Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Microsoft Azure File Storage based on the interviews we conducted with its users.
The top alternative solutions include Google Cloud Storage, Amazon S3 Glacier, and Amazon S3.
The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.
Microsoft Alternatives Report
Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Microsoft, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Google Cloud Storage often stands out for its competitive pricing and extensive flexibility. In comparison, Microsoft Azure File Storage offers advanced features and strong integration with other Microsoft services. Google Cloud Storage ensures fast retrieval times, while Microsoft Azure File Storage provides robust security and deployment support.
The setup cost for Google Cloud Storage is minimal compared to the more substantial initial investment required for Microsoft Azure File Storage. Google Cloud Storage offers a more cost-effective entry point, while Microsoft Azure File Storage demands higher upfront costs.
The setup cost for Google Cloud Storage is minimal compared to the more substantial initial investment required for Microsoft Azure File Storage. Google Cloud Storage offers a more cost-effective entry point, while Microsoft Azure File Storage demands higher upfront costs.
Amazon S3 Glacier excels in cold data storage efficiency and cost-effectiveness, ideal for infrequent access. In comparison, Microsoft Azure File Storage stands out with seamless integration and better accessibility for regular data interactions. Users appreciate Azure’s comprehensive feature set for managing and sharing files across environments.
Amazon S3 excels in scalability and integration. In comparison, Microsoft Azure File Storage offers superior data management. Amazon S3 is robust in capacity and speed, while Microsoft Azure File Storage integrates seamlessly with Microsoft services. Pricing models are flexible with Amazon S3, whereas Microsoft Azure File Storage provides competitive pricing.
Microsoft Azure File Storage excels in simplicity, scalability, and integration with Microsoft services such as Active Directory and SMB protocol support. In comparison, Azure NetApp Files offers superior performance and extensive protocol support, making it ideal for enterprises with high-performance requirements and demanding workloads.
Microsoft Azure File Storage excels in customer support and straightforward deployment, making it a cost-effective choice for organizations with tight budgets. In comparison, Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) offers comprehensive features, robust data protection, and multi-cloud capabilities, making it suitable for enterprises seeking advanced functionalities.
Microsoft Azure File Storage offers seamless integration with other Microsoft services, advanced security, and flexibility for large data volumes. In comparison, Wasabi provides high-speed performance, simplicity, and cost-efficiency, making it more attractive for straightforward storage needs and quick setup.
Google Cloud Storage Nearline offers efficient long-term storage and seamless integration with Google Cloud services. In comparison, Microsoft Azure File Storage provides superior file syncing and high availability. Google emphasizes cost efficiency and deployment ease, while Azure prioritizes documentation, support, and perceived ROI.
Microsoft Azure File Storage integrates seamlessly with Azure services and offers efficient file sharing capabilities, making it a cost-effective choice. In comparison, Oracle Database Backup Service provides reliable, secure backup and recovery tailored for Oracle databases, justifying its investment with advanced, specialized features.
Oracle offers general purpose and high memory compute shapes to provide the full power of the Oracle Database in the cloud for any type of application. You can use all standard network connections and have administrative control.
