Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

I appreciate the scalability of this solution; it is fully scalable and excellent for certain tasks. One thing I particularly like is the block solution, where files are divided into parts and sent through the firewall in parallel, making it incredibly fast. However, there have been some issues with disconnections, especially when downloading large files. It works perfectly for handling many smaller files, though. The initial storage options, like data lake storage, are diverse and cater to various needs such as big data analytics. As a certified professional architect expert, I find it crucial to understand specific requirements to make the most of these solutions.

Our current Azure setup faces challenges with API connectivity, particularly due to misconfigurations related to changes in Azure Graph. Version disparities in APIs and duplicated features have been flagged by Microsoft, complicating security updates. To enhance efficiency, we need improvements in the configuration process, ensuring a smoother integration of our solutions with Azure services. Additionally, naming and access control have been a bit challenging. While we start by setting private access for files in Blob Storage, syncing becomes an issue when making the Blob solution publicly accessible. It is like the Linux system, where granting access to an upper folder doesn't automatically cover internal files. Unlike Windows, here we need to be more specific about access, making it a bit tricky to manage.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure Object Storage for over ten years.

I would rate the stability as a nine out of ten. It is very stable.

Scalability is one of the strongest aspects of the product. I would rate it as a nine out of ten. We have approximately 10,000 end users of the product.

When it comes to technical support, the UK team has been good and responsive, especially with premium support. However, the Indian support team's performance is not as strong, and I would rate them around five out of ten. Advanced support, on the other hand, tends to be more efficient and timely in assisting.

Neutral

Before Microsoft products, we worked with other vendors like AWS for scalable storage solutions. The choice between AWS and Microsoft Azure largely depends on the client's existing setup – for instance, if they were using AWS before, we often stuck with that. However, in cases where object storage was a priority, we found Microsoft Azure's Blob Storage to be a fitting solution. It is all about adapting to the client's needs and the specifics of their setup.

We haven't been actively maintaining the product from our end. Currently, our technical team comprises 20 engineers.

The pricing for the product can be reasonable, especially for standard usage. I would rate it as a six out of ten in terms of costliness. However, costs can escalate if you are using storage accounts for resource-intensive cases. It is important to assess the nature of your usage and whether a more cost-effective solution exists. 

Using Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the specific use case. For storing numerous small files in the cloud, object storage like this is excellent -persistent, flexible, and generally a good fit. However, for tasks involving deep data analytics or databases, it is more of a case-by-case decision. Evaluating your specific needs and how well the solution aligns with them is crucial. Overall, I would rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

My job title is DevOps Cloud Infra, Cloud Engineer. I am an expert in Microsoft Azure Cloud and telecom. 

Inside the storage account, we use Blob Storage, mostly to store VM data, discs, and logs. We also use FileShare as an additional disc.

The features of Microsoft Azure Object Storage that are most valuable are the ones providing encryption.  Access is more controlled using private endpoints and SaaS token keys. Many access control features exist. 

I also enjoy the size of the Blob Storage, it can store up to three gigs. Another good feature is that we can host 10 static websites.

The solution needs to improve the custom domain integration with static web pages. Even though Blog Storage is providing the static content hosting feature, due to the custom domain availability, the integration is not available. In most cases, we withdraw from that service and use our app service to host our static data feeds.

For future releases, I would like to see the graphical representation of the Blob Storage and the analytics to be in the value review panel so we can go to the cost in subscriptions to get them. We need some graphs with the presentations.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for four years.

The solution has been stable for us.

There has been no issue with scalability with this product when accessing or adding users. However, we noticed that when we generated SaaS, it is at the storage account level. This should be specific to containers. However, whenever we change the container name without changing the whole key, it works.

The solution is specific to the application and not personal usage. For most applications, I see between one or two storage accounts. Most people are logging log storage and diagnostic storage. 

During the initial setup of Microsoft Azure Object Storage, we used File Explore, so it was not that difficult. It was via GUI, which was helpful. One challenge was when using the command CLI because it was new to us. Over time, we are ok with CLI too.

We have seen a positive return on our investment in this solution. We just need to make sure we clean up our storage and services which are not used.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage requires a license. We use a pay-as-you-go model and we have an enterprise subscription model as well.

The solution is not expensive, however, when compared to other enterprise, pay-as-you-go products, it is priced higher. 

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to anyone considering implementing this solution. The UI is easy to manage. When you go inside Blob, it looks just like your local File Explorer. Also, you can feel confident that encryption is there.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten overall.

Azure Object Storage is basically for storing files - if you want to process certain files. It's useful for if you want to keep images or some documents. I use it for that purpose as well.

We like the indexing feature.

The performance has been good. We haven't had any issues. 

The security has been fine.

Everything we need is already pretty much there.

It is very scalable. 

Technical support has been excellent. 

We are not missing any features. 

We would like it if we did not have to use another encryption solution to encrypt the storage. 

We've been using the solution for a couple of years. 

It's reliable and it performs well. it's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's scalable. We can increase storage as required. 

Azure Object Storage is mapped with a user. It's mapped to the server for storing files and all. So IOPS storage, probably we can talk 20,000 to 30,000 IOPS.

We monitor the usage based on there being increases.

Technical support is very good and very sound. 

Positive

There's not really an installation. It's a mapping solution. It's on the cloud. 

We have a common cloud team. They do any maintenance. It's a common cloud team who provisions the server, who manages the storage, who assigns the storage to the server. They do everything. We don't have a separate team.

I can't speak to the exact licensing costs. 

As a cloud-based solution, we are always on the latest version. It stays up-to-date.

I'd recommend the product to other users and organizations. 

Overall, I would rate the product ten out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for backups, archiving, and SFTP storage.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an easy-to-use and stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution. The cost management part is a little complex, and if we don't configure it right, it can be pretty expensive.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for a few years.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. Around 200 users are using the solution in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

The solution’s technical support should be improved.

We have previously used different solutions. We switched to Microsoft Azure Object Storage because most of our landscape is on Azure, and it's easier to have everything in one place than using a different vendor. So, it's convenient for us.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution can be deployed in one or two weeks.

The solution's cost is on a pay-per-use basis.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten.

It's a platform we're currently adapting for various scenarios like development, deployment, and security needs for new solutions. 

The performance of the solution is good. It’s also good in terms of Information Security (IS) and structured services.

I have been using this solution for the past three years.

The solution is stable. It works fine for us.

We plan to increase the further usage depending on the customer's requirements. 

The operations team handles the support. If they need anything, they deal with it directly, and I haven't heard any complaints.

The initial setup is straightforward. It’s deployed on the cloud.

Our storage capacity is cheap because we have a committed discount. 

I recommend it. However, it depends on the specific use cases and existing environments. For new users, especially, it is a good start. 

However, those with several years of industry experience should thoroughly analyze requirements to determine which suits them better. 

Overall, I rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The solution can be used to share files and folders.

The product has good accessibility.

The stability could be improved.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight and a half out of ten.

The tool is scalable. I rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten. Around 100 technical support team members, including support engineers, support analysts, and service delivery managers, use the solution in our organization.

I have contacted the support team for a couple of issues. The team is knowledgeable.

We were using the on-premise solution NAS provided by Dell.

The setup is straightforward.

The tool is worth the money.

The solution is expensive. However, we can choose to get a budget-friendly license. The vendor should offer extensions on the licenses. People are still working on on-premise servers. If we want them to move to the cloud, the vendors must provide competitive prices. We have a couple of small to medium businesses. The solution is not affordable for small businesses.

The vendor must provide more information on how the tool helps users. Many of our clients do not know the solutions provided by the vendor. Though the information is available on the website, most customers do not understand the technical aspects. A better way to explain the tool's uses would be through pictures. Overall, I rate the product an eight and a half out of ten.

We use the product for all kinds of images and static data. 

The tool's most valuable feature is performance. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage needs to increase its response time from 25,000 per second to 40,000 or 50,000. 

I have been using the solution for nine years. 

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has 100 users for Microsoft Azure Object Storage. 

The solution's support is good enough for us. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage's deployment is straightforward. 

We deployed the solution in-house. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is not expensive. 

I rate the product a ten out of ten. 

Our primary use case for the solution is data storage and on-premises backups to the cloud.

The initial setup is not easy to understand and the scalability can be improved.

We have been using the solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. I rate it a five out of ten.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate them a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I rate the initial setup a five out of ten.

We have deployed the solution on-premises.

Licensing fess are charged monthly.

I rate the solution a six out of ten. The solution is good but the scalability and initial setup process can be improved.