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

Azure NetApp Files vs Microsoft Azure Object Storage comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure NetApp Files
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (3rd), Cloud Storage (8th)
Microsoft Azure Object Storage
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 7.1%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is 2.0%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Public Cloud Storage Services
 

Featured Reviews

We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision
Ease of provisioning: It's very easy to consume the product. We are not doing this manually. We are doing this programmatically, but it's very easy and seamless for us to consume it. It's like any other Azure component. It's very good and well-integrated into the ecosystem of Azure. There is tight integration. We didn't need to learn anything new. It feels like we know everything already, although under the hood, the product is something totally different. However, it seemed very easy for us. 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 performance is quite good, so it's almost on par with the make of SSD storage. It provides a quick, scalable storage solution. We were looking for a supported solution. We didn't want to experiment. We didn't want to look for open source, though we did look into open source initially before we bumped into NetApp. We figured out that adding yet another unknown into our system was not going to bring us benefit. It would be another problem that we would need to tackle. So, we said, "Okay, let's look for a supported solution," and NetApp was one of them. Then, we turned to NetApp.
DanBryant - PeerSpot reviewer
Good SLAs and better suited for large files like videos and anything in the multi-gigabyte range
Support's not great, but Microsoft products are much more industrial strength and enterprise ready than any other services out there. That's why we use them and learn how to use them, even when they change things without much advanced notice. We proactively educate ourselves on how to use it once it's changed. I don't pay for premium support. But at a basic level, Microsoft products can be pretty aggravating to work with. I prefer not to rate it. I don't think a number would accurately describe the experience. We still use it, and it's still valuable. But the experience with Microsoft products, from storage to Teams and everything else, can be quite aggravating.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"We use Azure NetApp Files mainly for backup."
"I like the SnapMirror feature in Azure NetApp Files. It helps me create backups with snapshots and makes data recovery and compression."
"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."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers hassle-free usage. It is easy to configure."
"Technical support is excellent."
"We can do data queries easily."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is its ease of use."
"AzCopy is probably the best feature. It's a scripting app or a scripting function. Whether it's a Linux batch or a PowerShell script, you can essentially just send a file via a line of code with a specific key."
"The file retention and object retention have been most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Object Storage for us is its simplicity and reliability as a storage solution."
"The product has good accessibility."
 

Cons

"The solution needs to improve it's ABS environment."
"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."
"I don’t like the solution’s configuration and support."
"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 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 were looking for a clustered solution that has over-complicated things because we had it in AWS, which is Amazon. There was a solution for clustered NetApp. That meant there would be two NetApps that were not clustered because there was no solution for a cluster. We would like there to be an HA cluster solution."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."
"The solution can be quite slow."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage needs to improve stability and cloud user interface."
"I think if the tool puts features that only exist in the easy copying area through Azure Storage Explorer, so introducing such features in Microsoft Azure Object Storage can make it more user-friendly."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution."
"The password retrieval process was very difficult."
"A more comprehensive training option is needed."
"In future releases, I would add something like a better lifecycle management system, and for integration purposes, I would add some stuff related to newer concepts like data products and databases. I would like to have a seamless flow between those things."
"They could improve AI and ML-based modules. They should add more modules based on artificial intelligence and machine learning. Pricing is a little bit tricky with Microsoft Azure. They do provide the estimates, but it is not easy to guess the exact amount that we will be billed after a month or two because it is based on usage. This is a little confusing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing depends on your scaling and consumption."
"The licensing fees for this solution vary, ranging from a single shelf to a full suite."
"NetApp is a premium offering, so it's not a cheap product, but it is well-priced. It combines a couple of properties which customers like us are willing to pay. Could it be cheaper? Yes, but if you combine fully supported, fully managed, easily provisioned, scalable, and quick all in one product, it's a good selling point. You can ask a lot of money for all these. If you have a use case like we do, it's a perfect match. It's like the Porsche of storage solutions in the cloud. It is totally worth the cost."
"It is expensive in small environments, which could be better. The reason is the four terabyte minimum. A one terabyte minimum would be better."
"The price of Azure NetApp Files could be better."
"Our pricing has not been determined because we are still waiting on additional features."
"In the cloud, pricing depends on how you manage it. It's not necessarily cheap, but it's all about optimizing charges and showing the cost back. So, it's more about managing the expenses rather than being inherently expensive or cheap."
"We are currently on a pay-as-you-go model with the storage that we use."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an expensive solution."
"I think we pay per bit as per usage. There is a billing pattern for the subscription, and we get a monthly bill. I've seen that happen over there. I haven't seen any fixed costs. It always depends on what we're using and how much the servers are running. The breakdown appears on the bill."
"Object Storage is competitively priced."
"Additional costs depend on the data and complexity of the project."
"Object Storage is cost-effective, and our license fees are about $200 per month."
"The cost should be reduced to make it more competitive."
"Microsoft Azure Object Storage is not expensive."
"The solution is not affordable for small businesses."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
33%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Computer Software Company
22%
Retailer
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Azure NetApp Files compare to NetApp ONTAP?
Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology. The platform combines the file capabilities of Azure and NetApp to move critical file-based applications to ...
What do you like most about Azure NetApp Files?
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 ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure NetApp Files?
The solution's competitors like Oracle or Amazon are not cheap either. I think we're paying two million dollars for Azure NetApp Files. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is exp...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Object Storage?
The pricing is higher than CNC. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the pricing as six to seven.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Object Storage?
The deployment process needs improvement, and it requires a lot of expertise to use and to utilize it.
 

Also Known As

NetApp ANF, ANF
Microsoft Azure Blob Storage, Azure Object Storage, MS Azure Object Storage
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Restaurant Magic
Umbraco, Xbox, Radioshack, 343 Industries, McKesson
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure NetApp Files vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.