Amazon S3 Reviews

I am managing the S3 storage solution from Amazon. From Microsoft, I'm managing the Azure administration. I handle that. As a part of that, I need to create the virtual machines, a point to site to VPN and Azure AD, AD synchronization with Windows server, a database server, mail server, and web server. I administrate all that.

We use Amazon S3 for storing files and documents on the cloud. I fill out the user whenever the files they use are downloaded. That is fully automated. After a few days, it can delete it. I've done the policy for the automated deletion.

Amazon S3 is great. We are using it for storage solutions.

Due to using S3, our data documents are safe and easy to access. It is better to keep them in the cloud as opposed to in our internal drive. You can access them from anywhere. Especially during the pandemic period, we are able to access remotely, as well. So it's good.

We are using the basic S3 bucket. It is easy to manage and easy to understand.

We need the mapping to Windows. That feature is needed in S3. That feature is in the Azure cloud where we can map it like a drive. We can map the cloud storage to the effort driving our Windows PC. But Amazon is not providing that feature for the S3 solution.

In the next release I would like to see mapping on the Windows machine. In Windows, there are drives right in volumes. We need to map these Amazon S3 storage to the Windows. That usually is available in the Azure. I would like to have that in the Amazon as well.

We have been using Amazon S3 for just six months as of now.

In terms of stability, it is good and has no issues.

We can scale Amazon S3 for storage. We can increase or scale up and we can scale down. It's easy to manage.

I'm happy where I'm at right now. If we need more storage, we will implement. We'll scale it up.

As of now, I haven't needed to contact support. It is really easy to manage. Even for the small issues, we can just Google the issues and find the solution. For complex issues, we may need to contact them, but as of now, I haven't needed to. I haven't faced any issues like that, so I didn't contact support. We have found that there is enough online documentation regarding S3.

We switched because of the security and scalability. It is highly secure because nobody can access it. Before we had solutions using an FTP and SFTP. That protocol is different and we are now using the S3. We need a shared key and an access secret key to access the particular storage. Without that, we cannot access. We cannot do anything. So security is more important. That's why we switched to Amazon S3.

The initial setup is simple and easy to manage.

It's not actually a deployment. It is a simple step. Within five minutes, we can deploy it.

Our implementation strategy for the solution is based on the user's document files and how much GB they want and how they want to access that particular story's solution. Based on that scenario, I create the S3 bucket on the cloud for the particular users - whoever wants to access that particular S3. I created that particular IM user, the user access for that particular storage. I make an access policy to that particular storage.

Our ROI is good based on our usage. We have multiple users who are accessing this S3 storage.

It's a monthly pricing.

We are happy with the pricing.

Amazon S3 is a great solution.

My advice is to have an implementation strategy based on the user usage.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Amazon S3 an eight.

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 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.

We use it for Dollar Bank to provide them with Telematics and to transport IoT solutions. We host our full term on X-ray and the data we receive from the devices is put into the Amazon S3 bucket by using the Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose. The data in the Amazon S3 bucket is synced into Google BigFix.

The most valuable feature of Amazon S3 is storage, which provides a personal capacity. Besides, we can send an analytical query on the data storage side using Aetna as a bucket. It also allows us to expose the data and provide data access depending on who we want to share it with. We can also specify how we want to sort the data inside, in a numerical format or any other format.

An encryption mechanism and storage optimization could be added.

I have been using Amazon S3 for around four years now.

The product is pretty stable. I do not recollect facing any issues with the solution.

Amazon S3 is pretty scalable. I would give it a nine out of ten.

Amazon’s technical support team is awesome. I have interacted with Microsoft Virtual Technical support but the support provided by Amazon is very good.

Positive

I previously used AWS service and SQS but it had a lot of issues.

The initial setup was simple.

For pricing, I would give it a six or seven out of ten.

The analytical capability can be improved.

I would give the solution an eight 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.

It is mainly for transferring the files we are using from AWS, where we have to transfer the files from AWS to a non-cloud environment.

The security is the most useful aspect of the product.

We've had no issues with stability.

It can scale well. 

You do need to get training on the setup process. It's not straightforward. 

I've been using the solution for four years now 

The solution is stable and reliable. the performance has been good. It's been problem-free. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It can scale well.

We have about 70 people using the product currently.

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

I don't know much about technical support. I don't deal with that aspect. We have a separate team that handles any issues. 

The initial setup isn't easy. We require training to get up to speed. 

I'm not the person that actually handled the deployment.

I don't have any insights into the exact price of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. We've been pretty happy with its capabilities in general. 

It is not for everybody. Potential users can also evaluate Azure as well as AWS, as both are equally good. If you really need a cloud solution, then obviously there are many in the market. The cost is a top pain factor nowadays.

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.

We use Amazon S3 to store data.

Amazon S3 is a storage bucket service with good stability.

The solution's data transfer speed could be improved.

I have been using Amazon S3 for more than three years.

Amazon S3 is an easy-to-scale solution.

Amazon S3 is a cheap solution.

I am using the latest version of Amazon S3. Amazon S3 is a reliable and secure storage bucket service that stores data.

Overall, I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.