We compared Microsoft Azure File Storage and Azure NetApp Files based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Microsoft Azure File Storage offers strong security measures and efficient file sharing capabilities, with positive remarks on customer service. The pricing is considered competitive, and businesses have seen a significant ROI. However, users note a desire for faster file transfer speeds and an improved interface. Azure NetApp Files emphasizes high performance, scalability, and seamless workload migration, along with excellent customer support. Users find the cost and setup reasonable, experiencing cost savings and enhanced performance. Feedback suggests a need for improved performance during peak times, better documentation, a more intuitive interface, and enhanced security features.
Features: Microsoft Azure File Storage offers valuable features such as scalability, integration with Azure services, efficient file sharing, strong security, and seamless file management. On the other hand, Azure NetApp Files stands out for its ease of use, high performance, scalability, reliability, and seamless migration capabilities. Additionally, users appreciate its cost-effectiveness and excellent customer support.
Pricing and ROI: The setup costs for Microsoft Azure File Storage and Azure NetApp Files are both considered reasonable and affordable based on user feedback. Users appreciate the straightforward and easy management of setup for Microsoft Azure File Storage, while Azure NetApp Files offers a transparent pricing structure and flexible licensing options., In terms of return on investment (ROI), Microsoft Azure File Storage was praised for its cost savings, improved efficiency, scalability, reliability, and ease of integration. On the other hand, Azure NetApp Files focused on significant cost savings and enhanced performance.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure File Storage could benefit from enhancements in file transfer speed, a more intuitive interface, and expanded storage options. In contrast, Azure NetApp Files needs improvements in performance during peak times, documentation and support resources, user interface intuitiveness, security features, and data migration efficiency.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, it appears that the duration required to establish a new tech solution can vary for both Microsoft Azure File Storage and Azure NetApp Files. However, Azure NetApp Files seems to offer more flexibility in terms of varying timeframes for deployment, setup, and implementation phases. It is necessary to consider the context in which these terms are used to accurately evaluate the overall time required for the entire process., Microsoft Azure File Storage receives positive remarks regarding its customer service and support, with prompt and helpful assistance. Azure NetApp Files also provides highly recommended customer service, consistently exceeding expectations for a smooth experience.
The summary above is based on 35 interviews we conducted recently with Microsoft Azure File Storage and Azure NetApp Files users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."
"It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something."
"The availability is good, meaning downtime or network issues rarely occur. The system also offers flexibility, allowing for increases in data volume, IOPS, and other capabilities without requiring downtime, which is a strong point. Based on the money spent, we can get performance improvements and high availability."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"I think the easiest part is, when you do a comparison, it is the throughput versus the cost. And it's much easier to set up."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The most valuable features of the solution is replication to another region and the performance. The solution is stable. The solution is scalable. The initial setup is straightforward."
"The profile management option is another valuable feature that allows us to manage the profiles and secure them."
"It is a very scalable solution. I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I like that we can copy and download data using Azure. It's not just for file storage; we can also use it for large data sets or to host static web applications."
"The storage in this solution is excellent."
"The product is a reliable cloud solution."
"Very user-friendly and intuitive."
"The product can integrate with all platforms. My team also does data visualization, and Power BI can directly connect with those nodes. We can very conveniently connect with multiple tools for our database. The benefit here is that by utilizing the same storage application, my application is linked with their application through the same server. This setup provides real analytics and data for a holistic purpose, which is advantageous."
"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."
"Azure NetApp Files is expensive."
"The main area for improvement is in the support ticket system. Since it's a SaaS platform, support tickets are managed by Microsoft or NetApp backend. This can sometimes lead to cross-functional challenges for organizations."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"Azure NetApp Files could improve by being more diverse to integrate better with other solutions, such as Splunk and the on-premise version. There are some use cases that are not covered natively by Azure. It is not the best solution because it is not external from the cloud which for me is the best type of solution."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"It would be good if they added some features that make the solution easier to access for everyone."
"The solution should support all the legacy storage systems."
"It's a bit complex to set up. Other than that, there is nothing to improve."
"The storage account key could be a security issue."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage needs more integrations. In the future, I also want to see GRC added to the portal. If you enroll or sign up for Azure services, your country may not have GRC available in the portal, so you may have to choose a strange country, for example, Kenya, to activate credit."
"One thing that Azure File Storage could help us with is some kind of impact assessment. When we talk to some of our larger customers who have between 500 and 1,000 applications, we normally do an assessment of all these applications and then tell them which ones are ready to be lifted and shifted, and which ones need to re-architected. It would really help if Azure File Storage could come up with a better way to give estimations of the total investment required, including all costs incurred during the migration."
"The product must provide better security functions."
"A lot of things could be better, especially when it comes to accessing File Storage for monitoring. Azure Copy is fine, but there could be additional integration and security features for those who want more privacy and control over access to Azure."
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 10th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 15 reviews while Microsoft Azure File Storage is ranked 3rd in Public Cloud Storage Services with 44 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure File Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure File Storage writes "Various storage options available, high availability, and quick deployment". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Nasuni, NetApp ONTAP and Google Cloud Storage, whereas Microsoft Azure File Storage is most compared with Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Wasabi, Amazon S3 Glacier, Amazon S3 and Google Cloud Storage. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Microsoft Azure File Storage report.
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.