Microsoft Azure File Storage Reviews

We use the solution to store the files that are fed to the product by the end user. All the files are stored in Microsoft Azure File Storage.

The security features and the ease of integration are good.

Some of the procedures are a bit more complex in Azure than in other providers.

I have been using the solution for a year.

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

The scalability is good. The tool can be scaled automatically.

The setup is not straightforward, but it is not complex. We need some technical knowledge to do it. Our technical team deployed the system in our organization. The tool is deployed on the cloud.

The tool is easy to integrate with our products and applications.

The price could be reduced. The tiered pricing model is good. The solution is a bit pricey compared to AWS and Google. We pay as we use.

We also use other cloud providers. When we operate in the Microsoft ecosystem, including Microsoft 365, emails, and Microsoft Exchange, it is easy to incorporate Microsoft Azure into the system and make it accessible end-to-end. That is why we chose Microsoft. It would be difficult to integrate other cloud providers because the user IDs will be in a different system. We wanted everything within Microsoft so that the integrations would be easy.

Our developers are creating a solution. It will be a B2C product. Once the solution is created, we will launch the product in a couple of weeks. Many end users will start using the product. We use the basic tiers. Our developers are certified Azure personnel. They are developing the product with their own knowledge.

We have not reached out to Microsoft for support. People can use the Microsoft Azure ecosystem. It is easy to log in and integrate it into the already existing Microsoft 365 subscriptions. If an organization already uses the Microsoft ecosystem and would like to start using the cloud, they can use Azure.

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

We are transforming our Oracle databases to the data lake because the data volume is increasing daily. We are moving from classic Azure to modernize our architecture in that scenario.

The product can integrate with all platforms. My team also does data visualization, and Power BI can directly connect with those nodes. We can very conveniently connect with multiple tools for our database. The benefit here is that by utilizing the same storage application, my application is linked with their application through the same server. This setup provides real analytics and data for a holistic purpose, which is advantageous.

The tool needs to add more controls and enhance Power BI. For instance, I'm just suggesting the visualization layer. Power BI can increase visualization as much as possible, and the product can add more controls to the data flows. 

I have been working with the product for seven to eight months. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten.

My company has 20-23 users. 

As of now, support seems to be understanding the situation well. If there are any questions about the intro, they're handled separately. We've hired a vendor to provide support in India, and they should be able to provide the necessary assistance. However, if the issue surpasses their capabilities, it's escalated to the US panel or the core development team, which usually takes longer.

Our vendor helps with the deployment process.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

I was using Microsoft Azure File Storage because we were receiving the batch file.

In a previous project, our team opted to utilize Microsoft Azure File Storage as our initial choice due to the need to gather batch files from various systems, including SAP and other external sources. We stored all the data in the file storage, and then employed either Azure Data Pipeline or Azure Data Factory to retrieve the files from storage, process them, extract the data, and ultimately transfer it to Azure Data Store. We relied on file storage as a means to store the batch files.

The most significant aspect of Microsoft Azure File Storage is its life cycle functionality, which enables us to transfer files to various storage options, such as hot storage, full storage, and archive. This feature is crucial since we can apply a life cycle method to files that have not been in use for an extended period, and then move them to a cheaper cold storage option to save costs. Since the newest files are stored in the hot storage, it met our specific requirements. Consequently, older files can be transferred to archive and cold storage.

I have used the file storage explorer in multiple systems, and it seems a bit cumbersome and not very efficient, particularly with authentication. It can be tricky to set it up.

As a developer or technical asset of Microsoft Azure Data Storage, it's relatively easy to navigate. However, for non-technical individuals attempting to use the file storage on their laptops and installing file storage explorer, there may be authentication issues that are difficult to resolve from a non-technical perspective. This has been my experience, and I believe it could be challenging for someone who is not tech-savvy.

I have been using Microsoft Azure File Storage for approximately three years.

The stability of the solution is great.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure File Storage a ten out of ten.

The scalability of Microsoft Azure File Storage is scalable. We selected the package from Azure services to scale the solution to our needs.

We have approximately 20 people using this solution.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure File Storage a nine out of ten.

Microsoft team was trying to sell more of their solutions than providing the support we needed.

I rate the support of Microsoft Azure File Storage a six out of ten.

Neutral

I have used Amazon AWS.

Setting up Microsoft Azure is generally straightforward, but from a non-technical standpoint, Microsoft Azure File Storage can be somewhat challenging. I have helped others who simply wanted to use it as a central storage system, and it can be difficult for other people within the company to utilize it due to its somewhat complicated nature.

The deployment of the solution is quick because we use DevOps in our pipelines which reduces the time to 15 to 20 minutes to deploy.

The deployment can be done by one person with scripts and it is automated.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is worth the investment. 

The price of the solution is reasonable. The pricing model is based on usage.

Depending on the size of the deployment will determine out much maintenance staff is needed. However, two people are typical for maintenance. Some of the maintenance tasks are modifying the code as per the requirements and fixing bugs and issues.

I would advise others if they want a life cycle storage it is a good option. The cloud solutions are good.

I rate Microsoft Azure File Storage a nine out of ten.

As an enterprise solution architect, I have most often used Microsoft Azure File Storage as a file storage solution in projects that have required the migration of organizational data from on-premises to the public cloud. In these cases, the migration is usually a one-time transfer of data to Azure File Storage, where the data then resides going forward.

Essentially, with any content management platforms that we implement for ourselves or our customers, Azure File Storage will almost certainly play a part in the final solution. For example, we are now building a new knowledge management hub as an internal platform for solution architects, and it is based on Azure. 

That said, at my company we tend to take a pretty agnostic view when it comes to products and vendors, and with some of the ITSM or content management solutions that we recommend such as those offered by ServiceNow and AIOps, we will deploy on both AWS and Azure as these are our preferred partners. 

During the course of my work, I have also dealt with other Azure products such as Azure Data Factory, but data warehousing is only one part of what I do, as my role is more aligned to business development and solution architecture. We have a platform focused on data solutions, comprising AI data warehousing, recording, analytics, etc., and this kind of platform would be more likely to be using Azure Data Factory for all of the data lakes across the various public and private cloud providers.

Right now, my role is a bit broader and more generalist, and I would usually have someone well-versed in the Azure cloud actually building the solutions. I am more interested in the economics of Azure solutions, and I have found a lot of customers are asking, "Can you bring in some expertise on cloud economics?" So this is definitely an area of interest and a core focus for me.

The biggest advantage of Azure File Storage vis-à-vis other public cloud storage providers, and why we recommend Azure first and foremost, is that many of our customers have partnerships with Microsoft and so they have access to better cloud economics. Compared to AWS, we have found that (from a customer perspective) Azure is much more competitive.

Another advantage of Azure is the fact that it integrates so well with our customers' existing Active Directory implementation, which really saves a lot of time when integrating on-premises environments with public cloud environments. With Azure, it's a seamless integration.

One thing that Azure File Storage could help us with is some kind of impact assessment. When we talk to some of our larger customers who have between 500 and 1,000 applications, we normally do an assessment of all these applications and then tell them which ones are ready to be lifted and shifted, and which ones need to re-architected. It would really help if Azure File Storage could come up with a better way to give estimations of the total investment required, including all costs incurred during the migration.

For some aspects of file storage, there will only be approximate requirements, but for others there are empirical formulas, and it would greatly assist the solution architects and customers to have access to better assessments in this area. For instance, in one case we had, there was an unexpected escalation of costs which were not factored in from the beginning. Of course, this wasn't Azure's fault, but an impact assessment to prevent this kind of occurrence would definitely help. And, I believe, it would be a win-win for both us and Azure, because it would help Azure bring the right customers to the table.

Another thing I could see being useful is some form of diagnostic tool with perhaps a list of errors that can potentially happen. From a solution architect perspective, I would want to give my customers some pointers about possible pitfalls, and a diagnostic tool like this would make it much easier for me.

From an internal team perspective, there's also lot of improvements that could be done when it comes to Active Directory. We find a lot of errors occur in our Single Sign-On integration with AD because not all scenarios are integrated from isolated networks, and they are often not configured to be isolated during the project. So, at times, when you go live, you'll suddenly hear someone screaming. To prevent these errors, I would propose a type of auto-discovery feature that is automated to some extent.

Finally, a typical issue that we see during file migrations is failed transfers for whatever reason (e.g. network connection issues), and the current methods that Azure employs for dealing with these failures could be improved upon. My suggestion would be some kind of transfer management solution, especially one that is enabled for mobile. With this, there might be a type of dashboard where I would be able to easily see what percentage of the transfer has been completed, and take the actions necessary to go back and restart the transfer at the point where it failed. Anything more intuitive than the current solution would help us during file transfer failures.

I have worked with Azure File Storage for one year.

Overall, we don't have any complaints when it comes to stability.

I can confirm that Azure is a reliably scalable platform. However, with the non-production environments that we normally use, Azure File Storage isn't that easy to scale during development in real-world scenarios.

To elaborate, we have one engagement where we are supporting up to 140,000 VMs, and our non-production environment load comprises the simultaneous use of many people working on it at a high velocity and with many requests per second. Whereas, in a production environment, many of the processes are automated and predictable, and there are various cloud management tools available to help.

I have never interacted with Azure technical support, since the alliance we have between Microsoft and the delivery teams means that they are the only ones who interact when it comes to support.

The setup of Azure File Storage is undertaken by the delivery team, but from a pre-sales perspective I haven't heard anything untoward regarding the setup, or anything that suggests it is very challenging. We have a partnership with Microsoft, so whenever we have challenges with setup or implementation, we invoke our alliance and somebody from Microsoft comes along to help us.

There are fewer hidden costs involved compared to other solutions, and when our customer is already a Microsoft partner, they typically have access to more affordable fees.

We are somewhat vendor-agnostic so we also use other cloud storage solutions, such as those from AWS. However, we always recommend Azure for a number of reasons such as that there are fewer hidden costs involved, as well as the fact that our customers are typically partners of Microsoft and thus get access to better economics as a result.

Our customers in the retail industry are a bit hesitant about AWS, and will usually go with them for specific workloads which require a lot of algorithms and domain-specific expertise.

While there are some areas for improvement, Azure File storage is, overall, a highly comprehensive solution which ticks all the boxes for us. For cloud file storage and file transfers, it is definitely our preferred solution.

I would rate Microsoft Azure File Storage an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for migrating local file servers and for file storage of on-premise systems.

The immutable storage features are valuable. It works very well.

It’s a challenge to find the right support person. The technical support must be improved.

I have been using the solution for three years.

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

I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten. Our customers are not very large companies. The product is suitable for small and medium-sized businesses.

If we are in the right queue, the support is very good. If we have the right support person, the support is quite good.

The initial setup is easy, straightforward, and quick.

I did the deployment myself. I have deployed the tool as a consultant for other companies.

The product must improve its price.

I am a service provider for Microsoft. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I work for a company that is a partner with Microsoft. Therefore, the use cases depend on the client. I've used it for various solutions, including those for banks and financial institutions.

I like that we can copy and download data using Azure. It's not just for file storage; we can also use it for large data sets or to host static web applications.

A lot of things could be better, especially when it comes to accessing File Storage for monitoring. Azure Copy is fine, but there could be additional integration and security features for those who want more privacy and control over access to Azure.

I have been using this solution for four years now. I always use the latest version available.w

Azure is pretty stable, but occasionally, like many cloud services, it has stability issues. But most of the time, it’s stable.

It's highly scalable. Most of our clients are enterprise businesses.

The customer service and support are good. 

Positive

I've worked with a lot of different solutions, including e-commerce and cloud migration solutions in various domains, such as banking and finance.

I've used Microsoft technologies, like Azure and .NET, but not their products. I have experience with Windows Azure CDN. I've worked with a variety of Azure products, including CDN, and AKS.

I've used Azure AKS, Azure Functions, and Azure Storage accounts. I've used File Storage, Block Storage, ADSL, and Data Lake Storage Gen2.

The initial setup is easy. The deployment model depends on the customer. Some want cloud, but if it's not suitable, it's deployed on-premises. Most customers are hybrid.

Moreover, the deployment time depends on the workload. Some take minutes, and some take weeks.

I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. It's not cheap.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

In my company, we use Microsoft Azure File Storage for the backup of our data since we have opted for an on-premises deployment model. We also use it to keep another copy of the data.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is not that easy to use. We had a few concerns regarding the communication between Microsoft's on-premises and cloud versions, which we feel is because of the geolocation differences between our business and the data centers of Microsoft. The product should be easier to use.

Since the initial setup phase of Microsoft Azure File Storage was not easy, it should be made easier by getting Microsoft to pay closer attention to the Middle East region.

I have been using Microsoft Azure File Storage for four years. I use the solution's latest version.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten since my company did face some communication issues between Microsoft's on-premises and cloud versions.

It is a scalable product since it is a cloud solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The IT personnel in our company use the solution.

My company has managers, admins, engineers, and developers as technical staff for the solution.

It is regularly used in my company.

The solution's technical support is good.

The initial setup phase of Microsoft Azure File Storage was not easy.

The deployment process was completed in two weeks.

Our company uses the help of consultants during the installation. We can also call the resellers to help us with the installation.

My company has experienced a return on investment for our business use cases.

The licensing cost for Microsoft Azure File Storage comes with an agreement from Microsoft.

I would tell those planning to buy the solution to put in the effort to understand Microsoft's strategy before they go for a cloud solution or cloud storage. The product's potential users need to find the risks of going to a cloud solution and the return on their investment. They also need to compare the on-premises and the cloud solution offered by Microsoft Azure File Storage.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We are using Microsoft Azure File Storage for file access.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure File Storage is the cloud file storage capability.

The support could improve.

I have been using Microsoft Azure File Storage for approximately six years.

We looked into the stability before we chose this solution and it has great stability.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Azure File Storage a nine out of ten.

We have less than 500 people using the solution.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Azure File Storage an eight out of ten.

The support needs to improve. When we contacted support we received different answers to resolute our issue which was not helpful.

I rate the support from Microsoft Azure File Storage a three out of ten.

Negative

The majority of people are primarily using the Microsoft ecosystem. If I were not part of that ecosystem today, I would undoubtedly require an alternative to Microsoft Azure File Storage. In fact, I would likely opt for either Google or AWS instead.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure File Storage is simple. Someone with basic technical knowledge can handle the task.

We did the deployment of the solution ourselves.

The price of Microsoft Azure File Storage is expensive, we do not know exactly how the price is calculated.

I rate the price of Microsoft Azure File Storage five out of ten.

We use four people for the maintenance of the solution.

I rate Microsoft Azure File Storage an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution in the IoT environment to gather information from devices in file form using FTP protocol and SDP to move the files from the clients to the cloud. Naturally, we kept those files in the file system that we moved for various internal reasons into a database. Due to physical and preconceived infrastructure reasons, we moved the installation into the data of up to a week. This is to block storage for analytics and data warehousing.

The solution used a standard file system. It is very easy to use SSTP and some traditional code to move the data into a database because we can easily use the permissions and we don't have any integration or conversion issues.

The integration of the site storage with SQL was not completely seamless. We had to do some extra steps as there was no immediate support for file storage, only for block storage. For whatever reason, since we were working with a managed service and a secure service, most of the connections we made were not very successful. We had to do some networking. The integration has room for improvement.

In our process, we use the entire system just as an intermediate. An ideal solution is to gather the information from the endpoint and then move it into a database or sign-up. With that, we can do some analytics. In the future, it would be nice if there was a tight progression between the five storage and the analytical tools. For example, if we are working with Power BI, it would be very helpful if we could point to the signer, SQL environment, global environment, or file system environment and have them be completely synchronous.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The stability is good except for a few occasions when we had issues with the SQL.

The solution is scalable.

We have 100 people using the solution in our organization.

The technical support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I give the pricing of the solution a seven out of ten.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

I used Microsoft Azure File Storage for a project focused on deploying a Windows server and connecting that server to my Active Directory domain. I synchronized the file server with Microsoft Azure File Storage. I then set up and connected the disc storage with storage in the cloud to back up the data. My intent for using the solution was to back up data in the cloud. My company doesn't use Microsoft Azure File Storage, but other organizations, government, and non-government could be using it. The usage of the solution depends on whether an organization can integrate Microsoft Azure File Storage into its environment.

I like that Microsoft Azure File Storage works fine and is quick to deploy. It's also easy to connect to it, particularly when connecting it with my on-premise file servers. Microsoft Azure File Storage doesn't give me any connection issues.

Microsoft Azure File Storage needs more integrations.

I encountered a problem with the solution: Microsoft said you could directly integrate Azure file share on your PC by enabling that feature in Microsoft Azure File Storage. It worked at first, but then, when I restarted my PC, that feature stopped working. I did that only for research purposes, so I wonder if Microsoft fixed that bug or if that Azure file share integration feature in Microsoft Azure File Storage was designed wrong.

In the future, I also want to see GRC added to the portal to integrate it with Microsoft Azure File Storage and other Azure services. If you enroll or sign up for Azure services, your country may not have GRC available in the portal, so you may have to choose a strange country, for example, Kenya, to activate credit. Having GRC helps many students, enterprises, and users easily access Microsoft Azure File Storage.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure File Storage has good scalability. Scalability-wise, it's a nine out of ten.

My rating for the technical support for Microsoft Azure File Storage is nine out of ten.

I'm a Microsoft Student Ambassador, so I get free access to Microsoft technologies, and if I need support, I can contact other members or Microsoft directly. I can ask the community via Microsoft Teams. I'm an MVP nominee in the Windows Insider program, so I can ask a question and get an answer quickly, so I rated support as nine.

Positive

It was my first time using a public cloud storage service, such as Microsoft Azure File Storage. It was also my first time using Azure to deploy a web application. The other tool I used wasn't in the public cloud storage but in the data visualization niche. That was Microsoft Power BI, which I connected to a database on Azure and an API gateway.

Microsoft Azure File Storage deployment is quick but depends on your connection. A good connection takes one or two clicks, and the deployment time also depends on the data you have in Microsoft Azure File Storage.

If you have more data, then that takes more time. Still, Microsoft has improved the capabilities, quality, and protocol to help enterprises transfer even massive amounts of data many times. I don't have much data, though, just around 500MB.

I deployed Microsoft Azure File Storage. I didn't need a consultant because I referred to the documentation. Microsoft documentation gives information on different services. For example, if you type "Azure cloud services," you'll find various topics on cloud services. If you choose, for example, "file sync," you'll see information on how to start, the steps you need to take, how to integrate, etc. If you face any issue following the steps in the documentation, you can always Google it.

The licensing cost for Microsoft Azure File Storage is very low. I viewed my bill from Azure on the portal, and the solution didn't cost much.

Microsoft Azure File Storage has a reasonable price. It's cheap, price-wise.

I recommend Microsoft Azure File Storage to other people.

My Microsoft Azure File Storage rating is a nine on a scale of one to ten.