Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

I use the solution in my company for business applications and to move content.

I can't speak about the specific features I like about the product, but I know that it was used for our company's processes. The most valuable features of the solution are related to its ease of use and performance.

The stability of the product is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required.

I have been Microsoft Azure Object Storage for 7 years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Scalability-wise, my company didn't face any issues. I rate the solution's scalability out of seven out of ten.

It is not a tool used by users since it is for the system. The front-end system uses the storage.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.

For the product's deployment phase, my company used CI/CD pipelines and the DevOps process, but the storage can be accessed through laptops and Azure Storage Explorer, which was a great feature.

The product was deployed with the help of our company's in-house team.

The product works on a real-time and optimized basis. The scalability offered by the product is one of its benefits. You don't have to wait for your company's infrastructure team to increase the storage, as it can grow on its own.

The tool has a pay-per-use pricing model. You need to pay for what you are consuming. It is not a complex model. It is not an expensive product. There is no need to pay extra money for the licensing costs since the price is based on the storage you consume.

The tool is useful for our company's client engagement and for the automation of their business applications.

The product's security measures are good. I rate the tool's security measures an eight out of ten.

Speaking about the integration capabilities of the product, I can say that my company serves as a system integrator of the tool for our clients.

The product integrates with our customers' existing ecosystems.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a straightforward product that is available with good documentation and is useful for a good number of use cases. I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the tool a seven or eight out of ten.

For us, there was a specific use case where we were trying to collect some of the information and this was a project related to IoT information collection. That is where we used Object Storage. There was bot storage used as well. We were trying to collect some information from smart meters. That smart meter solution that we developed for the customer required both Object Storage as well as Block Storage.

There are a variety of good features. Which one is best really depends on the customer's focus or specific deployment. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

The solution offers good documentation.

When you get the right support person, you can deal with issues very fast.

While we defined the solution, it was not fully implemented before I left. Therefore, it would be difficult to point to an area that was lacking. 

Technical support with Microsoft is a bigger challenge as finding the right person to support you and actually getting that person on the call is hard. If you are able to get the right person on the call, then he is able to help fast. That said, in most cases, getting the right person on the call itself is a challenge.

The setup process could always be a bit easier. It's hard to find good resources. With the cloud being new, it's difficult to find the people who have done it already.

I've been using the solution for three to six months. It's been less than a year so far. 

I left before the solution was fully implemented. Therefore, while I did not see any instability, I can't speak to how stable it was once it was up and running. 

From our requirement perspective, the required scalability existed in the solution. We had no issues with scaling. 

I've interacted with technical support. They were okay. However, getting the person you need to assist you can be a challenge. 

Neutral

I have been comfortable with Microsoft technology, in general, and Microsoft approaches in the past as well. That's the reason, in most cases, I prefer to use Microsoft solutions as such.

The process is not that complex. There is a challenge finding resources who understand the cloud, however. With most of the technologies, there is enough documentation, however, what happens is, when you are looking at the whole ecosystem as such, you need resources that know what is happening. Generally, there are articles that can assist you with the setup. Therefore, for those who have knowledge with the solution, it's straightforward, however, newer users would find it possibly a bit complex. 

I'm not sure how many people would be required to maintain the solution. 

I haven't gotten a chance to evaluate this solution in comparison to others. For example, I've never been able to compare Object Storage on AWS.

The company I worked for was a Microsoft gold partner. We were Azure partners as well. 

We use a private cloud deployment. There were some sensitive products that were supposed to only be available as a part of the private cloud, even though they were in the Azure cloud, they were fully accessible from the internal network.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Our use case is related to a data lake. It is just a file collection.

I am using its latest version. It is in the cloud through a private company.

AzCopy is probably the best feature. It's a scripting app or a scripting function. Whether it's a Linux batch or a PowerShell script, you can essentially just send a file via a line of code with a specific key.

Currently, the Microsoft Azure Storage Explorer is just a Windows app. I don't know if it's available on mobile, such as iOS or Android. I don't know if the app is mobile-friendly. It should be mobile-friendly.

I've been using it every day for four years.

It is stable.

I haven't hit any limitations yet, and I'd say it is scalable. There are probably different scaling solutions, such as a data lake or a data warehouse. Those would be the next version of this, as opposed to binary large object storage.

We have less than five users.

It's a Microsoft product. They're the best software company in the world. So, the support is quick. It is immediate. Sometimes, it is too quick but pretty helpful. They'll get you through the problem. Their support is definitely very good.

It is easy to set up. You just sign in. You have to have a cloud subscription. Once you deploy a disk or any sort of object that can be manipulated in the cloud on a cloud-based model, all you do is sign in, and access should be granted to that resource.

It was implemented in-house. I take care of its deployment and maintenance.

It has a pay-as-you-go model. So, you are only paying for what you store. It's an attractive model. You don't pay for a set; you pay for what you actually use.

It's definitely one of the top Azure Cloud objects out there for file storage and accessing files. Especially if you're using the Microsoft ecosystem, it's definitely one of the best tools for cloud storage for files.

I would rate it a nine out of ten just because of the mobile presence.

We are using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for storing customer content. Our applications are running on Kubernetes, and the content is stored on the Microsoft Azure Object Storage. For example, we are using the queues for email. We have a couple of web jobs that are running that pick up the object from the queues. Additionally, we are using it for the files.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is that it is on the cloud.

We have experienced a data copy bottleneck with the AZ copy using Microsoft Azure Object Storage, this should improve. It has high CPU consumption. There are a couple of ways to copy files fast, we have tried a few ways. Other than AZ copy, we can use Azure Fluent Storage, which also takes a lot of time to copy files. The AZ copy is faster but it takes a lot of time and CPU operations.

Microsoft Storage Explorer is used for connectivity but it needs to be improved.

On the backend side, it is not an easy implementation, and if they introduced a solution roadmap, that would be great.

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

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is somewhat stable, but some improvements need to be applied. I can remember, it was down one time. We have faced a lot of issues since our application is tightly coupled with storage. More than 700 customers were affected during that time period. A lot of queries came, and lots of tickets were created for us because the storage was down.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage can scale in terms of users using the solution.

I am in a team of 50 and I am the manager of the team. In our company, all the project teams, and developers are using Microsoft Azure Object Storage mostly in the repair. We have approximately 300 to 500 developers using the solution.

I have contacted the support when the Microsoft Azure Object Storage could not be accessed. They did the recovery but it took them some time, approximately 10 hours.

We have only used Microsoft solutions.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure Object Storage for me is easy, but it depends on the person. If you do not have much experience it is not as easy. The whole process of implementation took 15 to 20 minutes. We have automated a lot of the processes.

When doing the deployment of Microsoft Azure Object Storage we have experienced some issues with our scripts and the automation.

We have one person in my team that is managing Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

The licensing cost of Microsoft Azure Object Storage is monthly. We have two types of licenses. One is the EA enterprise license and the other is a CSP license.

My advice to others is if you're going to be copying the data in Microsoft Azure Object Storage it will be slow.

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

I worked in Azure Cloud mostly on the Databricks side, with SQL Server or Synapse Analytics, or streaming analytics. It's a blob storage solution. We use the storage account, either the blob storage or the ADLS Gen 2.

We can do data queries easily. If it's a JSON document or XML document, mostly we deliver the APIs, calls, and all. The document is stored as an object stored in the Blob Storage. Then, using the Databricks, we try to process that JSON and then load it into a Delta Lake table. That is where we interact mostly with Object Storage.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

If we look at the different versions of that ADLS, it really does not have a hierarchical storage mechanism. If you want to store any document, you have to go and create one blob storage account, in case you want to store any hierarchical data. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's all scalable. It has lifecycle management where I can define a rule so that I can easily archive or move the data from the cool tier to the hot tier based on the uses and then I can also send it into the cool tier so that it can be frequently accessed. If I do that, the cost can also be minimized.

Technical support is great. We have a partnership basically with Microsoft. For my organization, Microsoft is the partner vendor. Whenever it is required, support is readily available to us.

Positive

I'm also familiar with Amazon S3. 

The initial setup is straightforward. You just have to create a storage account. You can automate that also. You have different mechanisms. You can use Azure templates, like SQL, or you can use the Terraform as well. To automate the creation of that object storage or any account. Or, if you have different APIs, like Python-based API, you can easily create what you need.

If we compare most of the other cloud vendor solutions, for example, S3 Object, S3 with the Blob Storage, more or less, both have the same capabilities. However, from a security perspective, Azure is very good. Azure offers AD integration with the storage account. That is something I find as a good feature compared to the other clouds and integration with all the Azure services is a really useful feature.

We're a gold partner with Microsoft.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten due to the ADLS integration and the different authentication mechanisms that we have.

We need to make sure that the data which we are storing in those storage objects is highly secured. That is where Azure is providing us with the best features. We can go with the different mechanisms like its Nexus security or the AD authentication. Or, they also provide us admin encryption, including the transparent keys. With transparent encryption, we can encrypt based on customer-based keys. Those are also some good features that make it a really great product.

I used the solution for email and messaging.

The layout of Microsoft is professional. It is suitable for office purposes.

The product hangs sometimes. The password retrieval process was very difficult.

I have been using the solution for ten years.

The tool’s stability has improved. It is much better now. It was not good 10 to 12 years ago. It used to freeze a lot. The UI has improved a lot.

The tool’s scalability is good.

The setup was complex. We created an account and decided on ways to retrieve passwords. We must also add our mobile number to the account.

I could do the deployment myself.

Google is better than Microsoft. Google's password retrieval process is very easy. However, Microsoft's layout and setup are much more professional. Google is much more user-friendly and interactive. Google is more secure than Microsoft. I often get emails on Microsoft that someone is trying to access my account.

I worked for a company that was a Microsoft Gold partner. I will not recommend the product to others. Google is a better tool. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

It's a platform we're currently adapting for various scenarios like development, deployment, and security needs for new solutions. 

The performance of the solution is good. It’s also good in terms of Information Security (IS) and structured services.

I have been using this solution for the past three years.

The solution is stable. It works fine for us.

We plan to increase the further usage depending on the customer's requirements. 

The operations team handles the support. If they need anything, they deal with it directly, and I haven't heard any complaints.

The initial setup is straightforward. It’s deployed on the cloud.

Our storage capacity is cheap because we have a committed discount. 

I recommend it. However, it depends on the specific use cases and existing environments. For new users, especially, it is a good start. 

However, those with several years of industry experience should thoroughly analyze requirements to determine which suits them better. 

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

We can store and load data into Snowflake using the product. We can easily create a storage layer in any system. We can store and backup data at any point before transformation.

The product's cost needs improvement during the POC stage. Additionally, its user interface could be better compared to AWS and GCP.

It is a stable product. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the product's scalability a nine out of ten.

We are running AWS and GCP as well.

I rate the initial setup process a seven out of ten. You need to understand many things by referring to the documentation before implementing it.

I rate Azure Blob storage's pricing a seven out of ten. Additional costs depend on the data and complexity of the project.

I rate Azure Blob storage an eight out of ten.

I recommend it to others as it is a leading cloud provider. I advise the customers to consider the cost. If you find it expensive, you can go for GCP and AWS.