Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

We use it basically for binary or any text data that needs to be there. Or if we want to solve something like data redundancy problems.

And some image processing. We have also done some image processing in one of the POCs. So that's one of the use cases for us.

The index search and block storage are valuable features.

In future releases, I would add something like a better lifecycle management system, and for integration purposes, I would add some stuff related to newer concepts like data products and databases. I would like to have a seamless flow between those things.

All my companies that use Azure use Object Storage.

More than 2,000 people were using those kinds of things.

The initial setup is usually easy.

It is neither cheap nor expensive. So, the pricing is in-between. 

I would recommend it. But I would also suggest that you check your requirements, and then we can discuss things like performance optimization, security, and stability. Also, consider cost optimization and potential interruptions. Once you're satisfied with those things, it will be easy for you to go for it.

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

I appreciate the scalability of this solution; it is fully scalable and excellent for certain tasks. One thing I particularly like is the block solution, where files are divided into parts and sent through the firewall in parallel, making it incredibly fast. However, there have been some issues with disconnections, especially when downloading large files. It works perfectly for handling many smaller files, though. The initial storage options, like data lake storage, are diverse and cater to various needs such as big data analytics. As a certified professional architect expert, I find it crucial to understand specific requirements to make the most of these solutions.

Our current Azure setup faces challenges with API connectivity, particularly due to misconfigurations related to changes in Azure Graph. Version disparities in APIs and duplicated features have been flagged by Microsoft, complicating security updates. To enhance efficiency, we need improvements in the configuration process, ensuring a smoother integration of our solutions with Azure services. Additionally, naming and access control have been a bit challenging. While we start by setting private access for files in Blob Storage, syncing becomes an issue when making the Blob solution publicly accessible. It is like the Linux system, where granting access to an upper folder doesn't automatically cover internal files. Unlike Windows, here we need to be more specific about access, making it a bit tricky to manage.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure Object Storage for over ten years.

I would rate the stability as a nine out of ten. It is very stable.

Scalability is one of the strongest aspects of the product. I would rate it as a nine out of ten. We have approximately 10,000 end users of the product.

When it comes to technical support, the UK team has been good and responsive, especially with premium support. However, the Indian support team's performance is not as strong, and I would rate them around five out of ten. Advanced support, on the other hand, tends to be more efficient and timely in assisting.

Neutral

Before Microsoft products, we worked with other vendors like AWS for scalable storage solutions. The choice between AWS and Microsoft Azure largely depends on the client's existing setup – for instance, if they were using AWS before, we often stuck with that. However, in cases where object storage was a priority, we found Microsoft Azure's Blob Storage to be a fitting solution. It is all about adapting to the client's needs and the specifics of their setup.

We haven't been actively maintaining the product from our end. Currently, our technical team comprises 20 engineers.

The pricing for the product can be reasonable, especially for standard usage. I would rate it as a six out of ten in terms of costliness. However, costs can escalate if you are using storage accounts for resource-intensive cases. It is important to assess the nature of your usage and whether a more cost-effective solution exists. 

Using Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the specific use case. For storing numerous small files in the cloud, object storage like this is excellent -persistent, flexible, and generally a good fit. However, for tasks involving deep data analytics or databases, it is more of a case-by-case decision. Evaluating your specific needs and how well the solution aligns with them is crucial. Overall, I would rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for file sharing.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is flexible and has all the features we need.

The solution’s stability could be improved.

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

I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten for stability.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. Around 1,000 users are using the solution in our organization.

The solution's technical support is good.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

We have seen a return on investment with Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

We don't need to pay for the solution's license.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a cloud-based solution. I would recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten.

The main use case that I have in my company is to store some scanned documents from our customers.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the tool's price since it is not expensive. The tools that support using Azure Blob Storage, like the open source storage accounts like Azure Storage Explorer, are really easy to use and user-friendly. When it comes to life cycle management, you have many pricing tiers associated with storage costs. You can use policies to change between the pricing tires, and it is really easy to use the policies.

For me, there are many things that are only possible to be used in the CLI for easy copying. I think if the tool puts features that only exist in the easy copying area through Azure Storage Explorer, so introducing such features in Microsoft Azure Object Storage can make it more user-friendly.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for five or six years. I am a customer of the solution.

I didn't have any problems, so I didn't use the tool's technical support. I found everything that I needed on the internet or using the CLI, so I never had to use the tools' support. I rate the tool a six out of ten.

Neutral

I have only used Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward, but if you don't pay attention, you will have to delete and create another storage because some options cannot be changed.

The product's deployment phase is easy.

The solution can be deployed in a couple of minutes.

For any kind of cloud provider, when you use the correct tools instead of just putting virtual machines inside the cloud, you will always have a good return on investment. I don't see Azure to be very different from AWS.

I didn't have any problem with the tool's durability, so I guess it is okay. We have used it for many years, and there hasn't been a single case of missing documents, as it always works perfectly.

Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2 is a tool my company started to use with Azure Databricks, and it has been a good experience till now. When it comes to pricing, Azure Databricks uses a large amount of data, and the price is okay even with a lot of data to manage.

Microsoft, in general, is complicated because there are some tools that we have great support for, and there are some tools that you simply don't. For example, I worked with an application gateway, and the support wasn't great. There are lots of people working with me. When there were some issues in the application gateway, we had to figure it out for ourselves, and the the support wasn't able to help us. There are other tools for which the support is good.

Speaking about AI and Microsoft Azure Object Storage, Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2 helps us to update Azure Data Lake Storage sources, and when you enable the option in the storage account, you can connect a lot of tools, like Azure Databricks or Azure Machine Learning Studio, so you can use them as a source of data for your models. The tool helps us since it is easy to use. The tool is pretty straightforward. You don't have to think about the tool, as it just works fine.

I recommend the tool to others.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for our data streams and logs. We bring all our live data streams and store them in Microsoft Azure Object Storage. When the files are added to the folder, the Lambda series will kick in, and then we will run and train the models with new data and publish the results. The outputs will be written to Snowflake.

What I like most about Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that you have many ways to access it.

I have no complaints about Microsoft Azure Object Storage, but maybe its market size could be more extensive, and its backup speed enhanced. My company is still building an amenity, so I have yet to review what went wrong with the current stack. My team will document anything that's not developed as technical learning.

One limitation of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that you can only use it if your data does not change. If your data is in a file, you also use Microsoft Azure Object Storage. The solution is not meant for data that you need to update.

I've been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage since 2011.

My rating for Microsoft Azure Object Storage in terms of stability is nine out of ten.

The scalability of Microsoft Azure Object Storage depends on the use case and how an aspect of the solution can be leveraged as data storage on public storage. Still, based on my use case, Microsoft Azure Object Storage is scalable.

My experience is with Microsoft Azure Object Storage developer support for real-time issues, particularly support from the Microsoft Azure portal. It's a seven out of ten support-wise because it could be far better. I'm aware that many issues can arise from availability, but my team was able to manage, so I rate it as seven. Otherwise, I would have given the support a four or five.

Neutral

I used AWS and found Microsoft Azure Object Storage more mature than AWS because, database-wise, Microsoft Azure Object Storage is more well-known, so I prefer it over AWS, and my company went with it.

From a service point of view, on the other hand, AWS is better than Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure Object Storage in terms of integration and data storage. AWS is also more comfortable for memory and virtual machines, but Google Cloud is better for data workflows.

I found Microsoft Azure Object Storage simple to set up, but it depends on how well you know the service. If you know the service, then setting it up is pretty straightforward, but if you do not know Microsoft Azure Object Storage, you first need to understand how it's meant to be implemented. For me, setting up the solution is easy.

We do the deployments for Microsoft Azure Object Storage. We test the development in-house, as we have our infrastructure.

The pricing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage is high and needs some reduction. It's a seven out of ten, price-wise, because it currently limits your consumption, so the solution should have better pricing. The pricing for Microsoft Azure Object Storage should be more flexible for clients.

I evaluated AWS and GCP.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is currently deployed on a private cloud, but my company will eventually deploy it on the public cloud.

My company doesn't have direct users accessing Microsoft Azure Object Storage because the target is to write data on it on the object bucket.

I can recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to others, but I'll base my recommendation on the use case.

Based on what I'm using it for, my rating for the solution is nine out of ten.

My parent company has a partnership with Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

We use the solution on multiple levels. We deploy at the product level, production, and internal use cases.

The most valuable features of the solution are its performance and stability.

Since the solution is messy and heavy, it needs to be faster in terms of speed and latency.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for five years.

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

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. Around 60 people use the solution extensively in our organization.

The solution provides good technical support.

The solution’s initial setup is a little complex. Around 15 technical staff are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a stable product with good enough uptime.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an expensive solution. We need to pay a monthly licensing fee for the solution. We need to pay extra setup cost in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We use the enterprise version of the solution. I would recommend the solution to people who have a Microsoft ecosystem.

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

Perhaps some customers wish to share information such as DPN or other materials about the company. However, we are uncertain about reaching every worldwide employee in every country or office. Therefore, this solution allows to download or access information like product details or new prices.

The reason is that I believe they only offer the corporate interface we use, and perhaps they should consider creating a historical customer interface. I haven't created a virtual machine; instead, I've established a personal GED. This allows me to provide customers with the necessary role functions, enabling them to download files without incurring excessive costs.         

The efficiency depends on various operations, and therefore, it should involve multiple vendor support.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for three to five years.

The stability is good.

It is scalable and we have around ten users.

We have used Microsoft's technical support through phone calls; the experience was okay.

Positive

Regarding the integration and setup of Public Storage, it was a bit complex. The upgrade process was okay. In terms of time, I'm not sure about the exact duration of the deployment. We use object storage for data related to different customers. I'm still learning about the steps involved in deployment.

We didn't use a consultant; it's done in-house. The technical staff needed for deployment and maintenance is more than ten. 

I'm not aware of the licensing cost, as my customer handles it. In Taiwan, it's reasonably priced,

I would recommend this solution, and my advice is to use it for object storage or other services. I would like to see improvements in integration to support multiple operations.

We use the product for storage, documentation, and reporting. 

Microsoft Azure Object Storage needs to improve stability and cloud user interface. 

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

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is scalable, and we have nine users. 

A consultant helped us with the implementation. 

The tool's licensing costs are annual. It should be made reasonable. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

The solution can be used to share files and folders.

The product has good accessibility.

The stability could be improved.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight and a half out of ten.

The tool is scalable. I rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten. Around 100 technical support team members, including support engineers, support analysts, and service delivery managers, use the solution in our organization.

I have contacted the support team for a couple of issues. The team is knowledgeable.

We were using the on-premise solution NAS provided by Dell.

The setup is straightforward.

The tool is worth the money.

The solution is expensive. However, we can choose to get a budget-friendly license. The vendor should offer extensions on the licenses. People are still working on on-premise servers. If we want them to move to the cloud, the vendors must provide competitive prices. We have a couple of small to medium businesses. The solution is not affordable for small businesses.

The vendor must provide more information on how the tool helps users. Many of our clients do not know the solutions provided by the vendor. Though the information is available on the website, most customers do not understand the technical aspects. A better way to explain the tool's uses would be through pictures. Overall, I rate the product an eight and a half out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for backups, archiving, and SFTP storage.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an easy-to-use and stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution. The cost management part is a little complex, and if we don't configure it right, it can be pretty expensive.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for a few years.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. Around 200 users are using the solution in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

The solution’s technical support should be improved.

We have previously used different solutions. We switched to Microsoft Azure Object Storage because most of our landscape is on Azure, and it's easier to have everything in one place than using a different vendor. So, it's convenient for us.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution can be deployed in one or two weeks.

The solution's cost is on a pay-per-use basis.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten.