Microsoft Azure File Storage vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud comparison

Microsoft and NetApp are both solutions in the Public Cloud Storage Services category. Microsoft is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.2, while NetApp is ranked #18. Microsoft holds a 10.8% mindshare in PCSS, compared to NetApp’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 97% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Microsoft Azure File Storage

Read 48 Microsoft Azure File Storage reviews

3,050 Views
2,577 Comparison Views

97% willing to recommend

NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...

Read 3 NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud reviews

275 Views
137 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Microsoft Azure File Storage

NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

Microsoft Azure File Storage and NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud are two prominent cloud storage solutions. Users praise the scalability and integration features of NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud, yet Microsoft Azure File Storage is often highlighted for its robust security and cost-effectiveness.

Features: Microsoft Azure File Storage is valued for its seamless integration with other Microsoft services and strong security protocols. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is appreciated for its high performance, scalability, and ease of use in multi-cloud environments.

Room for Improvement: Users of Microsoft Azure File Storage suggest improving its speed and reducing downtime. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud users recommend enhancing the backup options and lowering costs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Azure File Storage users find the deployment process straightforward with the advantage of extensive documentation and responsive customer service. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is highlighted for its quick setup and intuitive operation, but some users report delays in customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Azure File Storage is praised for its cost-effective pricing model and lower initial setup costs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud, though potentially more expensive, is perceived as offering higher ROI due to its advanced features and performance.

To learn more, read our detailed Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Azure File Storage

Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...

Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services

18th

Average Rating

9.4

Reviews Sentiment

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (15th), Cloud Storage (18th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Microsoft Azure File Storage is 10.8%, down from 13.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud is 0.7%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Public Cloud Storage Services

Featured Reviews

PrashanthR

Lead Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Seamlessly streamlines document processing with advanced file storage and OCR integration

We need to store data over there. We process documents through Kofax Time is a major benefit, as well as ease of processing. With configuration, it happens quite easily, and we can finish tasks early. File storage is complemented by OCR with Azure Cognitive Service. This enhances the processing…

Read full review

John Wheeler

President/COO at ChartDoc

Tools and dashboard enable us to view our peak loads and to tune the system as we go, reducing costs

Confidential Computing is really the key for us because of the security requirements for HIPAA compliance. With HIPAA compliance, there are policies and rules in place on the ability to look at a patient's data. There are rules around security, encryption, and decryption on any part of that data. When you put in the data, it is encrypted when it goes to storage, and when you pull the data back, it has to be decrypted. And you have to have two-phase authentication built into that. The Confidential Computing adds another layer of security to the storage infrastructure, which is pretty slick stuff. The NetApp service's high availability is very important when it comes to upscale and downscale. Our system is a digital system so it requires immediate response for telemedicine. When your patients are going through a telemedicine session, you need the video to work properly and respond in a timely manner, and the doctors are actually taking notes regarding that specific patient session. In terms of its storage snapshot efficiencies, the service is highly efficient. We are only doing things in small batches right now because we have not converted all of the data, but we have tested them in the Google Cloud and they work efficiently.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its simplicity of use is most valuable. It's easy to start working with it and understand it. It's easier to transfer files between different users. I'm able to move files from my device to my manager's device without any issues or without facing any problems in between."

"General user familiarity with Office 365 products make adopting this solution easy to adopt in production."

"It is a scalable product since it is a cloud solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."

"Implementing Microsoft Azure has meant that we are using the same solution as our customers who use Azure Public Cloud. This allows us to integrate our application, as well as provide the solution to them."

"I like that we can copy and download data using Azure. It's not just for file storage; we can also use it for large data sets or to host static web applications."

"It is a good service for file storage."

"The storage in this solution is excellent."

"File storage is complemented by OCR with Azure Cognitive Service."

More Microsoft Azure File Storage pros

"Storage was taking up maybe 10 to 20% of my life at the startup, and now it takes up zero. I was personally running all the infrastructure for the company. Now that we've moved to NetApp, I don't have to worry about making sure it's up and running. It's made my life personally much better."

"In terms of its storage snapshot efficiencies, the service is highly efficient. We are only doing things in small batches right now because we have not converted all of the data, but we have tested them in the Google Cloud and they work efficiently."

"High availability is very important to us because we have a production environment. High availability is the highest priority for us to continue keeping our systems running."

Cons

"One thing that Azure File Storage could help us with is some kind of impact assessment. When we talk to some of our larger customers who have between 500 and 1,000 applications, we normally do an assessment of all these applications and then tell them which ones are ready to be lifted and shifted, and which ones need to re-architected. It would really help if Azure File Storage could come up with a better way to give estimations of the total investment required, including all costs incurred during the migration."

"I would like to see more updates around File Storage."

"The security could always be modernized."

"It’s a challenge to find the right support person."

"Microsoft Azure File Storage is not that scalable. Once you reach the boundaries, you need to migrate to another solution."

"The pricing and technical support could be better."

"It's a bit complex to set up. Other than that, there is nothing to improve."

"I have had issues migrating my data to another subscription."

More Microsoft Azure File Storage cons

"It would help if they increased the area in which they employ artificial intelligence, by starting to do assessments on the environments, to project those. They're not using any AI tools, currently, on the administrative side."

"The user interface has room for improvement. We would like this service to be more integrated with Azure, which is very easy to manage and use. It was easy to create volumes and add capacity pools in Azure, but in Google Cloud, we can only create separate volumes. We need more management or configuration options in the user interface."

"I would like for the sales team to get in contact more often and let me know what I should be doing next, what we should be doing about new features. So it would be nice if I heard a little bit more from him. From a technology perspective, I have no complaints."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. It's not cheap."

"Microsoft Azure File Storage is expensive."

"We have Microsoft Azure File Storage's enterprise license."

"For one terabyte of data, we are spending about 150 Euro every month."

"There are fewer hidden costs involved compared to other solutions, and when our customer is already a Microsoft partner, they typically have access to more affordable fees."

"The licensing cost for Microsoft Azure File Storage comes with an agreement from Microsoft."

"The pricing is usually dependent on your storage requirements. Overall, I believe Microsoft Azure File Storage's price is reasonable."

"The solution is a bit pricey compared to AWS and Google."

More Microsoft Azure File Storage pricing and cost advice

"We don't need so much space, and there is no option to pay as we go or use just what we need. Also, the only way to increase performance is by increasing the level of the service."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Educational Organization

60%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?

Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...

See all answers

What do you like most about Microsoft Azure File Storage?

The product is a reliable cloud solution.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure File Storage?

The price is almost the same as the competition. I would rate it three or three and a half out of ten on the pricing scale.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs Microsoft Azure File Storage

Compared 48% of the time

Azure NetApp Files vs Microsoft Azure File Storage

Compared 20% of the time

Wasabi vs Microsoft Azure File Storage

Compared 15% of the time

Amazon S3 vs Microsoft Azure File Storage

Compared 7% of the time

Amazon S3 Glacier vs Microsoft Azure File Storage

Compared 6% of the time

More Microsoft Azure File Storage Competitors

Google Cloud Storage vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Compared 57% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Compared 43% of the time

More NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Azure File Storage

March 2025

Download Microsoft Azure File Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

March 2025

NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud report

Download NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud product report

Also Known As

MS Azure File Storage

CVS for Google Cloud, NetApp CVS for Google Cloud, Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud, Cloud Volumes Service for GCP, NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for GCP

Overview

Fully managed file shares that use the standard SMB 3.0 protocol

Key scenarios:

Share data across on-premises and cloud servers
Migrate file share-based applications to the cloud with no code changes
Integrate modern applications with File storage
Simplify hosting for high availability workload data

Microsoft

NetApp^® Cloud Volumes for Google Cloud is a fully managed or self-managed file service that is integrated into Google Cloud with the multiprotocol support, performance, and availability required to run business-critical applications. It is designed to provide massively parallel shared access to thousands of Google Compute Engine and Google Kubernetes Engine instances, enabling your applications to achieve high levels of aggregate throughput and IOPS with consistent low latencies.

Use cases. Customers can use the service to migrate existing enterprise applications to Google Cloud. Other use cases include hybrid deployments, multicloud mobility, big data analytics, web serving and content management, application development and testing, media and entertainment workflows, database backups, container storage, and more.

Features. Multiple performance tiers, standard file interfaces, advanced data management, metered service, fully managed service, native service experience, integrated support, and integrated billing.

For more information:

NetApp: https://cloud.netapp.com/cloud-volumes-service-for-gcp

Google: https://cloud.google.com/netapp

NetApp

Sample Customers

Talon, Camden

Atos, Bandwidth, Wuxi NextCode

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

March 2025

Free Report: Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud report.

See our list of best Public Cloud Storage Services vendors.

We monitor all Public Cloud Storage Services reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.