Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo

Top 10 Microsoft Azure Object Storage Alternatives

Vendor: Microsoft
4.0 out of 5
162 followers
Post review

Top Microsoft Azure Object Storage Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Microsoft Azure Object Storage based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Amazon S3, and Azure NetApp Files. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Microsoft Azure Object Storage surpasses its competitors by offering scalable cloud storage with seamless data access, advanced security features, robust data redundancy, and integration with powerful analytics, enhancing efficiency and reliability for developers and enterprises.

Microsoft Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Microsoft, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)
4.2 out of 5

Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) provides simple, scalable file storage for use with Amazon EC2 instances in the AWS Cloud. Amazon EFS is easy to use and offers a simple interface that allows you to create and configure file systems quickly and easily. With Amazon EFS, storage capacity is elastic, growing and shrinking automatically as you add and remove files, so your applications have the storage they need, when they need it.

Download Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage Report
It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage.
The solution's price is mid-ranged.
View comparison
Pricing
It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage.
The solution's price is mid-ranged.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Amazon S3
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Amazon S3
4.4 out of 5
Amazon S3 excels with its scalability, reliability, and security, making it suitable for extensive storage needs. In comparison, Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers advanced analytics, integrating well with Microsoft services. Amazon S3 could enhance cost predictability, while Azure simplifies pricing.
Download Amazon S3 vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage Report
Amazon S3 setup cost is highly affordable, while Microsoft Azure Object Storage requires a higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Amazon S3 setup cost is highly affordable, while Microsoft Azure Object Storage requires a higher initial investment.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Azure NetApp Files
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Azure NetApp Files
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers easy scalability and cost-effectiveness. In comparison, Azure NetApp Files has higher performance and seamless on-premise integration. Azure NetApp Files requires improved cost transparency, while Microsoft Azure Object Storage could benefit from faster data retrieval and more intuitive management tools.
Download Azure NetApp Files vs. Microsoft Azure Object Storage Report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has a relatively low setup cost compared to Azure NetApp Files, which entails a higher initial investment for implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has a relatively low setup cost compared to Azure NetApp Files, which entails a higher initial investment for implementation.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Wasabi
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Wasabi
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage is known for high scalability and strong security with seamless Microsoft integration, making it suitable for diverse environments. In comparison, Wasabi excels in high performance and affordability, making it appealing for cost-conscious buyers. Both have unique strengths fitting different tech needs.
Download Microsoft Azure Object Storage vs. Wasabi Report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has a higher setup cost, while Wasabi offers a lower setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has a higher setup cost, while Wasabi offers a lower setup cost.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers scalability and seamless Microsoft services integration. In comparison, Nutanix Unified Storage provides robust data management and multi-protocol support. Tech buyers might choose Microsoft Azure Object Storage for its extensive integration, while preferring Nutanix Unified Storage for its intuitive management and operational efficiency.
Download Microsoft Azure Object Storage vs. Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) Report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has zero setup costs, whereas Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) requires a significant initial investment. This difference highlights Azure's cost-effective startup compared to NUS.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has zero setup costs, whereas Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) requires a significant initial investment. This difference highlights Azure's cost-effective startup compared to NUS.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Zadara
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Zadara
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers extensive integration and robust security. In comparison, Zadara excels in high performance and customizable storage. Azure’s pricing is complex but offers extensive services, while Zadara provides high ROI despite higher setup costs. Azure ensures smooth deployment; Zadara offers flexible options.
Download Microsoft Azure Object Storage vs. Zadara Report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has relatively low setup costs compared to Zadara, which tends to have higher setup costs. Zadara offers more customizable setup options, whereas Microsoft Azure provides a more straightforward, cost-effective setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has relatively low setup costs compared to Zadara, which tends to have higher setup costs. Zadara offers more customizable setup options, whereas Microsoft Azure provides a more straightforward, cost-effective setup.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Oracle Cloud Object Storage
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage integrates well with other Microsoft services and excels in ease of use. In comparison, Oracle Cloud Object Storage offers advanced analytics and cost efficiency, which can attract tech buyers seeking superior data management and competitive pricing.
Download Microsoft Azure Object Storage vs. Oracle Cloud Object Storage Report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers a straightforward setup with moderate initial costs, whereas Oracle Cloud Object Storage provides a competitive price with a more complex setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers a straightforward setup with moderate initial costs, whereas Oracle Cloud Object Storage provides a competitive price with a more complex setup.
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Microsoft Azure Object Storage Logo
Oracle Database Backup Service
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Azure Object Storage excels in scalability, Azure integration, and cost management. In comparison, Oracle Database Backup Service offers robust data protection and strong Oracle integration. Azure's ease of deployment stands out, whereas Oracle users benefit from its dedicated customer service and long-term ROI.
Download Microsoft Azure Object Storage vs. Oracle Database Backup Service Report
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has a higher setup cost compared to Oracle Database Backup Service, making Microsoft Azure Object Storage potentially more expensive initially.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Azure Object Storage has a higher setup cost compared to Oracle Database Backup Service, making Microsoft Azure Object Storage potentially more expensive initially.

Related categories

Public Cloud Storage Services
Cloud Storage
File and Object Storage