Amazon S3 Glacier Reviews

We mainly used the solution for file storage and hosting static websites.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a highly stable solution.

The solution’s deployment process is complex and could be improved.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for three to four years.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

We have plans to increase the number of users for Amazon S3 Glacier.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution’s deployment takes around 15 to 20 minutes and can be done in-house. Two to three people are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance, including a developer and a cloud fundamental expert. They need to have a proper understanding of each different environment where the solution needs to be deployed.

We have seen around 300% return on investment with the Amazon S3 Glacier. With Amazon S3 Glacier, you save on infrastructure costs, security compliance costs, and the cost of employing technical staff.

Amazon S3 Glacier is not an expensive solution, and it has a pay-as-you-go pricing model.

The solution helped us to meet our compliance needs. We use Amazon S3 Glacier as a platform as a Service (PaaS). If you have a virtual server, you can create a copy of the solution on an entire virtual machine. In case it goes down or someone messes with the configurations, you could just easily activate the copy.

Amazon S3 Glacier is expensive as far as virtual machines and data storage are concerned. That's why I minimized the data storage as much as possible. Two to three people are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance. They need to have a proper understanding of each different environment where the solution needs to be deployed.

Amazon S3 Glacier works like OneDrive, and it's straightforward to upload or download from it. I would recommend the solution to other users. Hosting static websites is straightforward, but you need a specialist to guide you to deploy dynamic websites on Amazon S3 Glacier.

The solution is easy to manage, and I rate it an eight out of ten for its ease of management.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for file storage. We store customer data in CSV and Excel files. We also use AWS for deployment purposes.

We don't have to manage anything. AWS manages everything. The solution is secure. We use the solution because the banking system needs to be secure.

The learning curve is very high.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The tool’s stability is good. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The tool’s scalability is very good. We have around 200 users. We have 23 people on our technical team. We are planning to decrease the usage.

The technical support is good. We had some issues, and we raised the ticket. The support team provided a solution within 24 hours.

The initial setup is not complex, but it is not easy. The product is cloud-based.

Third-party consultants deployed the solution for us. We used Terraform to deploy the tool.

I work for a bank. They are not into technology. We use a third-party tool so that our job becomes easy. We do not want to manage everything technically.

The vendor must provide a cheaper solution. The tool is too expensive. It must be made more cost-effective.

We are also using API Gateway and NAT Gateway. We are using the infrastructure and security features of AWS. If an organization has the budget, they can use the product. If they have a big requirement, huge loads, and a need for high availability, they must choose cheaper products. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use it for our products, mainly as a source for some data, like a type of S3 bucket.

It's mostly used for current product data, not archival data. We use it for things like customer demos, training for customers, and also storing large configuration files.

The reliability of storage is the main benefit.

The pricing is a bit expensive. There is room for improvement in costs.

I have been using it for a couple of years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It is a very scalable solution.

There are around 50 end users using this solution. We do plan to increase the further usage.

The initial setup is straightforward once you get used to it. It's automated for us now, so in that sense, it's very easy.

We need about ten DevOps guys for the deployment. 

We pay a monthly licensing fee. It is expensive. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I would recommend using this solution. 

I would suggest just go through thorough AWS training and some of the training courseification programs.

We used to have our own storage, hardware, and software in a legacy environment. Our data was completely stored on-premises. Nowadays, AWS is offering a cheap way of storing data. We use Amazon S3 Glacier for the project's storage purposes.

Amazon S3 Glacier is scalable, flexible, easy to maintain and handle. The solution is easy to handle, where you have to log in, upload, and check your details. Amazon S3 Glacier is a simple, user-friendly, scalable, flexible, and easy-to-use solution.

Amazon S3 Glacier could be more flexible, user-friendly, and secure.

Amazon S3 Glacier has good stability.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

Users have to pay for what they use. You can easily scale the solution from 15 to 20 terabytes, but you have to pay for that in the next bill cycle. Amazon S3 Glacier is used by around 100 users from the development team in our organization.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward and not complex. In the initial legacy, we used to put our servers in our data centers, look for storage, and give a path to that storage. In Amazon S3 Glacier, you can directly put your credentials for the portal login and upload your data.

Amazon S3 Glacier doesn't take much time to deploy. You have to log in to a simple user portal for AWS; do two or three clicks, and you are good to go. Individuals without much technical expertise can install the solution. However, you need a technical person to manage all the accounts.

Our organization doesn't need to spend money creating infrastructure on their premises. Since Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution, we don't have to put machines in data centers or use hardware storage in the data center.

Other on-premises storage solutions are much more expensive than Amazon S3 Glacier. Customers prefer Amazon S3 Glacier because it is a cheap and pay-as-you-go solution.

There is no licensing for Amazon S3 Glacier. It has a billing cycle, where you have to pay for what you use at the end of the month. If you use more, you have to pay more. If you use less, then you have to pay less.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a completely cloud-based solution.

Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a nine out of ten.

The solution is used to store data.

The biggest advantage of the product is that AWS always copies the tool internally. So, we have two or three copies of our data. We’re pretty sure that once it's uploaded, it's available. We can move it to less expensive storage if we don't use it. The way of working is very intelligent. It's very useful.

It's up to us to decide how many copies we need and how frequently we want to make copies. Whether we want a fast or slow disk, cheap or expensive, it’s up to us as architects. We have a lot of choices. It's a product that has been working for a very long time. Most remarks from customers have been dealt with. Everything a customer could want is available.

The tool could be made cheaper. We always need the internet to access the tool. If our network goes down, we cannot access the information.

I have been using the solution for five to six years.

We do not have any issues with the product’s stability. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

The tool’s scalability is very good. We have no problems with it. We have 4000 to 5000 users. The solution is used regularly. We have plans to increase the usage in the future.

The product is cloud-based. The setup is very easy. The deployment took ten minutes. It’s very fast. To deploy the product, we must select the type of disk we need, create the interface to our account, and then start using it. It is very straightforward and very easy. The solution is so easy that we do not need any technical people.

The solution costs around 9 cents per data forum per month. The tool is very cheap.

It's a good product. We must remember that it's already been copied two or three times by AWS. We don't need to set up a copy ourselves. It is a big advantage. We can try to separate our data between different regions. So, if one region goes down, we still have our data in another. It’s a good practice.

We can't improve the product without increasing the cost. People can use two or three S3s to make it more secure. However, forcing all users into the same setup is not in AWS's best interest. There’s an advantage in going to the cloud. If an organization needs big security and has well-trained people, they can implement it. However, a very small company that doesn’t need that security won't pay for it.

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

Amazon S3 Glacier can be used for storage and RDBMS applications.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a stable and scalable solution.

The solution's pricing is too expensive and could be improved.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for two years.

I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten for stability.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a very scalable solution. More than 200 users are using Amazon S3 Glacier, and we have plans to increase the usage with the addition of new branches.

I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten for scalability.

We pay a monthly licensing fee for Amazon S3 Glacier. There will be additional costs if you install other apps and features.

I am using the latest version of Amazon S3 Glacier. Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution. Around eight people are needed for the solution’s deployment and maintenance.

I would recommend Amazon S3 Glacier to other users. Before using the solution, users should know its cost because it is too expensive based on the storage size.

Since Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution, you don't have to worry about installing and maintaining a server on-premises.

Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten.

We're a tech company, so we use a variety of solutions, but S3 Glacier is what we currently use for the database. 

We use it both internally for our own projects and our clients. We host some projects on Azure and AWS, depending on client requirements.

It's mostly used by enterprises for hosting various solutions.

We get free credits from Amazon, and we like the overall stability. We haven't had to rely heavily on their customer success teams, which is a good sign.

With hyperscalers like Amazon, things are generally pretty smooth. As long as the product is stable, billing is clear, and we don't have issues, we're happy.

Billing issues can be a nightmare. It's tough reaching the right person to get them sorted out.

I have been using this product for about three years. 

It is easy to scale. That's a major reason we use both Azure and AWS. They're very scalable.

We have around 35 end users using this in our company. 

When we have to reach out to them, it becomes an issue. They can improve, but we don't need them frequently anyway.

We don't get the right people right away. They connect us to someone who doesn't know, and then it goes in a loop, and we have to be very patient to find the person who can actually solve our problem.

Positive

We use Microsoft Azure services. But the usage depends on the client or the purpose. 

Some enterprises are typically on Azure, while others prefer AWS. We're cloud-native, so we don't differentiate between the two, but it depends on the client's needs.

My tech team handled it. It was a matter of hours, not days.

One person should be enough.

We have seen an ROI. That's why we're using it. We see value in the return; otherwise, we wouldn't continue.

Mainly on the cost side, It's very easy to use, which leads to cost synergies. That's how we look at it.

If it were cheaper, I'd be happier. I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. 

It is a yearly basis license. There are some other services that are linked with it as well. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use the solution for storing file objects.

The solution’s storage management is good and dynamic.

I have been using this solution for the past year. I’m currently using the latest version.

The product is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten.

The solution is highly scalable. Not individual users, but a specific application is using it within our company. I rate its scalability a perfect ten.

The customer service and support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward. With a couple of clicks, you can set up the solution. First, create the S3 bucket and then get the URI. Our DevOps team mostly deals with this area.

We don't pay for licenses. We pay based on consumption data, considering how much data is stored.

I recommend the solution. It's an effective native solution. It should be the first choice for storing files in AWS. Overall, I rate the solution a perfect ten.