Microsoft Azure File Storage Reviews

Microsoft Azure File Storage enables seamless integration with enterprise interfaces like ADF to exchange data with external applications via HTTP protocols. This allows business users to easily transfer files or access files generated from other systems in SaaS or PaaS environments. For instance, you can use specific connectors to directly generate data from Salesforce and store it in Azure Storage. Additionally, Azure File Storage provides endpoints and a comprehensive API for managing data access.

Microsoft Azure File Storage allows business users to connect to storage using Azure Active Directory features for authentication and security. This facilitates storing, transferring, and accessing data securely. It's a valuable feature appreciated for its simplicity and ease of use.

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

The product is stable. I rank Microsoft Azure as number one, AWS as number two, and IBM Cloud as number three.

500 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The deployment is simple.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is a paid service, like most cloud services. Various payment plans are available, including pay-as-you-go and reserved instances for lower costs. You should reserve resources in advance to manage expenses efficiently.

Cloud providers like Microsoft Azure, IBM Cloud, and AWS often offer similar services, although they may present them differently. For instance, Azure Blob Storage is different from Azure File Storage. While the core functionalities may align, pricing, features, and performance differences exist among these services.

Microsoft Azure File Storage is a useful feature. I haven't encountered any issues with its connectors or integration into enterprise systems. While I've recently faced challenges with other technologies, Microsoft provides reliable services. 

Microsoft Azure File Storage provides robust security features to protect data at rest and in transit. While it utilizes TLS certificates for secure file transfer, additional security measures can be implemented through custom encryption algorithms or encryption methods. This allows for tailored security solutions to meet the specific needs of enterprise companies, ensuring data remains protected during storage and transit.

We recommend Microsoft Azure File Storage because it offers secure access to your data from anywhere. Cloud providers prioritize security, which is crucial for all companies today. Securing data in transit and at rest is a significant challenge, and Azure provides robust solutions. Additionally, the cloud is the future of computing.

Overall, I rate the solution 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 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.

I generally help customers use Microsoft Azure File Storage primarily for a lot of purposes, including the storage of files and enhancing storage security. There are private endpoints and private DNS resolver, which is basically a private endpoint resolver that resolves the IP address of the private endpoints internally. It is then further mapped within the application. It also has short file storage which accesses the storage according to the minimum privilege and rights assigned to that storage. It has networking facilities and firewall options to safeguard public data. It also has a SaaS token that can be generated around the storage and shared storage which enables customers to share their files through Azure File Storage. 

Flexible stroage in the cloud is very use and can be cheap and programmaticlay deployed

There are various features attached to the solution, including firewall options to safeguard it. The profile management option is another valuable feature that allows us to manage the profiles and secure them. It allows the user to understand what configuration has been made to the  Azure virtual desktop. Blob Table Container Tables Queues Elastic San & Azure NetApp Files are also lots of other features that can be explored.

There is always going to be room for improvement. Certain use cases will evolve where file storage is used with visual ID and group mapping. As long as the dynamic mapping is working seamlessly, there aren’t any changes needed in Microsoft Azure File Storage. As of now, I've got no such recommendations.

Importing and exporting data needs to have a bit more documentation. Recently, Microsoft has actually stepped up and provided some training about securing data but they need to have a solution in case the data needs to be migrated. They need to include a service to securely transfer the data through Microsoft and encrypt it.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure File Storage for a couple of years.

It is very rare to get an outage in Azure. If there are any issues, the data is replicated into the DR region, allowing you to access it depending on the skew that is actually applied. 

Microsoft Azure File Storage can scale well because of its dynamic nature. It's quite scalable because of a file agent that is set on-premise and helps to scale out pretty much really. Azure can create large storage accounts and manage that, replicating the data securely.

Medium to large enterprises can mostly use file storage because they have a lot of data and Microsoft's features are evolving every day, making it a fit match.

I have direct experience with customer service at Microsoft. Usually, it involved raising a ticket. However, we as consultants are expected to fix the client’s problems first, and if there is a bug, then we raise the ticket. My experience with customer support is pretty good. They've always responded very quickly, and I never had to follow up with them. 

Positive

Net App

The setup is easy and easily doable. As long as the steps recommended by Microsoft are applied, it is not very complex. 

Usually, it is our customers who implement the solution. In most cases, they don’t require assistance if they follow the guidelines laid by Microsoft. However, in case there is any kind of assistance required, we help them to set it up. Usually, it is deployed on the cloud, but there are multiple ways to mimic the deployment and in some cases, they require it.

The pricing is usually dependent on your storage requirements. Overall, I believe Microsoft Azure File Storage's price is reasonable. 

On Premises San Storage

As long as one knows how to implement and secure it, Microsoft Azure File Storage can be used efficiently. There aren’t any particular recommendations, because a lot of it is already in place.

Microsoft has been implementing these scenarios but they can work a bit more around the SaaS token scenario. If they can simplify that, it can be great as not enough people use the SaaS tokens. I think this needs to be explained on an engineering level. If they include it, customers can use and choose this facility.

Overall, 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.

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.

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.