Director of Product Management at SID GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LLC
Real User
Top 5
2024-03-19T10:30:57Z
Mar 19, 2024
I haven't extensively used the retrieval options. Generally, we haven't encountered any significant issues with the service, although occasional network latency might occur due to various factors such as server positioning. However, the retrieval process has been fairly reliable. Rating the tool on a scale from one to ten is quite challenging. It's akin to comparing different brands of ovens, such as Murphy Richards, Samsung, or LG. All of them are excellent in performing their basic function. However, the differences lie in their operation, user interface, and user-friendliness. Similarly, AWS stands out as a leader in virtual services, but comparing it directly to others is not straightforward. I rate it a nine out of ten. The tool's integration into existing workflows is simple. Whether or not to recommend it depends on the requirements of the individual or organization. It's essential to assess what kind of data they intend to use it for and what their data needs are. Appropriate recommendations can be made based on these factors and other qualifying queries.
Manager, Security Operations Centre at Phillips Consulting Limited
Real User
Top 5
2024-03-06T13:03:07Z
Mar 6, 2024
Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution. Around five engineers are needed for the solution's deployment and maintenance. It is easy to integrate Amazon S3 Glacier with other solutions. I would recommend the solution to other users. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier nine and a half out of ten.
The solution helped us to meet our compliance needs. We use Amazon S3 Glacier as a platform as a Service (PaaS). If you have a virtual server, you can create a copy of the solution on an entire virtual machine. In case it goes down or someone messes with the configurations, you could just easily activate the copy. Amazon S3 Glacier is expensive as far as virtual machines and data storage are concerned. That's why I minimized the data storage as much as possible. Two to three people are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance. They need to have a proper understanding of each different environment where the solution needs to be deployed. Amazon S3 Glacier works like OneDrive, and it's straightforward to upload or download from it. I would recommend the solution to other users. Hosting static websites is straightforward, but you need a specialist to guide you to deploy dynamic websites on Amazon S3 Glacier. The solution is easy to manage, and I rate it an eight out of ten for its ease of management. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
It at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
2024-01-04T02:40:28Z
Jan 4, 2024
Programmers and system engineers do not find the tool to be difficult. However, it is difficult for others. I would not recommend it to many people. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.
For those looking to start using Amazon AWS, my advice is to consider AWS Lightsail for a quick and easy deployment. Setting up an account is straightforward, and it is a hassle-free solution. Overall, I would rate Amazon S3 Glacier as a nine out of ten.
Our company chose Amazon S3 Glacier because it's the most widely used platform. The solution has good documentation, and it has a lot of user groups. Once you get used to the solution, it's very easy to work with, and you get to know the configuration process. The solution has very good monitoring and an easy setup. Amazon S3 Glacier is worth the money for somebody who is using it. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten.
Users should choose Amazon S3 Glacier depending on their requirements. If someone wants to keep their data for ten years, they should use Amazon S3 Glacier. On the other hand, if someone wants to keep their data for one year, there is no need to use the solution. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a nine out of ten.
I advise others to set up cross-region verification for the S3 bucket. It is crucial to check the amount of data they upload. Companies should carefully evaluate their AWS usage based on specific goals and requirements. Different pricing plans and services may be more suitable for different use cases. They should implement bucket policies that require confirmation or additional steps before deleting files, which can prevent accidental data deletions. It saves a lot of data. I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a ten out of ten.
Maybe avoid reading data from S3 Glacier or processing data from there, as it can be very slow. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
If you plan to store your documents for over three years, I recommend using Amazon Glacier S3 to the fullest extent possible. This is because the longer you store your data in the tool, the more you pay. By moving most of your objects to Glacier, you can save money. Additionally, you can use Reserved Capacity to save even more money. Retrieving data from Amazon S3 Glacier is relatively easy. It is easier than retrieving data from the tool. So, I think people should use the product as much as possible. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
I give the solution a one out of ten. The maintenance is a nightmare. Amazon made two unauthorized charges, and we were unable to contact anyone to resolve the issue. As a result, we had to cancel the service.
I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by including better data discovery. My advice to new users in a startup company is if you're cost-effective, go for Amazon S3 Glacier.
You have to be aware of Glacier's performance. There is a delay in Glacier, and you will not have a response because you can archive it. If you bring files from the library, from the archive, the response time is between four to seven hours. When you fetch something from the archive, it will take time. If you want to make it faster, we keep the content on S3, and it will come instantly. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Amazon S3 Glacier a nine.
We are using the cloud deployment model. Everything is always on the cloud. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's a really good solution that could use a few small improvements, but for us, it works very well.
Amazon Glacier is a secure, durable, and extremely low-cost cloud storage service for data archiving and long-term backup. Customers can reliably store large or small amounts of data for as little as $0.007 per gigabyte per month, a significant savings compared to on-premises solutions. To keep costs low, Amazon Glacier is optimized for infrequently accessed data where a retrieval time of several hours is suitable.
I haven't extensively used the retrieval options. Generally, we haven't encountered any significant issues with the service, although occasional network latency might occur due to various factors such as server positioning. However, the retrieval process has been fairly reliable. Rating the tool on a scale from one to ten is quite challenging. It's akin to comparing different brands of ovens, such as Murphy Richards, Samsung, or LG. All of them are excellent in performing their basic function. However, the differences lie in their operation, user interface, and user-friendliness. Similarly, AWS stands out as a leader in virtual services, but comparing it directly to others is not straightforward. I rate it a nine out of ten. The tool's integration into existing workflows is simple. Whether or not to recommend it depends on the requirements of the individual or organization. It's essential to assess what kind of data they intend to use it for and what their data needs are. Appropriate recommendations can be made based on these factors and other qualifying queries.
Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution. Around five engineers are needed for the solution's deployment and maintenance. It is easy to integrate Amazon S3 Glacier with other solutions. I would recommend the solution to other users. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier nine and a half out of ten.
The solution helped us to meet our compliance needs. We use Amazon S3 Glacier as a platform as a Service (PaaS). If you have a virtual server, you can create a copy of the solution on an entire virtual machine. In case it goes down or someone messes with the configurations, you could just easily activate the copy. Amazon S3 Glacier is expensive as far as virtual machines and data storage are concerned. That's why I minimized the data storage as much as possible. Two to three people are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance. They need to have a proper understanding of each different environment where the solution needs to be deployed. Amazon S3 Glacier works like OneDrive, and it's straightforward to upload or download from it. I would recommend the solution to other users. Hosting static websites is straightforward, but you need a specialist to guide you to deploy dynamic websites on Amazon S3 Glacier. The solution is easy to manage, and I rate it an eight out of ten for its ease of management. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
Amazon S3 Glacier is a completely cloud-based solution. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a nine out of ten.
Programmers and system engineers do not find the tool to be difficult. However, it is difficult for others. I would not recommend it to many people. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.
For those looking to start using Amazon AWS, my advice is to consider AWS Lightsail for a quick and easy deployment. Setting up an account is straightforward, and it is a hassle-free solution. Overall, I would rate Amazon S3 Glacier as a nine out of ten.
I would recommend Amazon S3 Glacier to other users. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a nine out of ten.
Our company chose Amazon S3 Glacier because it's the most widely used platform. The solution has good documentation, and it has a lot of user groups. Once you get used to the solution, it's very easy to work with, and you get to know the configuration process. The solution has very good monitoring and an easy setup. Amazon S3 Glacier is worth the money for somebody who is using it. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten.
I would recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.
Users should choose Amazon S3 Glacier depending on their requirements. If someone wants to keep their data for ten years, they should use Amazon S3 Glacier. On the other hand, if someone wants to keep their data for one year, there is no need to use the solution. Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a nine out of ten.
Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.
I advise others to set up cross-region verification for the S3 bucket. It is crucial to check the amount of data they upload. Companies should carefully evaluate their AWS usage based on specific goals and requirements. Different pricing plans and services may be more suitable for different use cases. They should implement bucket policies that require confirmation or additional steps before deleting files, which can prevent accidental data deletions. It saves a lot of data. I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a ten out of ten.
Maybe avoid reading data from S3 Glacier or processing data from there, as it can be very slow. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
If you plan to store your documents for over three years, I recommend using Amazon Glacier S3 to the fullest extent possible. This is because the longer you store your data in the tool, the more you pay. By moving most of your objects to Glacier, you can save money. Additionally, you can use Reserved Capacity to save even more money. Retrieving data from Amazon S3 Glacier is relatively easy. It is easier than retrieving data from the tool. So, I think people should use the product as much as possible. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
I would rate the product a nine out of ten.
I would rate the overall product a nine out of ten.
I give the solution a one out of ten. The maintenance is a nightmare. Amazon made two unauthorized charges, and we were unable to contact anyone to resolve the issue. As a result, we had to cancel the service.
I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by including better data discovery. My advice to new users in a startup company is if you're cost-effective, go for Amazon S3 Glacier.
I would recommend this solution to other users who are interested in using it. I would rate Amazon S3 Glacier an eight out of ten.
You have to be aware of Glacier's performance. There is a delay in Glacier, and you will not have a response because you can archive it. If you bring files from the library, from the archive, the response time is between four to seven hours. When you fetch something from the archive, it will take time. If you want to make it faster, we keep the content on S3, and it will come instantly. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Amazon S3 Glacier a nine.
We are using the cloud deployment model. Everything is always on the cloud. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's a really good solution that could use a few small improvements, but for us, it works very well.