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

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Azure NetApp Files boosts performance, eases deployment, reduces downtime, and optimizes costs, despite higher initial expenses than on-premises.
Sentiment score
6.8
Microsoft Azure Object Storage is valued for cost savings, scalability, real-time capabilities, uptime, and transitioning data benefits.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Azure NetApp Files receives mixed feedback on support, praised for integration and ease, but some users seek more specialized assistance.
Sentiment score
7.6
Microsoft Azure Object Storage customer service is generally praised for expertise and responsiveness, despite occasional delays and communication issues.
They have top-notch people.
If I want to change something on my resources or directly access it via the portal, there is not a service level agreement of 100%, and sometimes it's quite difficult to access.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Azure NetApp Files is scalable, flexible, and cost-effective for large setups, but pricing concerns exist for smaller setups.
Sentiment score
8.0
Microsoft Azure Object Storage is highly scalable and easily accommodates extensive data, efficiently meeting diverse organizational needs.
The storage is very scalable, so you can effortlessly scale it.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Azure NetApp Files is rated highly for stability due to its reliability and consistency under increased workloads and migrations.
Sentiment score
7.8
Microsoft Azure Object Storage is stable, with minimal bugs, good performance, but occasional downtime and rare hardware disruptions reported.
 

Room For Improvement

Azure NetApp Files needs improved features, cost efficiency, easier deployment, regional integration, and strengthened security to meet user demands.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage faces high costs, performance issues, complex pricing, slow support, and requires usability and technical improvements.
I would like for them to have more compression so that it can avoid using more storage.
 

Setup Cost

Azure NetApp Files pricing is premium yet justified by features like management, scalability, and flexible licensing options.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage is seen as costly yet flexible, with scalable pricing, more affordable through reserved instances.
It is expensive, especially with NetApp Ultra Storage.
It's a pay-per-use solution and a good idea for proof of concept and value.
 

Valuable Features

Azure NetApp Files enhances performance, scalability, and management with integrated features for backup, recovery, and seamless Azure integration.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage provides scalable, reliable, and secure data management, with flexible integration and strong performance for large files.
The most valuable feature is that the sixty-terabyte database snapshot can be done in less than two to three minutes.
The ability to store everything inside Blob or Object storage and use it for archiving data is beneficial.
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure NetApp Files
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (2nd), Cloud Storage (7th)
Microsoft Azure Object Storage
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Azure NetApp Files is 7.2%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is 1.9%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Public Cloud Storage Services
 

Featured Reviews

AjayKumar13 - PeerSpot reviewer
Fast, reliable, and helps meet our SLAs
The most valuable feature is that the sixty-terabyte database snapshot can be done in less than two to three minutes. It is faster. It is quicker. It is reliable. You don't need to take the snapshot. Snapshots are compressed. It doesn't take storage from the back end. It takes three minutes to do sixty terabytes of the database. You don't have to go to the tape and store it outside, which takes hours and hours. It also uses a lot less of the storage. It's very easy to restore or copy the snapshots to other locations for disaster recovery. There are a lot of benefits. In terms of the snapshot's rapid restore capability, we were testing the load of performance testing, and we needed to rebuild the DR site. If I need to rebuild the DR for a standby database, it takes sixty terabytes to copy onto the another site, which will take at least a day. Now, the snapshot is easy. We just copy the snapshots, and then we do the cross-region application. The snapshots came along with that, and that's where we were able to build the DR site within a few hours rather than days. All together, instead of a four-day process, instead of a day.
Akram Zabat - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides versatile data storage solutions with a simple setup and easy to use
It's similar to S3 for AWS. The ability to store everything inside Blob or Object storage and use it for archiving data is beneficial. For example, you can transform data from relational databases, flatten it, and store it in Object storage to save space within the databases. If I want to save data and do not require legacy access, it's a good solution, for instance, to migrate archives from databases to Object storage. This can also be used for business intelligence purposes. Having a storage solution for data makes it the best place to store it. Azure has its own solution for StatsQ Web Apps.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.
849,475 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
28%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Computer Software Company
23%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
12%
Real Estate/Law 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 Microsoft Azure Object Storage?
I can't share a lot about the costs. I am focused on the technical aspect. It's a pay-per-use solution and a good idea for proof of concept and value. If I want to test a product before deploying i...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Object Storage?
In terms of compliance and security, everything is fine. I do not know of any immediate needs for improvement. However, one potential area for improvement is the replication process. Some clients c...
 

Also Known As

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

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: April 2025.
849,475 professionals have used our research since 2012.