Microsoft Azure Block Storage Reviews

We use the hybrid version of Microsoft Azure Block Storage. We have a client based in the UK who utilizes the hybrid cloud. We also have a couple of archiving solutions there, as well as NetApp on TapCloud. 

The NFS solution goes into that, deployment is purely on the Azure cloud. The production areas and archiving solutions are mostly done on-premises, while testing and application development in some areas is purely cloud-based.

Block storage is used for the data that is configured for our servers. We have it for auditing purposes and as a compliance method.

Microsoft Azure Block Storage is a stable solution.

As for scalability, we use other archiving solutions, NetApp on TapCloud, for example, because there are some limitations with capacity unless you extend the terabytes of data.

It has been a couple of years since I contacted support. However, at that time, it was difficult to get someone on the call even though it was an issue of high severity.

Positive

The initial setup for the production areas was on-premises, which is very simple.

Azure Block Storage is higher priced than its competitors. It is costly. The pricing is difficult to calculate as there are different tiers to select from. 

Microsoft Azure Block Storage is widely accepted. People are choosing the enterprise solution. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure Block Storage to store, upload and download data. We can also use it as a backup. 

Microsoft Azure Block Storage's stability needs improvement. 

I have been working with the tool for three to four months. 

I would rate Microsoft Azure Block Storage's stability an eight out of ten. 

Microsoft Azure Block Storage's setup is straightforward. You need to create a storage account and give a unique name to it. We have deployed the solution on the cloud. 

I use Microsoft Azure Block Storage's free version. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

We use it for high-speed data and a very critical mission.

Block storage is typically used when you have structured data. For example, RDP systems like SQL Oracle and the SQL DB tool. If you have structured data, you need Microsoft Azure Block Storage.

The solution should also support unstructured data. There is a different file format for unstructured data. It would also be good if the solution notification features.

We have been using this solution for three years. Microsoft Azure Block Storage is deployed as per the requirement. It can be deployed independently and supports every kind of deployment.

It is very stable, and I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

It is scalable, and I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

The technical support is very good.

The setup is not as simple as File Storage, and it requires a lot of investment because block storage requires a high-speed network, and you have to deploy a lot of fibre cables. It is also costly and not cheap compared to Internet-based networks. So the initial investment cost for deploying the block storage is very expensive.

The price depends on the requirement. If the data is critical, you must deploy block storage. But if it is not that critical, you can choose cheaper storage options. I rate the pricing for Microsoft Azure Block Storage a two out of ten.

Multiple vendors offer good block storage solutions, such as BMC Storage, NetApp Storage, Azure, Google and Oracle. Microsoft Azure Block Storage is deployed for mission-critical and business-critical data. When deploying these kinds of data, you must have a data center to control moving the data and allow multiple storages. You can know where the data is stored, which software controls the data, and who manages your data. But for cloud, the customer does not have any visibility or know who is responsible for managing data or whether it's secured. Therefore, transparency, control and storage deployment is significant.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten, and I would recommend this to others.

We're mainly using this solution for cloud container data and backup data. 

It's deployed on a hybrid cloud.

There are around 500 users in my organization.

In terms of latency, bandwidth, and productivity, Azure Block Storage is better than other solutions.

There have been problems with integration, but it's getting better.

I have used Microsoft Azure Block Storage for more than a year.

I would rate the stability as seven out of ten. We sometimes face issues.

I would rate the scalability as six out of ten.

Setup was simple. Between 5-10 people are required for maintenance.

I would rate the pricing as five out of ten.

I compared Azure Block Storage with AWS. The cost is the main difference.

I would rate the solution as six out of ten. I would recommend it to others.

We use Microsoft Azure Block Storage to store files uploaded by our users.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Block Storage is its performance.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Block Storage for approximately five years.

Microsoft Azure Block Storage is stable.

The scalability of Microsoft Azure Block Storage is good.

We have less than five people using this solution in my organization. We do not have plans to increase the usage.

I have contacted the support once and I had a good experience.

I have previously used Google Drive.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure Block Storage is more complex than Google Drive, but it is still not too difficult.

I did the implementation of the solution in-house.

Microsoft Azure Block Storage is an expensive solution and I pay monthly.

We use one person for the maintenance of the solution.

I would recommend Google Drive instead of Microsoft Azure Block Storage.

I rate Microsoft Azure Block Storage a seven out of ten.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Block Storage is the security and the management of user access from on-premise to the cloud.

Microsoft Azure Block Storage could improve by allowing the switching of the hot tier to the cold tier.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Block Storage for approximately five years.

Microsoft Azure Block Storage is stable.

The solution can expand, and it is scalable.

We have approximately 200 users using this solution. We plan to increase the usage of this solution in the future.

I did not use the support from Microsoft Azure Block Storage. However, I did use the support for other solutions. 

We deploy Microsoft Azure Block Storage with Linux SUSE or Red Hat, but Microsoft will not give us support for these solutions.

I rate the support from Microsoft a three out of five.

Neutral

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure Block Storage is simple.

The price could be more flexible, and it can be expensive.

I rate the price of Microsoft Azure Block Storage a three out of five.

I have not evaluated other solutions.

I rate Microsoft Azure Block Storage a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of the solution is for objects search, objects with information, and documents file search.

The most valuable features of this solution are the ease with which you connect and use it.

The solution can be improved by including quicker hard drive access and larger bandwidth as part of the standard licensing fee.

I have been using the solution for seven years.

The solution is extremely stable.

The solution is easily scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The implementation was completed in-house.

The solution requires an input-output operations fee as well as pay per gigabyte of storage. The solution also offers a quicker hard drive option and a higher bandwidth output for an additional cost.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

We have 23 people in our organization currently using the solution.

We do not require anyone for maintenance or deployment.

I suggest to anyone wanting to use this solution to be careful with the design of the folders because if you add files without folders it can get messy.

It's mainly for financial institutions and customers. These customers are all using Cloud Native types of applications, whether it is Oracle Fusion or whether it's AWS. We are using the solution to handle the APIs.

Its integration is very easy.

The accuracy is relatively high.

It is stable and reliable.

The product can scale well.

The implementation can be quite technical.

We would like the solution to lower the costs as much as possible. It’s always better for the customer if it is less expensive.

I’ve been dealing with the solution for six months.

The solution is stable. It’s reliable, and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze.

The solution is definitely scalable. It’s not a problem to expand it. If a company wants to, it can scale the product.

One client usually has about 1,000 assets to scan.

I’ve never had to use technical support. So far, the solution has been trouble-free.

My engineer can complete an installation in one or two days. I don't directly deal with it as it's quite complex. You need to be technical. It’s not for non-technical people.

We have five people that can handle deployment and maintenance. They are systems and ops engineers.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations.

I’d rate the solution seven out of ten.