Amazon S3 Reviews

Currently, I am a cloud solution architect. I consult with developers and set up the architecture needed to deploy a solution. If a solution needs to be deployed within AWS, we sit down with the client and discuss the services that are most appropriate for that solution and design the architecture, which is given to the review board for approval. The AWS services we consume are dependent on the solution. Users from various departments will use the solution, depending on what's being deployed there. 

We have cold storage here, and I think that's useful. When it comes to commercialization, it's cheaper to put data that you won't be using into the data storage. You only use a little bit of the data needed each day for your transition, so you pay less. 

There could be more flexibility in configuration to allow more ways to connect to outside the PPC.

I started using S3 at my previous company, so I have been using it for five years. 

S3 is very stable.

Amazon S3 is highly scalable.

I rate AWS support 10 out of 10. 

Positive

Setting up S3 is straightforward.  At first, it was difficult because I didn't know how to use the solution. Now it takes less than five minutes to deploy S3. 

A solution architect needs to create a plan for what needs to be deployed, and the developer will deploy the solution. Most of the engagement happens before the deployment when the architect and the developer come to an agreement about the approach. One person procures the services, and others will test them and put them into the live environment.

We deployed the solution with the help of a consultant, who helped us implement some of the heavier stuff in the data lake. However, we did the basic stuff in-house because we've got the VPC to do it ourselves. 

The licensing cost is not bad. However, you need an understanding of the solution you're deploying and the services running. You will save money by shutting down some of the services when they're not in use.

I rate Amazon S3 nine out of 10. It's an excellent product. I'm also working with it for my personal use. I'm putting my documents and pictures into the S3 bucket.

We predominantly use this solution for our data storage, primarily making DB backups. I'm a lead data engineer.

The product is easy to use, very intuitive, fast and quite flexible. We can manage access and controls using Amazon policies so it's very secure and provides secure implementation methods. All those features help our day-to-day processes and functionalities. 

File versioning could be improved and I'd like to see some additional security features.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

We haven't had any downtime in the years we've been using this product. We also have disaster recovery setups but haven't needed them.

Scalability is pretty good, we have over 100 plus users, and inherently all our applications interact with S3. We use it heavily, it's our main storage medium.

The tech support is very good. We had some help with the configuration and some of our niche use cases and more complex aspects of the implementation. Apart from that, we've rarely needed any S3 support because the UI and the functionality itself are straightforward so you don't need to go beyond the standard documentation provided.

We're a small organization and previously had an on-prem solution that was more expensive for us with a lot of overheads. It didn't make sense to continue using it. 

It's a simple deployment once you get the hang of it. We had two people managing the deployment. You can develop your own templates for repeated actions and automate repeat jobs. It's not complex. We're currently using more than 200 terabytes. We're using three different modes so we're using the solution extensively.

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. 

We are using Amazon S3 for image and video files.

The most valuable features of Amazon S3 are compatibility and reliability.

Amazon S3 could improve by providing some type of storage notification.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately 18 months.

Amazon S3 is a stable solution.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is good.

We have approximately 500 people using the solution and plan to increase usage.

I have used the support from Amazon S3. The speed of the support could be faster.

The initial setup of Amazon S3 is straightforward. The time it took for implementation took approximately one week,

We used an integrator for the implementation of Amazon S3.

We have approximately three administrators that do the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

The price of Amazon S3 is competitive with other solutions.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

We are using Amazon S3  for short-term or long-term storage.

The most valuable features of the Amazon S3 are its ease of use and integration

Amazon S3 could improve the limitation on how much data can be stored.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately two years.

Amazon S3 is stable.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is good.

Our company uses Amazon S3 as the main target backup solution.

I did not use the support from Amazon S3 because we never faced any challenges.

I have used other similar solutions to Amazon S3, but they are not comparable.

The initial setup of Amazon S3 is straightforward, the process took a few minutes.

We did the implementation of Amazon S3 in-house. We used one engineer for the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

I have seen a return on investment. The cost is based on a consumption-based model, you only pay for your usage.

The price of Amazon S3 depends on various variables. However, the price overall is fair.

I rate Amazon S3 a nine out of ten.

Usually, I use it to make deployments and service solutions in the cloud.

I don't have to waste time buying some computer or buying some external list or whatever they want. I can buy S3 in one minute. I don't have to spend time going to shops or anything like that. The payment is really good, easy. 

I save a lot of time and money with contract people that have to format the computers and install all the applications. 

I can do snapshots and recover data very easily.

It's a very good solution. It is very user cool and very user-friendly. 

I don't have any problems with the solution. It's issue-free.  

I can get a lot of information and data out of the solution, which is critical for me.

It's able to keep diversions quite well. 

The product provides for an easy initial setup.

The solution needs to improve test recognition. We need bots to test that are better. It's just not as good as Google, for example.

My main issue is security. If a code is entered incorrectly, it could leave you vulnerable to attack. 

I'd like to see more connections between EC2 and S3.

I've been using the solution for two or three years.

It is very stable. I never had any problem with S3. It's good. The only problem for me is that it is very easy to put in code that might have some mistake, and, in the end, everybody sees your information. You could have an attack or a hack in as it is very easy to change the entire software.  That is a big issue for me and the guys. 

I don't have any problems with scalability. I have not run into any limitations, however, there may be limitations in terms of the number of folders. That said, I've never seen any scalability issues.

We have ten to 15 people working with the solution. However, it depends on the day. For example, sometimes I am using S3 to produce some information for e-commerce. In e-commerce, I have all the images and all the information that I need on a pdf. However, I'll have some websites where 1000 people are basically connecting.

Technical support is inefficient and poor. 

I am also familiar with Google products.

I previously used some solutions based on MinIO.

The solution is very easy to set up. It's not difficult or complex. 

How long it takes to deploy depends on each project. Some might just take minutes. Others may be longer.

How many people you need for deployment also varies according to what's needed. 

Sometimes we handle it in-house and sometimes we have others handle the initial setup. 

I have seen an ROI. Previously, I needed a lot of people to store, deploy, maintain. Now, I have only a couple of people to work at all this stuff.

The pricing is pretty good. We don't have any issues with it. 

I spend $20,000 more or less every month.

We are a customer and end-user.

We sometimes use the latest version of the solution, however, it depends. They normally update users on the direction of the product. I'm not sure if we have the latest right now or not.

With this product, you can manage your distribution and manage all the different hosted data and who is able to serve or write on the backend. If you make a mistake, you can return to the previous iteration. It's good, even though sometimes it can be a little slow. The price and the quality are very good.

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

I am managing the S3 storage solution from Amazon. From Microsoft, I'm managing the Azure administration. I handle that. As a part of that, I need to create the virtual machines, a point to site to VPN and Azure AD, AD synchronization with Windows server, a database server, mail server, and web server. I administrate all that.

We use Amazon S3 for storing files and documents on the cloud. I fill out the user whenever the files they use are downloaded. That is fully automated. After a few days, it can delete it. I've done the policy for the automated deletion.

Amazon S3 is great. We are using it for storage solutions.

Due to using S3, our data documents are safe and easy to access. It is better to keep them in the cloud as opposed to in our internal drive. You can access them from anywhere. Especially during the pandemic period, we are able to access remotely, as well. So it's good.

We are using the basic S3 bucket. It is easy to manage and easy to understand.

We need the mapping to Windows. That feature is needed in S3. That feature is in the Azure cloud where we can map it like a drive. We can map the cloud storage to the effort driving our Windows PC. But Amazon is not providing that feature for the S3 solution.

In the next release I would like to see mapping on the Windows machine. In Windows, there are drives right in volumes. We need to map these Amazon S3 storage to the Windows. That usually is available in the Azure. I would like to have that in the Amazon as well.

We have been using Amazon S3 for just six months as of now.

In terms of stability, it is good and has no issues.

We can scale Amazon S3 for storage. We can increase or scale up and we can scale down. It's easy to manage.

I'm happy where I'm at right now. If we need more storage, we will implement. We'll scale it up.

As of now, I haven't needed to contact support. It is really easy to manage. Even for the small issues, we can just Google the issues and find the solution. For complex issues, we may need to contact them, but as of now, I haven't needed to. I haven't faced any issues like that, so I didn't contact support. We have found that there is enough online documentation regarding S3.

We switched because of the security and scalability. It is highly secure because nobody can access it. Before we had solutions using an FTP and SFTP. That protocol is different and we are now using the S3. We need a shared key and an access secret key to access the particular storage. Without that, we cannot access. We cannot do anything. So security is more important. That's why we switched to Amazon S3.

The initial setup is simple and easy to manage.

It's not actually a deployment. It is a simple step. Within five minutes, we can deploy it.

Our implementation strategy for the solution is based on the user's document files and how much GB they want and how they want to access that particular story's solution. Based on that scenario, I create the S3 bucket on the cloud for the particular users - whoever wants to access that particular S3. I created that particular IM user, the user access for that particular storage. I make an access policy to that particular storage.

Our ROI is good based on our usage. We have multiple users who are accessing this S3 storage.

It's a monthly pricing.

We are happy with the pricing.

Amazon S3 is a great solution.

My advice is to have an implementation strategy based on the user usage.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Amazon S3 an eight.

I use the solution to store data.

We can easily connect to the AWS resources. We can use the credentials to fetch data from other resources. It is easy to interact with other resources. The product can store large volumes of data. We can visualize the data on S3 using QuickSight. The tool is quickly able to read the data by other services. We can easily run the query and get the data.

The search option must be enabled in the UI to filter and retrieve files. The filter option must be provided within the directory. Users must be able to filter files based on the file name.

I have been using the solution for three years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight and a half out of ten.

We have five to six data engineers, analysts, and scientists using the tool in our organization. We do not do any maintenance. I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The support is very helpful. I rate the support a seven to eight out of ten.

Neutral

We can use the data for analytical purposes. We can calculate the performance based on the season-wise data. We can also generate revenue. The analytics is beneficial for us.

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

I will recommend the tool to others. We can store large volumes of data and easily integrate the data with other resources. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use Amazon S3 mainly for daily backups of our database.

Amazon S3 has helped our organization because the daily backups can be done automatically with automation. We do not have to spend time on it and I am confident with Amazon S3 in its ability to recover our data.

Amazon S3 is easy to use and it is beneficial to use the CLI to make the backups. Since I use the CLI I do not have to do it on a web portal which is a big advantage because everything can be automatized. Automation can be done very well in Amazon S3.

The solution could improve by having a simpler way to have the detail size of a file in the CLI to be read or understood easier. Today, it's a little raw in the way the details are presented. You have to make some scripts and some modifications to be able to see the information properly of the size of a given bucket or the size of a file.

I have been using Amazon S3 for a long time. I used the latest version because the CLI is normally updated.

The stability of the Amazon S3 is good.

The scalability of Amazon S3 is great.

We are a small company and we have approximately five developers that use Amazon S3. We use the solution on a daily basis for hourly backups.

I have used the support from Amazon S3 a long time ago, I have not needed much help. When I did have contact with them there were times it took a while for a response.

I would rate the technical support of Amazon S3 a three out of five.

Positive

The main difference from other solutions I have used is Amazon is the leader, and it has a very large number of zones and capacity, while others can be smaller and can have different options. Not all the options that are available in Amazon S3 are offered by other competitors, but for the main features, most of them are working fine. I have been evaluating two different solutions, one from a French cloud-based company called Scaleway, and the other is peer-to-peer storage.

The installation was simple. Creating a new bucket and deploying it is very straightforward. To make the script deploy a new bucket takes approximately one hour. 

I would rate the initial setup of Amazon S3 a four out of five.

We did the implementation ourselves and we have two developers that do the maintenance of the solution.

The return on investment has been very good because the backups of our database are critical for our business to operate.

I would rate the return on investment of Amazon S3 a four out of five.

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

When backups are more than 6 months old, I would recommend keeping less of them and storing the remaining ones in Glacier (long-term, cheaper storage).

I have evaluated other options.

My advice to others is to separate the buckets project, not to put everything in the same bucket, and be sure to implement IAM rules to avoid problems between users and not to lose any backups. The implementation process is important. 

I rate Amazon S3 an eight out of ten.