Amazon S3 Reviews

We use this solution to store the historical data of the customer. Additionally, we are creating JSON format data while running our application and we are pushing this JSON format data to the Amazon S3.

This solution is good at storing historical data and we were using it for other purposes.

When we need to find the queries there is no user interface, it is the only textual format that is bulky. If we need some data we will use Athena for queries and we will get results. When comparing this solution to others, such as DataDog, they provide a wonderful UI, and user-friendly dashboards, and many other features that this solution is lacking.

We have found that the query takes too much time to process and it is quite difficult to receive the data.

I have been using the solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the solution scalable.

The initial setup was quite complex. We needed to create some endpoints but with a little effort everything turned out alright. Additionally, we use Kafka queues and we send them to the S3 bucket. With the help of shell scripts, we run one script and we receive the data from Kafka queue, topic by topic, and we send the data to the S3 bucket.

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.

I have evaluated Datadog and Kibana and we are planning on moving away from Amazon S3 and S3 Athena because the other solutions provide the latest technology.

We should not use this solution for the purpose of the logs. We realized if we need to track the logs and a few other things we should use a good log platform which would have been better.

We plan to keep using this solution in the future but only for a specific set of purposes. We are moving away from S3 to a different solution, such as Datadog or Elasticsearch because 80% of the usage is only for storage purposes. We will keep on doing the same thing in the future. Only 20% of our usage we are planning to move from S3 to a log platform.

I would advise others if this solution fits the use case or expected usage for the end-user then I would recommend it. If they can afford everything that is involved, such as storage and usage fees, then it would be a good choice. They have to consider how frequently they want to access the data from the storage, how many heavy queries they want to run, and are they going to manipulate the data or retrieve the data. They should consider all these scenarios before they make the decision to implement the solution.

I rate Amazon S3an eight out of ten.

We use it for static website hosting, storing data, and second data of some of the websites. We can then easily sync the data whenever we have the need to do so.

Some of our websites are 2 or 4 pages and have static content. We can simply host it by creating a bucket, putting the content of the website there, and making it available to the public with the Make Public feature.

Amazon S3 has multiple types of data detection. You can store data on a monthly basis, yearly basis, and long term basis. You can choose the Glacier feature, create a life cycle policy, and store it. This is one of the best features this solution has.

It is stable and scalable, and the installation is very straightforward as well.

The only pain point is migrating the life cycle policy because if someone is a newbie, they cannot easily create the life cycle policy. This is because there are multiple, additional ways. If I want to store data for one month, they have the option to Glacier over it. With Glacier, you have addition policies for one year or four years. The option will not be there. So you would need to use a UI process over it.

I've been using it for almost the last four years.

I think the stability of Amazon S3 is good.

It is scalable. We currently have 40 plus users.

Amazon Protect Support has been been quite responsive.

The initial setup was completely straightforward.

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

We didn't evaluate other options because there's no such available feature in the market at present that can compare all the things in a bucket, like S3.

If you are a small scale enterprise that wants to host websites or data, you should go for it and use Amazon S3. 

I would rate Amazon S3 at nine on a scale from one to ten.

We use this solution for cloud-based data storage.

We appreciate that this solution is relatively easy to use, straightforward, and reliable.

We would like some improvement in the cost of storage via this solution, as it currently has a very high price point.

We have been working with this solution for more than eight years.

We have found this to be a very stable solution during our time using it.

This is a very easily scalable solution.

The technical support for this solution are good, and have okay response times whenever we raise issues with them.

Positive

We previously used other data storage software. However, because this solution is straightforward to use, and our workload is in Amazon, it was more efficient to switch to this solution than using other tools. 

The setup of this solution is very simple, but just like any other software, there is a learning curve for those who are not yet familiar with the tool.

We implemented this solution using our in-house team.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using Amazon S3 mostly for block storage.

The most valuable features of Amazon S3 are its storage capabilities, security, and integration.

Amazon S3 could improve by having more frequent updates.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately six years.

The solution is stable.

Amazon S3 is a highly scalable solution.

We have two clients using the solution.

The support from Amazon S3 is excellent. 

I rate the support from Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

Positive

The setup of Amazon S3 was straightforward. The implementation process is quick.

We used an integrator for the deployment of the solution.

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

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution in order to share static files among web applications and mobile applications.

The ability to have everything in the cloud is the most valuable aspect of the solution. 

It allows me to only pay for what I use. Therefore, the pricing model is very useful.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The solution has been stable so far.

We've found the scalability to be good.

I don't really have any pain points with this product. There isn't really anything to complain about. It does what we need it to do.

Technical support could have a faster response time. They are a bit slow right now.

I've been using the solution for three or four years or so at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is fairly stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and its performance is good.

The scalability is good. If a company can expand it, it can do so with ease.

Mostly, we implement this solution for small businesses.

At this point, neither we nor our clients have any plans to increase the usage.

Technical support is okay. They aren't good or bad. They are somewhere in the middle. Our main issue is the fact that they take too long to answer questions. Sometimes you need to wait up to two days to get any kind of response from them. They need to provide answers in a more timely manner.

The initial setup is not difficult or overly complex. It's very straightforward and easy to implement. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process.

The deployment times vary according to the company and its requirements. It could take anywhere from days to weeks.

You only need one person to handle the implementation process. It doesn't take a big team or a lot of people.

We are an implementor and can implement the solution for clients if they need us to.

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.

We did not evaluate another product before ultimately choosing this solution. We went immediately to Amazon.

We are implementors.

I would recommend the solution to other companies. it's a very flexible product. It's cheap. You pay for what you get. It's just a cloud. AWS has a really good cloud implementation. I could not compare it with any other -such as Azure or Google - as I have not tried any of those. Users who would like to look at other options should check out Gartner's Magic Quadrant. However, any company can go easily to AWS straight away and be sure that they're going to pay a good price for a good service.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

I work as an integrator of Amazon S3

Normal file system storage is very limited when you want to store additional objects. The concept of S3 is to give you the option to have sharing from multiple users. They can share content among various users in a file system. It has the capacity to scale and to accommodate more files than a normal file system. This solution can really scale according to demand and you pay according to your consumption.

Whatever enhancement they could include in terms of object storage and limitations, would be an improvement. There is a five terabyte limitation size, and in today's world with the data size doubling all the time, anything extra would be helpful. We really need a very, very huge file system, a big data system to accommodate all this content. 

It is a scalable solution, the product has content encryption and nobody can access it. Amazon has very good security when it comes to securing the S3 buckets. You can keep the content secure and the user can have the encryption key and even Amazon doesn't have access to it. It's very secure. 

The initial setup is straightforward. If you want to use it as a target for backup, you redirect the backup software to store data to it by using an API to talk to the S3 buckets. Depending on the application you want to deploy, integration is also easy. Amazon provides good documentation and if you have an IT background and go through the documentation, you can integrate.

Other companies are trying to reach them but they've been ahead of the game for a long time. As an object storage product and in comparison to what's available on the market, I rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

The primary use case of this solution is for storage.

The most valuable features are unlimited storage, scalability, and performance.

The security model can be improved as it is a bit confusing.

The access speed could be faster.

I have been familiar with Amazon S3 for six years now.

I am always using the latest version because it is self-service, and you cannot choose the version you are using.

It's a stable solution.

It's a scalable solution.

I provide consulting services for this product and every customer we have is using it. Our clients are enterprise businesses.

I have used Amazon support for this product and I find the service to be good. We also try to provide for our clients.

The initial setup is easy, it's straightforward, and it only takes a few minutes to deploy.

I have experience with many cloud services and with several services through Amazon.

I would recommend this solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We have deployed Amazon S3 in two places, in Ireland and Northern Ireland. These act as storage for all the data, which is there. We have up to three servers there, one of these is an SQL server and one is Windows.

Feature-wise, Amazon S3 is the cheapest and it's reliable.

Overall, I don't think there's anything that needs to be improved.

The console could be improved - it's not very user-friendly for non-technical guys and the cost has to improve. It does not give us a clear picture of the total cost.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd rate it an 8.

We are using Amazon S3 for three years now.

It's very stable, you just have to look at cloud security more deeply because otherwise everything gets opened on the cloud.

Amazon S3 is easy to scale - scaling just comes with a cost.

Only the core IT Admin team and I are using this solution. The users do not have access to it.

Amazon technical support is good.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. If you don't know how Amazon works, it takes time to set up. Once it is set up then it is straightforward.

We used integrators to deploy as Amazon recommended that at the time in India. They recommended a partner or consultant.

Amazon deployment works beautifully.

If you know what your inside view will look like, you can cut down on your cost. 

Look at cloud security when you first configure the architecture.