for ten years.

The tool’s stability has improved. It is much better now. It was not good 10 to 12 years ago. It used to freeze a lot. The UI has improved a lot.

The tool’s scalability is good.

The setup was complex. We created an account and decided on ways to retrieve passwords. We must also add our mobile number to the account.

I could do the deployment myself.

Google is better than Microsoft. Google's password retrieval process is very easy. However, Microsoft's layout and setup are much more professional. Google is much more user-friendly and interactive. Google is more secure than Microsoft. I often get emails on Microsoft that someone is trying to access my account.

I worked for a company that was a Microsoft Gold partner. I will not recommend the product to others. Google is a better tool. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.