What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon S3?

The licensing model is complex. If you need your backup data available at all times, but don't access it frequently, there are better options. You could go with S3, but other vendors offer the same thing for much better prices. For example, Wasabi has S3-compatible hot storage and charges a lot less. The disadvantage of Wasabi is that they don't want you accessing the data frequently. They say you can have it right away if you need it, but if you keep accessing it all the time, you're going beyond their service agreement. At that point, you'd need to go with an Amazon solution. If you're going to store data in an archive that you don't need to access frequently and can wait up to 24 hours to retrieve, then Amazon is a good solution. Amazon would definitely be a seven out of ten, where one is the lowest price and ten is the most expensive.

Amazon S3 is a low-cost product. The solution is fairly priced. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten.

The pricing can be improved.

The pricing is good. The main charges for S3 are data transfer and storage. You can create as many buckets as you need and manage them according to your requirements. Naturally, the more you use any service, the higher the cost.

The tool's licensing costs are yearly. I rate it a six to seven out of ten.

I don't use it that frequently, so I think it's too early to comment on the tool's pricing structure. Six months later, I may have more data related to the tool. I can't comment on the pricing part of the product since I don't deal with a high workload for now. I use the tool's free tier. I believe that there is a need to make annual payments towards the licensing charges associated with the product.

The solution is cost-effective because it is based on a pay-as-you-go model, where I can purchase and use it according to my needs.

While storing data in Amazon S3 is relatively inexpensive, there are costs associated with retrieving or transferring data across continents. Connecting Amazon S3 with real-time applications can increase data retrieval costs.

The product has one of the best pricing in the market. It is very cost-efficient. The cost depends on the data we access. If we access a particular data regularly, we must pay for it. If we know that we will need the data after three to five years, we can store it in the archives, which will cost us less.

The cost of Amazon S3 is low. For R & D purposes there is a free option available. There is a license needed to use the solution. I have been satisfied with the storage overall price.

I rate the solution as one for pricing. It is expensive but much more secure.

For pricing, I would give it a six or seven out of ten.

The cost of Amazon S3 could be better. The solution needs to be less costly. As the number of data increases, you'll pay more for Amazon S3. It's around $200, which is okay, but my company uses it less often. For a file storage solution, Amazon S3 is expensive, though it would still depend on the project. It's more of the storage charge that needs to be lowered. Usually, Amazon gives you up to five TB free. Suppose Amazon charges you $200, that's fine, but it doesn't feel very justifiable, though there's no question in terms of the abilities of Amazon S3. There's no extra cost for Amazon S3 except for personal storage.

The pricing for Amazon S3 is reasonable, so price-wise, it's a seven out of ten.

There is a license needed to use this solution and it is reasonably priced.

It is expensive for storing, but it is way cheaper for retrieval.

I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten. Pricing depends on a particular class where you want save your objects. There are different classes when it comes to storage in S3.

The pricing is very reasonable. We do not find it expensive at all. We pay a monthly licensing fee. I'd rate the pricing five out of ten.

The cost is based on the amount of storage required and if we exceed the data transfer rate across regions. If we use an external encryption key and not the one included by AWS, the data transfer between the key server and our Amazon S3 server will incur a charge.

I know it is very inexpensive compared to other solutions.

The solution is very inexpensive at 50 cents per gigabyte, per month. Some packages or discounts are available. Big companies can use the solution for free.

The pricing depends on your region and is reasonable. For example, the price per gigabyte is .0025 in the South Pacific and .0023 in Europe.

Not many products in the market beat the solution in terms of quality or price. The solution charges for data downloads.

There is a license to use Amazon S3.

We were able to reduce our licensing costs by exploring the different storage classes and different lifecycle management policies. It's a very good tool to control your costs and automate a few of the routine tasks which typically take significant manual effort when you need to write ad-hoc jobs. The storage is quite cheap although there are some processes that bump up the cost.

Their prices are higher than say Microsoft Azure or Google. So AWS is very easy to use yet expensive. Licensing is pay as you go. The more resources you use, the more you pay, however, they seem to be more costly than competitors.

The price of Amazon S3 is competitive with other solutions.

The license of Amazon S3 is based on volume, capacity, and time. The overall price of the solution could improve. The support has to be added if you want it at an additional cost.

Amazon should work to revamp its pricing structure so that pricing comes down.

The price of the Amazon S3 is low. The license model is based on what you use.

The solution started off reasonably priced, however, it is getting more and more expensive. It's a free service for one year.

The price of the Amazon S3 is reasonable. There are not any licensing costs, they have a pay-as-you-use model.

We pay for the solution on a monthly basis. We use a basic license and any additional fees based on usage. It's complete licensing. It's not simple at all.

It's a monthly pricing. We are happy with the pricing.

The cost of storage is cheap. However, the cost to have a better interface can get expensive. We are using Athena for this purpose and if we did some heavy queries the cost will start adding up. When the Athena query is running, it will scan the bucket and they charge for how many GBs we are going to scan. The function of scanning has a lot of costs attached to it, this is a negative point.

The licensing is pay as you go, and I'm happy with the pricing.

The pricing is very fair. It's actually pretty inexpensive. We only pay for what we use. We don't have to pay for anything else.

This solution has reasonable pricing and a low cost.