Amazon S3 Reviews

We are using the solution to host our website and manage the database.

We have an online portal, and we are providing services to customers. We need to maintain an elastic database storage, along with security features. The solution’s functionality and accessibility are valuable to us. It's geared towards users. It makes things simple. The product is easy to use.

The product should enable users to create their own shortcuts. It should allow more customization. Users should be able to place their shortcuts on the dashboard. It will make things easier.

I have been using the solution for a year.

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

The product is scalable. We have over 50 users online at any given point. We can increase it as we need.

The setup is straightforward. We have a team of developers. They are very happy with the tool. The deployment did not take much effort. The product is cloud-based. We have six developers and engineers in our technical team.

Everything is housed in one place, so it is all easily accessible. The scalability is good. We have an assurance of data integrity. It is critical.

The pricing can be improved.

We are also using Azure.

For disaster recovery, there's a backup going on in AWS. At the same time, we take our own local backup. It is a daily process. People who want to use the solution must explore the tool and look at the training videos. It is quite straightforward.

We have a subscription model with our customers. They pay it yearly. There are no additional costs associated with the product. We had a problem with storage when we were working with on-premise servers. The hard disks were failing because of the volume of the data. They were regularly failing every three to four months. There was a cost associated with it. It impacted our project.

Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

I use the tool for my product deployment. 

Amazon S3 is easily accessible, fast and effective. Its performance is good. 

The tool needs to improve its flexibility in support. 

I have been using the product for a couple of months. 

Amazon S3 is stable and reliable. Its resource utilization is also good. 

I rate the product's scalability an eight point five out of ten. My company has more than 200 users. 

Amazon S3's deployment takes some time. However, once you learn it, it's not complex. 

The tool's licensing costs are yearly. I rate it a six to seven out of ten. 

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten. Setting it up takes some time at the beginning, but it's reliable and stable once it's all set up.

Most people who need to store files usually turn to Amazon S3. The use case for this is not only for me but for anyone building technology who needs to store files.

Amazon S3 helps to store data, such as Excel, audio, and video.

An important feature of the Amazon S3's system is that it offers encryption while the files are at rest. This is crucial in ensuring the security of the files being restored and addressing potential security risks. That's what I would emphasize.

The cost of the solution should be reduced.

I have been using Amazon S3 for a long time.

I rate the stability of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

I rate the scalability of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

I rate the support of Amazon S3 a seven out of ten.

Neutral

The implementation of Amazon S3 was easy.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

I have received a return on investment using Amazon S3.

The price of Amazon S3 should be reduced.

I rate the price of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

I did not evaluate other solutions before choosing Amazon S3.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

We have a data warehouse and a data lake using Amazon S3. Additionally, we use it for application streaming.

We have our computer systems that have storage but we do use the cloud storage available from Amazon S3. However, it depends on the type of data we have and whether we use the cloud or not.

The most valuable feature of Amazon S3 is its flexibility as a solution to suit many different use cases.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately six years.

Two third of our company use this solution.

The support is better than other cloud providers but sometimes it takes a while to have a resolution to our issues.

I rate the support from Amazon S3 a seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup of Amazon S3 was straightforward.

I rate the initial setup of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

We have a few developers that we use for deployment.

The solution is worth the money and we have seen an ROI. However, it is not our primary goal. We are trying to optimize different areas. 

Amazon S3 is a cost-effective solution compared to the others.

I rate the price of Amazon S3 a two out of ten.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

We use Amazon s3 to store objects like data in my environment.

In one of my previous environments, I was brought in to help with the challenges they were facing resulting from a data breach in the S3 bucket. What I noticed in that environment was that every user had full access into their S3 bucket, and accidentally deleted data without a trace.

They did not know how some of their data was missing. One of the first services I suggested was enforcing access control by applying IM best practices, such as granting list privilege permission to our users to avoid overpowering them. I created a single group and then applied specific permissions to that group.

All users added to that group were able to inherit the same permission and privileges. Versioning was enabled which keeps multiple variant of objects in the same bucket and also safeguards against accidental deletions. I also enabled multi-factor authentication which prevented accidental bug deletion by requiring the user who initiate the delete action to prove physical possession of an MFA device with an MFA code. 

The versioning of this solution for accidental deletion has been most valuable. 

You need to fully understand the solution's best practices to get the most out of its security features. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We have seen a return on investment with S3.

I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten. Pricing depends on a particular class where you want save your objects. There are different classes when it comes to storage in S3.

I would advise others that this is a scalable solution that offers comprehensive security. 

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

We are very flexible with our use cases and it fits most clients.

The most valuable feature is the automated replication of the data. You can store things and they automatically replicate somewhere else. So if you have an issue, you have a backup, and that is very good. You can set up how often you want it backed up, and I find that extremely useful.

I would like to see the API for beginners improved because it is hard to understand. It is based on the idea of a container when most programmers just understand directories and subdirectories. For a beginner, the API is a bit confusing.

I have been working with Amazon S3 for the past four years

The solution is very stable.

The scalability is definitely present from hundreds to thousands depending on the client.

I have used other solutions in the past, but none of them are as scalable.

The initial setup If you have the experience is fairly simple. If you do not, then it is fairly complex.

I know it is very inexpensive compared to other solutions.

I would basically recommend that individuals just follow the guidelines AWS as they are very good. I would rate Amazon S3 an eight on a scale of one to ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for storage.

The most valuable feature of the solution is auto-scaling.

I would like to see an easier setup that doesn't require as much training.

I have been using the solution for three years.

It is stable.

The solution auto-scales so it is easily scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward as long as you are familiar with the cloud services.

The cost varies based on the type of subscription you chose.

Currently, I use the solution for my phishing server and I pay $15 per month.

Before choosing the solution I evaluated DigitalOcean.

I rate the solution nine out of ten.

I suggest if you are interested in using the solution you should also use the other services offered by Amazon such as AWS, and EC2 so you have access to everything in one place.

Auto-scaling is very costly if you don't manage to control it. You need to have good training and understanding of the solution.

Our company uses the solution for deep CI backups. We have thousands of customers who use the solution and access our application. 

The solution is good and includes all the features we expect. 

The solution's pricing should be modified to automatically expand storage based on prior usage. For example, our monthly usage is very low so our storage allotment should be increased by 200%.

I have been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support is good so I rate it them a nine out of ten. 

Positive

I did not previously use another solution. 

The setup is very easy. 

The pricing depends on your region and is reasonable. For example, the price per gigabyte is .0025 in the South Pacific and .0023 in Europe.  

We use the solution and EC2 with similar frequency depending on use case. 

I recommend the solution and rate it a nine out of ten. 

We have multiple use cases for Amazon S3. We use Amazon S3 for storing static data and as a static site load balancer.

Amazon S3 could improve the load balancers. They are very basic compared to other solutions in the industry, such as F5. It has to be able to be analyzed up to a certain level. 

The basic features need some improvement, users should not have to use any third-party solutions, Amazon S3 should provide those particular features. The feature at present does not suffice most of the requirements of an enterprise-class organization.

The security could improve in Amazon S3. I am not seeing any value in the solution in security.

I have been using Amazon S3 for more than two and a half years.

Amazon S3 is a stable solution.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is good. However, it could be changed to make it much better than it is today.

We have approximately 25 projects that are using this solution.

We have 24/h support from Amazon S3 and their support has been very good. We have had quick response times. Within two to three days our issue gets resolved.

I rate the support from Amazon S3 a four out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of Amazon S3 is of a medium level of difficulty. It's not easy or difficult. There are certain things that need to change from a documentation perspective, or from an ease of use perspective. The configuration needs to be more user-friendly. The full deployment of Amazon S3 took approximately 15 days.

We did the implementation of Amazon S3 in-house.

There is a license to use Amazon S3.

Before doing any project we have criteria sheets to follow, we evaluate any solution on-premise or on the cloud. We compare all the cloud solutions, such as Oracle, Azure, and GCP, and whichever solution we find better for our requirement, we design a solution using it.

Our main corporate website is posted on Amazon S3 and our evaluations determined Amazon S3 was the best solution for our use case. This is why we choose it.

My advice to others is Amazon S3 is a good solution. However, it depends on the use case that you have. This will determine if this solution is the best fit or if another solution would be better. The requirements of your use case have to be met.

I rate Amazon S3 an eight out of ten.

I'm a consultant who provides services for companies of various sizes here in South Africa. Our company is still small, with only about 20 clients. I use S3 for hosting my websites and other storage services. S3 can be used for static and dynamic websites as well as file storage. In terms of dynamic websites, I use S3 in addition to other technologies in a computerless environment. In other words, I don't need a virtual machine to have a dynamic website hosted on Amazon Web Services.

E3's most valuable feature is CloudFront.

You need to do some things to make the files and updates immediately accessible. If you don't know those steps, you will wait forever for your updates to take effect or be seen by the public.

That is the only area where a newcomer might get frustrated with hosting on S3. The files are available immediately when they are first deployed, but it takes some time when they make changes if you don't understand the simple procedure you need to follow for it to happen immediately.

The process needed to show updates immediately is a problem. You have to go somewhere to delete whatever is propagated and restart the propagation somehow. That is the only issue that I think they could fix with hosting on S3 as far as websites are concerned.

I would also like S3 to have the ability to do dynamic websites without the need to do reconfigurations outside of S3. You should be able to switch on dynamic websites in S3, and then it works. I shouldn't need to go elsewhere within Amazon Web Services to get a dynamic website to work.

I've been using S3 for about three years 

It's a cloud service, so our scalability is good. I haven't had any issues. At the same time, I haven't had a situation where a client needed to expand the footprint of their site tremendously. I don't have massive clients like Netflix.

I was never in a position where I needed to request AWS tech support.

I've also used Azure's tool, and S3 is far more stable I haven't seen the same issues on AWS that I'm having on Azure. Amazon CloudFront is way faster. The websites are loading way faster than when you do it on Azure CDN.

Another advantage of S3 over CDN is the fact that I can deploy my websites on Amazon S3 with the root domain and the sub-domain loading the website. When using CDN, you cannot load the website with the root domain.

In the beginning, it wasn't easy. S3 was a little cumbersome when I started using it. With updates, it became easier to set up static websites. However, deploying dynamic websites in S3 is still difficult. You need to take notes on what you're doing so you can do the next dynamic website. 

The deployment is quite fast. You upload files, and that's it.

There a no license fees. E3 is a cloud service, and you pay as you go. Your encryption licenses are free, so you only pay for the storage you're using. It's extremely inexpensive. 

I rate Amazon S3 10 out of 10. S3 is highly cost-effective, so I would definitely recommend it.