Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS Storage Gateway vs NetApp Cloud Backup comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Storage Gateway
Ranking in Cloud Storage Gateways
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NetApp Cloud Backup
Ranking in Cloud Storage Gateways
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (28th), Deduplication Software (10th), Disk Based Backup Systems (4th), Cloud Backup (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Cloud Storage Gateways category, the mindshare of AWS Storage Gateway is 11.6%, down from 16.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Cloud Backup is 1.4%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Storage Gateways
 

Featured Reviews

Sumit Mundik - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides really good documentation so that information is easily accessible
When we opened a ticket for AWS Storage Gateway, the support team was responsive but could not resolve the issue. When we sent a file from MOVEit to AWS Storage Gateway, it sent the file twice. We were not able to figure out why it was doing it. In the AWS S3 bucket, you will find an option called versioning. If a file is sent multiple times, the versioning feature will increase the version one by one. For example, if I send the same file thrice, it will have version one, version two, and the original file. Likewise, they have the versioning. Whenever we send file one, the files are getting duplicated. When we opened a ticket, even the AWS team could not figure it out. They just told us the configuration might be wrong on the AWS Storage Gateway side, and we need to look at it. After that, we also did not follow up because the destination team changed the architecture on their end. Instead of running the Lambda function immediately when the file arrived, they added a sleep time of four to five minutes and then started processing the file.
Abbasi Poonawala - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplifies our backups with an agentless backup manager, but needs better integration with in-house applications
One area that can be improved is around how we define the different KPIs. In particular, the business KPIs. I have my own in-house application for the business KPIs, so for example, with our policies around retention, which is a period of seven years, I have to read these parameters from other applications and I need them to integrate well. NetApp Cloud Backup Manager should help to get this integrated seamlessly with other applications, meaning that it will populate the data around the different parameters. These parameters could be things like the retention period, the backup schedule, or anything. It might be an ITSM ticket, where it's a workflow that is triggered somewhere, and the ITSM ticket has been created for a particular environment like my development environment, an INT environment, or a UAT environment. This kind of process needs to integrate well with my own application, and there are some challenges. For example, if it allows for consuming of RESTful APIs, that's how we will usually integrate, but there are certain challenges when it comes to integrating with our own application around KPIs, whether it's business KPIs or technical KPIs. What I want is to populate that data from my own applications. So we have have the headroom in the KPI, and we have the throughput, the volumes, the transactions per second, etc., which are all defined. And these are the global parameters. They affect all the lines of business. It's a central application that is consumed by most of the lines of business and it's all around the KPIs. Earlier, it used to be based on Quest Foglight, which is an application that was taken up and customized. It was made in-house as a core service, and used as a core building block. But our use of Quest Foglight has become a bit outdated. There is no more support available, and it's been there as a kind of legacy application for more than ten years now in the organization. And now it get down to the question: Is this an investment or will we need to divest ourselves of it? So there has to be an option to remediate it out. In that case, one possibility is to integrate the existing application and it gets completely decommissioned. Here it would help if there were some better ways of defining or handling the KPIs in the Cloud Manager, so that most of the parameters are not defined directly by me. Those will be the global parameters that are defined across all the lines of business. There are some integration challenges when it comes to this, and I've spoken to the support team who say they have the REST APIs, but the integration still isn't going as smooth as it could be. Most of the time, when things aren't working out, we need dedicated engineers to be put in for the entire integration. And then it becomes more of a challenge on top of everything. So if the Cloud Manager isn't being fed all the kinds of parameters from the backup strategy around the ITSM and incident tickets, or backup schedules, or anything related to the backup policies, then it takes a while. Ideally, I would want it to be read directly from our in-house applications. And this is more to do with our kind of product processes; that is, it's not our own choice to decide. The risk management team has mandated this as part of the compliance, that we have to strictly enforce the KPIs, the headroom, and the rest of the global parameters which are defined for the different lines of business. So if my retention period changes from seven years to, let's say, 10 years or 15 years, then those rules have to be strictly enforced. Ultimately, we would like better support for ITSM. The ITSM tools like ServiceNow or BMC Remedy are already adding multiple new features, so they have to be upgraded over a period of time, and that means NetApp has to provision for that and factor it in. Some of the AI-based capabilities are there now, and those things have to be incorporated somehow. One last thing is that NetApp could provide better flash storage. Since they're already on block storage and are doing well in that segment, it makes sense that they will have to step up when it comes to flash array storage and so on. I have been evaluating NetApp's flash array storage solutions versus some others like Toshiba's flash array and Fujitsu's storage array, which are quite cost-effective.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It's a cloud storage solution, which makes it quite flexible. If you have one terabyte today and need ten tomorrow, it's not a problem."
"The solution has low latency."
"The stability is probably the most valuable aspect of the product."
"The most effective features are the asynchronous server functionality, which improves latency and stabilization. I also like the distributed data capabilities for data management."
"The solution's most valuable features stem from its ease of use, including how easy it is to set up, configure, and manage the tool."
"The solution's documentation is really good, and any information is easily accessible."
"AWS Storage Gateway is used when there's a high requirement for storage and the company has their goal to move to the cloud and they are not comfortable having it in the data centers. They want the data to move to the cloud. We propose storage services that give them flexibility. They don't have to manage their data centers by themselves because it is being managed by Amazon or Microsoft. They do not have to worry about security and vulnerability issues. That is a strategy that companies can find value in and choose a cloud service."
"The solution gives us the ability to move large amounts of data to the cloud and it gives us on-premises connectivity. Additionally, the storage can be shared from the cloud to on-premise."
"One feature that works well for us is that the Cloud Manager is a completely agentless solution. There's a similar dashboard on both the versions for on-premises and the cloud, and with reference to the Cloud Manager, it's a little faster because there's nothing to be installed as such. Being agentless, it doesn't require any agent to be deployed on the targets where the backups are triggered."
"Scalability is very good."
"I rate the scalability a ten out of ten...It has a great impact on our business because we have the infrastructure deployed globally on four continents around the world."
"NetApp Cloud Backup performance is good and they have beneficial technology."
 

Cons

"AWS Storage Gateway's cost can be an issue."
"AWS Storage Gateway could improve by having different kinds of storage. For example, allowing all kinds of data, whether it's images or structure, not structure data. This would be great."
"We've had issues with bandwidth in the past, and we don't know where the bottlenecks are. We're not sure if it's on the AWS side or with the clients or the configuration in between. There's no visibility."
"Initial setup could be simplified and that would make the user experience better."
"Its interface could be easier to use."
"The solution's setup is not easy and takes time to complete."
"Data migration and collection could be made easier for improvements - there's still work to be done there."
"The security could improve in the solution."
"Integration and reporting could be improved."
"NetApp has a nasty way of dealing with the license for the product's on-premises virtual NetApp appliance that you need in your whole architecture, and it is not directly linked to NetApp Cloud Backup."
"NetApp Cloud Backup could improve by being easier to use. Veeam solution is easier to use."
"One area that can be improved is around how we define the different KPIs. In particular, the business KPIs. I have my own in-house application for the business KPIs, so for example, with our policies around retention, which is a period of seven years, I have to read these parameters from other applications and I need them to integrate well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company needs to get monthly licenses to use the tool."
"Licensing is paid monthly. Pricing is in the mid-range - not too high or too low."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
"AWS Storage Gateway is reasonably priced. The price depends on how much you need. The whole synopse model comes into the picture for the cloud where it depends on how many instances per VM and the price will increase. It's a reasonable price because with all the competition around the price has to be competitive. It's not very costly."
"We pay a monthly license."
"There is a monthly subscription for the use of this solution."
"Our usage depends on the number of licenses we have. On the cloud, it's a pay-to-use kind of model which suits our needs well. Once we have the Cloud Manager installed, the licensing process is okay, regardless of whether we're running backups in the cloud or on-premises. Sometimes, we have to restrict the number of users as per the contractual agreement and in this case we simply cut down on the licensing."
"NetApp Cloud Backup has a subscription-based model and it is paid annually."
"Cost could be lower."
"If one is not cost-effective and ten is a highly cost-effective product, I rate the tool as a three. The tool is not so cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage Gateways solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
14%
Retailer
6%
Non Profit
5%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Is AWS Storage Gateway only suitable for AWS?
No, I'm pretty sure you can't. This is a service of AWS and so you're probably only able to use it there. I haven't used any of the Amazon Web Services personally but from what I know, they usually...
Is AWS Storage Gateway easy to use?
Hi, yes, I think it is very easy to use. You can install it rather quickly, and then when you start using it, it's all explained to you on the native platform's website. I think the best thing abou...
Is AWS Storage Gateway free for users of AWS?
No, this service is not provided for free by AWS. If you visit the AWS website and you look for AWS Storage Gateway pricing, you'll be sent to a very helpful calculating page. There, based on what ...
What's the 3-2-1 data protection that NetApp Cloud Backup offers?
Hi, the 3-2-1 data protection from this product is related to a backup strategy with the same name. I'm assuming you don't know about it so I'll tell you in a few words. In its essence, this backup...
Is NetApp Cloud Backup secure for backup?
I've just started using NetApp Cloud Backup but my initial reason behind choosing it in the first place is that they advertise their high-security approach. So basically, they give you ransomware p...
Is NetApp Cloud Backup expensive in your opinion?
It depends on how much exactly you count as expensive. For me, NetApp Cloud Backup isn't too expensive. I say that based on the services it provides and on the way it provides them. I think it's im...
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

King, NEWLOG Consulting, Southern Oregon University, Religare Enterprises Limited, TGIX CloudCover, Moderna Therapeutics, JustGiving, VeriStor
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Storage Gateway vs. NetApp Cloud Backup and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.