Amazon S3 Reviews

I use Amazon S3 as storage and a platform for installing various types of software.

Amazon S3's best features are its reliability and capacity to expand.

Amazon S3's unit of measure for expansion should be smaller.

I've been using Amazon S3 for three years.

Amazon S3 is very stable.

Amazon S3 is scalable.

Previously I used Microsoft and Oracle.

I'd advise those thinking of implementing Amazon S3 to carefully plan their requirements and not use too many servers. I would recommend Amazon S3 to others and rate it eight out of ten.

I'm a consultant who provides services for companies of various sizes here in South Africa. Our company is still small, with only about 20 clients. I use S3 for hosting my websites and other storage services. S3 can be used for static and dynamic websites as well as file storage. In terms of dynamic websites, I use S3 in addition to other technologies in a computerless environment. In other words, I don't need a virtual machine to have a dynamic website hosted on Amazon Web Services.

E3's most valuable feature is CloudFront.

You need to do some things to make the files and updates immediately accessible. If you don't know those steps, you will wait forever for your updates to take effect or be seen by the public.

That is the only area where a newcomer might get frustrated with hosting on S3. The files are available immediately when they are first deployed, but it takes some time when they make changes if you don't understand the simple procedure you need to follow for it to happen immediately.

The process needed to show updates immediately is a problem. You have to go somewhere to delete whatever is propagated and restart the propagation somehow. That is the only issue that I think they could fix with hosting on S3 as far as websites are concerned.

I would also like S3 to have the ability to do dynamic websites without the need to do reconfigurations outside of S3. You should be able to switch on dynamic websites in S3, and then it works. I shouldn't need to go elsewhere within Amazon Web Services to get a dynamic website to work.

I've been using S3 for about three years 

It's a cloud service, so our scalability is good. I haven't had any issues. At the same time, I haven't had a situation where a client needed to expand the footprint of their site tremendously. I don't have massive clients like Netflix.

I was never in a position where I needed to request AWS tech support.

I've also used Azure's tool, and S3 is far more stable I haven't seen the same issues on AWS that I'm having on Azure. Amazon CloudFront is way faster. The websites are loading way faster than when you do it on Azure CDN.

Another advantage of S3 over CDN is the fact that I can deploy my websites on Amazon S3 with the root domain and the sub-domain loading the website. When using CDN, you cannot load the website with the root domain.

In the beginning, it wasn't easy. S3 was a little cumbersome when I started using it. With updates, it became easier to set up static websites. However, deploying dynamic websites in S3 is still difficult. You need to take notes on what you're doing so you can do the next dynamic website. 

The deployment is quite fast. You upload files, and that's it.

There a no license fees. E3 is a cloud service, and you pay as you go. Your encryption licenses are free, so you only pay for the storage you're using. It's extremely inexpensive. 

I rate Amazon S3 10 out of 10. S3 is highly cost-effective, so I would definitely recommend it.

Amazon S3 can be used for central storage, backup, log, and storage.

The reliability that Amazon S3 has provided has improved organizations.

Amazon S3 needs to simplify the backup features.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately 10 years.

Amazon S3 is a stable solution.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is good.

The support from Amazon S3 has been knowledgable and responsive.

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

The initial setup of Amazon S3 is easy, it can be done in less than one day.

We handle the implementation of Amazon S3. We have approximately 40 people that are able to do it.

It has been difficult for us to determine ROI.

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.

My advice to others is to pay attention to the backups and copies in Snapshots.

I rate Amazon S3 a seven out of ten.

We are using Amazon S3 for storage. This is a Cloud solution. We have developed a new application which has partly been released to the end customer, but not the complete solution. In the housing market, we have a lot of buying and they use the application to manage their lectures and receipts. This is what we are using Amazon S3 for the storage.

Amazon S3 can improve by decreasing the overall costs.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately one and a half years.

Amazon S3 is reliable.

We have not used Amazon S3 extensively, but the usage has been very high.

We have approximately 40 to 50 people using this solution. There might be an increased usage.

I have not contacted the technical support form Amazon S3.

I have not used other similar solutions to Amazon S3.

The implementation of Amazon S3 is done by a third party.

The price of Amazon S3 could be less expensive.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

I am using Amazon S3 for storing all the organization data, which comes from a data pipeline.

The most valuable features of Amazon S3 are the accuracy and the life cycle policies, which helps when moving from Amazon S3 to Amazon Glacier.

Amazon S3 could improve some of the features, such as indexing, or we should have more information about all the data stored in a single place. This way we can see what data resides where instead of going in different buckets, file locations manually, or searching. An index would be nice, allowing us to directly go to a location to use the date.

I have used Amazon S3 within the last 12 months.

Amazon S3 is 99.99 percent stable. The solution is highly stable.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is good. If we want more storage we only need to pay extra.

All the workloads of the whole company go to Amazon S3. As our workloads increase, the data increases, and we will use more storage in Amazon S3.

I have not used the support from Amazon S3.

Positive

I have not used another solution similar to Amazon S3.

The initial setup of Amazon S3 is not complex. We are only using it for a storage layer and there were not any complexities.

The cost of Amazon S3 is good. The pricing model is based on the usage of the solution.

I would recommend this solution to others, it is one of the most used storage solutions.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

I use the solution for the storage of images and documents.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that I mostly used the tool's free tier version, so I like the fact that its cost is very low.

Recently, I was trying to clean up the data because I have a lot of old, unused objects and images. I am trying to identify the files with the highest sizes and determine if I need to keep them or delete them. I didn't find the user interface very friendly. Beyond 399 or 999 objects, the tool's user interface was not allowing me to use the sort option. I had to use various keywords to search phrases and shortlist them so that I got less than 399 objects and could use the sort option. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Amazon S3 for around three years. I think two years back, I was in a different organization, which was an AWS partner. I am a customer of the tool.

It is a stable solution.

The solution's technical support is satisfactory. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

In my previous job, I used Sagemaker, but I don't use it currently. I have also used Amazon EC2 and CloudWatch for billing alerts or something that I might have set them up in the company.

The product's deployment phase is quite comfortable with no issues. The tool's maintenance part is fairly easy.

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.

Speaking of the process for retrieving data with the help of the tool, I would say that it is used to just display images on a website. When the page is opened, it gets linked to images and I display it on the website using Amazon S3.

I did not face any performance issues with Amazon S3.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We are using the solution to host our website and manage the database.

We have an online portal, and we are providing services to customers. We need to maintain an elastic database storage, along with security features. The solution’s functionality and accessibility are valuable to us. It's geared towards users. It makes things simple. The product is easy to use.

The product should enable users to create their own shortcuts. It should allow more customization. Users should be able to place their shortcuts on the dashboard. It will make things easier.

I have been using the solution for a year.

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

The product is scalable. We have over 50 users online at any given point. We can increase it as we need.

The setup is straightforward. We have a team of developers. They are very happy with the tool. The deployment did not take much effort. The product is cloud-based. We have six developers and engineers in our technical team.

Everything is housed in one place, so it is all easily accessible. The scalability is good. We have an assurance of data integrity. It is critical.

The pricing can be improved.

We are also using Azure.

For disaster recovery, there's a backup going on in AWS. At the same time, we take our own local backup. It is a daily process. People who want to use the solution must explore the tool and look at the training videos. It is quite straightforward.

We have a subscription model with our customers. They pay it yearly. There are no additional costs associated with the product. We had a problem with storage when we were working with on-premise servers. The hard disks were failing because of the volume of the data. They were regularly failing every three to four months. There was a cost associated with it. It impacted our project.

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

I use the tool for my product deployment. 

Amazon S3 is easily accessible, fast and effective. Its performance is good. 

The tool needs to improve its flexibility in support. 

I have been using the product for a couple of months. 

Amazon S3 is stable and reliable. Its resource utilization is also good. 

I rate the product's scalability an eight point five out of ten. My company has more than 200 users. 

Amazon S3's deployment takes some time. However, once you learn it, it's not complex. 

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

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten. Setting it up takes some time at the beginning, but it's reliable and stable once it's all set up.

Most people who need to store files usually turn to Amazon S3. The use case for this is not only for me but for anyone building technology who needs to store files.

Amazon S3 helps to store data, such as Excel, audio, and video.

An important feature of the Amazon S3's system is that it offers encryption while the files are at rest. This is crucial in ensuring the security of the files being restored and addressing potential security risks. That's what I would emphasize.

The cost of the solution should be reduced.

I have been using Amazon S3 for a long time.

I rate the stability of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

I rate the scalability of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

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

Neutral

The implementation of Amazon S3 was easy.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

I have received a return on investment using Amazon S3.

The price of Amazon S3 should be reduced.

I rate the price of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

I did not evaluate other solutions before choosing Amazon S3.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

We have a data warehouse and a data lake using Amazon S3. Additionally, we use it for application streaming.

We have our computer systems that have storage but we do use the cloud storage available from Amazon S3. However, it depends on the type of data we have and whether we use the cloud or not.

The most valuable feature of Amazon S3 is its flexibility as a solution to suit many different use cases.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately six years.

Two third of our company use this solution.

The support is better than other cloud providers but sometimes it takes a while to have a resolution to our issues.

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

Neutral

The initial setup of Amazon S3 was straightforward.

I rate the initial setup of Amazon S3 a ten out of ten.

We have a few developers that we use for deployment.

The solution is worth the money and we have seen an ROI. However, it is not our primary goal. We are trying to optimize different areas. 

Amazon S3 is a cost-effective solution compared to the others.

I rate the price of Amazon S3 a two out of ten.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.