Amazon S3 Reviews

It is mainly for transferring the files we are using from AWS, where we have to transfer the files from AWS to a non-cloud environment.

The security is the most useful aspect of the product.

We've had no issues with stability.

It can scale well. 

You do need to get training on the setup process. It's not straightforward. 

I've been using the solution for four years now 

The solution is stable and reliable. the performance has been good. It's been problem-free. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It can scale well.

We have about 70 people using the product currently.

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

I don't know much about technical support. I don't deal with that aspect. We have a separate team that handles any issues. 

The initial setup isn't easy. We require training to get up to speed. 

I'm not the person that actually handled the deployment.

I don't have any insights into the exact price of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. We've been pretty happy with its capabilities in general. 

It is not for everybody. Potential users can also evaluate Azure as well as AWS, as both are equally good. If you really need a cloud solution, then obviously there are many in the market. The cost is a top pain factor nowadays.

We are making custom applications to the cloud.

We are service providers.

In terms of use cases, where a company wants to deploy their applications instead of building their servers on the premise, on the company premise. They can just, instead of buying servers and setting up networks and everything, buy space online on the AWS cloud. That way, you don't have to buy an expensive server. You already have servers online. You deploy your application. That's the main use case we are handling now. For example, if you have an in-house ERP, you want to move everything to the cloud. We migrate clients, for example. from on-premise to the cloud. If you have heavy tasks, there are computations that require heavy, powerful machines.

The solution is stable and reliable.

It’s easy to set up.

Technical support is excellent.

Amazon, especially its cloud, is the best on the market.

It can lower costs as you won’t need physical hardware on-site.

Regarding S3, S2, and E2, all I'd recommend is for pricing to be lower since we can easily overuse them. For example, if a certain resource is left unchecked, you can easily use a lot of it and drive up costs.

We’ve used the solution for a while.

AWS is very, very stable. It's actually the most stable cloud service for S3, for all the services provided on the cloud. They're very stable. However, compared to others, they are costly.

We started this year, so we haven't gone much into it. We became partners this year. Right now, we only have one client that we have recently started locally in Kenya.

The tech support is good. It's perfect.

The initial setup is very straightforward. AWS is the easiest to set up. It's the best actually among the cloud providers. It’s number one compared to Google Cloud, Oracle, or Microsoft Azure.

It took a few hours to set up.

We are integrators. We are able to handle the setup ourselves.

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.

We have two options for the cloud. We can choose Oracle Cloud or AWS. We take what is suitable depending on the plan and the cost implications.

We became AWS partners this year.

I’d recommend this and any other AWS product to others.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

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.

Amazon S3 is our file storage solution. We use it for all of the backups of our storage and databases.

The most useful features of Amazon S3 are the intelligent multipart upload.

Amazon S3 could improve by being more secure.

I have been using Amazon S3 for approximately five years.

Amazon S3 is a stable solution.

I have found Amazon S3 very scalable, you can scale it on the fly and it is very easy to do.

Most all the cloud applications that are being used by our developer are using Amazon S3. More than 200 people are using this solution. At this moment we do not plan to increase usage.

I have used the support from Amazon S3 multiple times and they are good.

I have not used any other similar solution to  Amazon S3.

The initial setup of Amazon S3 is straightforward and the documentation is very good. You can do the setup of Amazon S3 in a few minutes.

We did the implementation ourselves.

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

If users are looking for highly scalable, competent solutions, then Amazon S3 would be a good choice.

I rate Amazon S3 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 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.

We are using the solution to secure the content. 

The solution's most valuable feature is its Uptime availability, especially for the cloud version. Its peak uptime is good. It offers 99.9% availability.

The Folder Access policy needs improvement. They should make it much more user-friendly, then it will be fine. The major challenge is the inability to create more than ten policies. When we want to create folder access, they provide some policy and then give the folder access. There should be an option to have a sub-folder for each folder. They should provide a distribution of access. Presently, we can't access all subfolders at a time.

We have been using the solution for three years now.

I rate the solution's stability as a ten.

The scalability of the solution is ten out of ten. We have more than fifty users of the solution at our company.

When we raise the ticket, we get a response within five to seven days. There needs some improvement.

Neutral

The setup process is simple as we are using the cloud solution. We configured the setting as per our requirements.

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

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a nine out of ten.