Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

We use this solution to store images and Excel files.

We used to use an on premise file system and the maintenance of on a premise server is difficult. This is why we migrated to Azure storage. Using this solution has reduced our maintenance time and cost. 

The file retention and object retention have been most valuable.

Uploading files from the UI has presented some issues. When editing work and once you delete a file, it takes some time to recreate the same file. If I have an ABC file and if I delete it and I want to recreate the file again with the same name, it is not immediate. There is at a least 30 seconds or one-minute delay.

We have been using this solution for three years.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. We have specifically configured it for scalability. 

We have reached out for technical support but not directly related to Azure Storage. We had a Logic app and we tried to connect it to Azure Storage. They provided a solution but it was not a limitation of Azure Storage and rather a limitation of the Logic app.

I would rate the support for this solution a nine out of ten. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. We had no issues with the deployment because we used GitHub Action, Azure DevOps, terraforms as well as AMS scripts to build and deploy. Deployment did not take more than a minute.

We have used a pricing calculator to find out the general pricing for our clients. 

I would recommend this solution to those who already have an on-premise file system and who want to migrate to a cloud-native solution. This solution offers scalability at a lower cost and additional benefits compared with an on-premise file server.

The storage account is one of the primary components in all implementations, including cloud implementations. It is a common resource in Azure.

We mostly work with Blob Storage, and it is a very good resource for unstructured storage. Blob Storage is one of the best resources in Azure for storing unstructured data such as files, video files, audio files, and Excel files. Currently, Blob Storage is the cheapest and best solution, with very good features for unstructured data.

One of the things that are currently important is consistency. To achieve this, another database called Cosmos DB is available. We want to have a similar consistency to the one in Cosmos DB but at a cheaper price. Although Cosmos DB is known to be expensive, it has a guaranteed consistency level of 99.99%. I want Microsoft to explore how they can provide the same consistency level as Cosmos DB but at a lower cost. Speaking of consistency, we are currently using GRS or GZRS as our storage redundancy types. It would be great if we could achieve the same guaranteed consistency level as with Cosmos DB. It would be of great use if we could apply the same approach to our storage account.

Currently, I do not have any suggestions regarding Blob Storage. The storage account allows for storing VHD, which is a type of blob, along with other blob types, such as append blobs and page blobs. These blob types are already well-matured designs, and I don't have any suggestions. The storage account also offers different tiers, such as cool, hot, and archive tiers, as per the access. These features meet the needs of data and application engineers for storing data. Mostly, it has all the features to meet the current requirements, and it is one of the well-designed resources from Microsoft.

I work with an Azure storage account that includes a blob bin and file storage. I have used Azure Blob Storage for almost five years. Also, I am not sure if we are partners with Microsoft since I joined a month ago.

For stability, I rate it a nine out of ten. This is because it offers one of the best features. Also, I have not faced any complaints regarding the storage account in my five years of experience. There might be other resources I feel that I couldn't access or have some service-related issues. But, I didn't face any issues with the storage account.

I rate the solution nine out of ten in terms of its ability to scale. Since it is a management service, we should not bother about scaling. This is because we have a very good scaling policy for management services. As I recently joined the organization, I am not aware of how many employees are currently using this solution.

The technical support you receive depends on the plan you choose, whether it is the basic plan, standard plan, or premium plan. In my current organization, we have a premium plan for which the technical support is awesome. I raised three tickets with the technical support team while using the premium plan and received the best support from Microsoft. So, I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

I am working with AWS, Azure, and GCP, but my major contribution to the cloud is towards Azure.

It is a very simple process.

Currently, it is a flexible price policy.

Amazon S3 is equivalent to Azure Storage accounts, as they offer almost the same features. Based on my experience, I find Azure to be a more comfortable tool to work with compared to Amazon S3. The UI is better designed, and I could easily understand the features and other things. Therefore, even though the two solutions are similar, I rate the storage account solution higher than Amazon S3.

It is one of the best features or resources, especially for people who want to use Blob Storage for unstructured data. For us, it is a very cost-effective resource since we can understand it easily. I haven't experienced any issues with this solution for the past five to six years. I rate this solution a nine 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.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is integrated into the applications that we provide our customers. Job dockets, regulatory documents, licenses, and insurance-related are the most common types of documents that our application users store in their storage containers. 

Apart from that, the job docket probably moves from one person to another and only authorized users can have access to view or download using a secure URL with a token and the shared access signature. This comes with an important feature that allows us to limit the time the users have access to the files on the storage.

Another aspect we have is for internal purposes, like having database backups over specific timelines. Internal application docket messages between the web and mobile application users including attachments that can be retained or archived for several years. All of this works under a multi-tenant structure.

The best thing is that it's on the cloud and accessible through any mobile, tablet, or laptop device. Easily configurable and integrated with any of our applications through its client libraries. 

Secure and having the option to setup additional regions for high availability.

.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage consistently for the past two years. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is stable. I haven't had any issues. Initially, when I was conducting hands-on workshops in the past few years most of the client-side libraries used to connect with Azure Storage have become obsolete and the newly updated libraries are simple and easy to work with.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. I believe this will grow, just like AWS, because it's totally isolated, and even websites could use that separately. I think Azure is beginning to take that path where other applications could directly connect to it and use the storage system. I believe there is a feature to interconnect all the other products they have.

The initial setup was quick. You definitely need some help with that, and Microsoft provides resources for learning. I have in the past attended workshops that came in handy when working with this solution. It's easy to use if you have some hands-on experience. There are online courses with hands-on labs available in some cases on Microsoft Learn which makes understanding and using this solution easier.

Pay per-use subscription has been our option and I see no problem using this subscription model as we are able to keep track of our costs on a daily basis

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.

Perhaps some customers wish to share information such as DPN or other materials about the company. However, we are uncertain about reaching every worldwide employee in every country or office. Therefore, this solution allows to download or access information like product details or new prices.

The reason is that I believe they only offer the corporate interface we use, and perhaps they should consider creating a historical customer interface. I haven't created a virtual machine; instead, I've established a personal GED. This allows me to provide customers with the necessary role functions, enabling them to download files without incurring excessive costs.         

The efficiency depends on various operations, and therefore, it should involve multiple vendor support.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for three to five years.

The stability is good.

It is scalable and we have around ten users.

We have used Microsoft's technical support through phone calls; the experience was okay.

Positive

Regarding the integration and setup of Public Storage, it was a bit complex. The upgrade process was okay. In terms of time, I'm not sure about the exact duration of the deployment. We use object storage for data related to different customers. I'm still learning about the steps involved in deployment.

We didn't use a consultant; it's done in-house. The technical staff needed for deployment and maintenance is more than ten. 

I'm not aware of the licensing cost, as my customer handles it. In Taiwan, it's reasonably priced,

I would recommend this solution, and my advice is to use it for object storage or other services. I would like to see improvements in integration to support multiple operations.

We use the product for storage, documentation, and reporting. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage needs to improve stability and cloud user interface. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is scalable, and we have nine users. 

A consultant helped us with the implementation. 

The tool's licensing costs are annual. It should be made reasonable. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

For us, there was a specific use case where we were trying to collect some of the information and this was a project related to IoT information collection. That is where we used Object Storage. There was bot storage used as well. We were trying to collect some information from smart meters. That smart meter solution that we developed for the customer required both Object Storage as well as Block Storage.

There are a variety of good features. Which one is best really depends on the customer's focus or specific deployment. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

The solution offers good documentation.

When you get the right support person, you can deal with issues very fast.

While we defined the solution, it was not fully implemented before I left. Therefore, it would be difficult to point to an area that was lacking. 

Technical support with Microsoft is a bigger challenge as finding the right person to support you and actually getting that person on the call is hard. If you are able to get the right person on the call, then he is able to help fast. That said, in most cases, getting the right person on the call itself is a challenge.

The setup process could always be a bit easier. It's hard to find good resources. With the cloud being new, it's difficult to find the people who have done it already.

I've been using the solution for three to six months. It's been less than a year so far. 

I left before the solution was fully implemented. Therefore, while I did not see any instability, I can't speak to how stable it was once it was up and running. 

From our requirement perspective, the required scalability existed in the solution. We had no issues with scaling. 

I've interacted with technical support. They were okay. However, getting the person you need to assist you can be a challenge. 

Neutral

I have been comfortable with Microsoft technology, in general, and Microsoft approaches in the past as well. That's the reason, in most cases, I prefer to use Microsoft solutions as such.

The process is not that complex. There is a challenge finding resources who understand the cloud, however. With most of the technologies, there is enough documentation, however, what happens is, when you are looking at the whole ecosystem as such, you need resources that know what is happening. Generally, there are articles that can assist you with the setup. Therefore, for those who have knowledge with the solution, it's straightforward, however, newer users would find it possibly a bit complex. 

I'm not sure how many people would be required to maintain the solution. 

I haven't gotten a chance to evaluate this solution in comparison to others. For example, I've never been able to compare Object Storage on AWS.

The company I worked for was a Microsoft gold partner. We were Azure partners as well. 

We use a private cloud deployment. There were some sensitive products that were supposed to only be available as a part of the private cloud, even though they were in the Azure cloud, they were fully accessible from the internal network.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.