Amazon S3 Reviews

We have deployed Amazon S3 in two places, in Ireland and Northern Ireland. These act as storage for all the data, which is there. We have up to three servers there, one of these is an SQL server and one is Windows.

Feature-wise, Amazon S3 is the cheapest and it's reliable.

Overall, I don't think there's anything that needs to be improved.

The console could be improved - it's not very user-friendly for non-technical guys and the cost has to improve. It does not give us a clear picture of the total cost.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd rate it an 8.

We are using Amazon S3 for three years now.

It's very stable, you just have to look at cloud security more deeply because otherwise everything gets opened on the cloud.

Amazon S3 is easy to scale - scaling just comes with a cost.

Only the core IT Admin team and I are using this solution. The users do not have access to it.

Amazon technical support is good.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. If you don't know how Amazon works, it takes time to set up. Once it is set up then it is straightforward.

We used integrators to deploy as Amazon recommended that at the time in India. They recommended a partner or consultant.

Amazon deployment works beautifully.

If you know what your inside view will look like, you can cut down on your cost. 

Look at cloud security when you first configure the architecture.

Our primary use of S3 is for storing data. I'm a senior associate. 

This solution is valuable in that it helps us store all types of data. It's also easy to delete data when necessary and it's very user-friendly.

The upload speed for data and documents is sometimes slow and it would be helpful if that were improved. The other issue is that downloading data is quite expensive. 

I have used this solution for the past three years. 

We occasionally face stability issues with respect to upload speed but it's very rare. 

The customer support is good but it could be improved. When we raise a ticket, sometimes we have to make a follow-up call because we haven't heard back from them. 

Positive

The initial setup was easy. 

I find Amazon to be more efficient and more scalable compared to other solutions on the market. 

I find this solution good for both structured and non-structured data, as well as data access and encryption. It reads more requests per second than other solutions. 

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

We predominantly use this solution for our data storage, primarily making DB backups. I'm a lead data engineer.

The product is easy to use, very intuitive, fast and quite flexible. We can manage access and controls using Amazon policies so it's very secure and provides secure implementation methods. All those features help our day-to-day processes and functionalities. 

File versioning could be improved and I'd like to see some additional security features.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

We haven't had any downtime in the years we've been using this product. We also have disaster recovery setups but haven't needed them.

Scalability is pretty good, we have over 100 plus users, and inherently all our applications interact with S3. We use it heavily, it's our main storage medium.

The tech support is very good. We had some help with the configuration and some of our niche use cases and more complex aspects of the implementation. Apart from that, we've rarely needed any S3 support because the UI and the functionality itself are straightforward so you don't need to go beyond the standard documentation provided.

We're a small organization and previously had an on-prem solution that was more expensive for us with a lot of overheads. It didn't make sense to continue using it. 

It's a simple deployment once you get the hang of it. We had two people managing the deployment. You can develop your own templates for repeated actions and automate repeat jobs. It's not complex. We're currently using more than 200 terabytes. We're using three different modes so we're using the solution extensively.

We were able to reduce our licensing costs by exploring the different storage classes and different lifecycle management policies. It's a very good tool to control your costs and automate a few of the routine tasks which typically take significant manual effort when you need to write ad-hoc jobs. The storage is quite cheap although there are some processes that bump up the cost. 

We use it for static website hosting, storing data, and second data of some of the websites. We can then easily sync the data whenever we have the need to do so.

Some of our websites are 2 or 4 pages and have static content. We can simply host it by creating a bucket, putting the content of the website there, and making it available to the public with the Make Public feature.

Amazon S3 has multiple types of data detection. You can store data on a monthly basis, yearly basis, and long term basis. You can choose the Glacier feature, create a life cycle policy, and store it. This is one of the best features this solution has.

It is stable and scalable, and the installation is very straightforward as well.

The only pain point is migrating the life cycle policy because if someone is a newbie, they cannot easily create the life cycle policy. This is because there are multiple, additional ways. If I want to store data for one month, they have the option to Glacier over it. With Glacier, you have addition policies for one year or four years. The option will not be there. So you would need to use a UI process over it.

I've been using it for almost the last four years.

I think the stability of Amazon S3 is good.

It is scalable. We currently have 40 plus users.

Amazon Protect Support has been been quite responsive.

The initial setup was completely straightforward.

The licensing is pay as you go, and I'm happy with the pricing.

We didn't evaluate other options because there's no such available feature in the market at present that can compare all the things in a bucket, like S3.

If you are a small scale enterprise that wants to host websites or data, you should go for it and use Amazon S3. 

I would rate Amazon S3 at nine on a scale from one to ten.

I use Amazon S3 mainly for daily backups of our database.

Amazon S3 has helped our organization because the daily backups can be done automatically with automation. We do not have to spend time on it and I am confident with Amazon S3 in its ability to recover our data.

Amazon S3 is easy to use and it is beneficial to use the CLI to make the backups. Since I use the CLI I do not have to do it on a web portal which is a big advantage because everything can be automatized. Automation can be done very well in Amazon S3.

The solution could improve by having a simpler way to have the detail size of a file in the CLI to be read or understood easier. Today, it's a little raw in the way the details are presented. You have to make some scripts and some modifications to be able to see the information properly of the size of a given bucket or the size of a file.

I have been using Amazon S3 for a long time. I used the latest version because the CLI is normally updated.

The stability of the Amazon S3 is good.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is great.

We are a small company and we have approximately five developers that use Amazon S3. We use the solution on a daily basis for hourly backups.

I have used the support from Amazon S3 a long time ago, I have not needed much help. When I did have contact with them there were times it took a while for a response.

I would rate the technical support of Amazon S3 a three out of five.

Positive

The main difference from other solutions I have used is Amazon is the leader, and it has a very large number of zones and capacity, while others can be smaller and can have different options. Not all the options that are available in Amazon S3 are offered by other competitors, but for the main features, most of them are working fine. I have been evaluating two different solutions, one from a French cloud-based company called Scaleway, and the other is peer-to-peer storage.

The installation was simple. Creating a new bucket and deploying it is very straightforward. To make the script deploy a new bucket takes approximately one hour. 

I would rate the initial setup of Amazon S3 a four out of five.

We did the implementation ourselves and we have two developers that do the maintenance of the solution.

The return on investment has been very good because the backups of our database are critical for our business to operate.

I would rate the return on investment of Amazon S3 a four out of five.

The price of the Amazon S3 is reasonable. There are not any licensing costs, they have a pay-as-you-use model. 

When backups are more than 6 months old, I would recommend keeping less of them and storing the remaining ones in Glacier (long-term, cheaper storage).

I have evaluated other options.

My advice to others is to separate the buckets project, not to put everything in the same bucket, and be sure to implement IAM rules to avoid problems between users and not to lose any backups. The implementation process is important. 

I rate Amazon S3 an eight out of ten.

We use Amazon S3 for a file storing system. The solution is cloud-based.

We're working with 10-15 applications.

The most valuable feature is the sharing capabilities.

I would like there to be more support without needing to use Transfer Family. 

I have used Amazon S3 for about five years but not at my current organization.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten.

The scalability is good.

I have also used Azure.

The price is okay.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

I would recommend Amazon S3 if you have the use case for it, but Azure provides a similar service.

We use the solution to store deployment logs and tech information.

The solution is simple and affordable to use. The solution's API Integration requests are straightforward; we just have to integrate and acquire the service.

They should improve in the area of metadata curation. Sometimes we open metadata via open source or ground stations in the area. They should design some features with improved performance where we can gain insights as well. It will help in maintaining the solution considering the cost.

It would be great if they get a new feature with the QV mechanism.

We have been using the solution for seven or eight years.

I rate the solution's stability as a ten.

It is a very scalable solution. I have 100-300 colleagues using the solution.

The setup was straightforward. We had an engineer help us establish configuration between the backend and the object. We had to work on the permissions, and the rest was easy. 

We have an in-house engineering team. They are skilled in doing the entire setup.

It's worth the price considering its functionality.

I advise others to have a support team. They should ensure the best practices for transferring the use history from AWS onto other applications via the cloud. It's very easy to find those actions. Most importantly, they must be very careful about the solution's security. They should plan the automation model right, ensuring to maintain the surface area for security. Otherwise, they have nothing to worry about as the solution is well established.

I rate the solution as a ten.

We use this solution as readily available internet storage.

We find the archival capabilities of this solution quite valuable, because we can have set policies of exactly when, and what to archive. 

We would like to see improvement in the ability to moves files within this solution. At present the process is not straightforward, and requires us to download files to our micro service service before then uploading into the solution. In addition, the transfer bit rate for the process is very slow.

We have been working with this solution for around five years.

We have found this to be a very stable solution.

This is a very scalable solution.

We have found the technical support for this product to be pretty good.

We would recommend potential users of this solution to ensure they have micro-services in place, in order to carry out data transfers.

We would rate this solution a 10 out of 10.