Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

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.

Azure Object Storage is basically for storing files - if you want to process certain files. It's useful for if you want to keep images or some documents. I use it for that purpose as well.

We like the indexing feature.

The performance has been good. We haven't had any issues. 

The security has been fine.

Everything we need is already pretty much there.

It is very scalable. 

Technical support has been excellent. 

We are not missing any features. 

We would like it if we did not have to use another encryption solution to encrypt the storage. 

We've been using the solution for a couple of years. 

It's reliable and it performs well. it's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's scalable. We can increase storage as required. 

Azure Object Storage is mapped with a user. It's mapped to the server for storing files and all. So IOPS storage, probably we can talk 20,000 to 30,000 IOPS.

We monitor the usage based on there being increases.

Technical support is very good and very sound. 

Positive

There's not really an installation. It's a mapping solution. It's on the cloud. 

We have a common cloud team. They do any maintenance. It's a common cloud team who provisions the server, who manages the storage, who assigns the storage to the server. They do everything. We don't have a separate team.

I can't speak to the exact licensing costs. 

As a cloud-based solution, we are always on the latest version. It stays up-to-date.

I'd recommend the product to other users and organizations. 

Overall, I would rate the product ten 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.

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.

There are a couple of different use cases. One is a cheaper form of storage and also robust protection of data. We also use it for its immutability. If you have enough copies, then it will always be available.

Storage accounts are used for things like logic analyzers that feed into the different archives. It also feeds into Azure Backup. You can peer into different levels of the archive.

The solution can be quite slow. 

Having some sort of caching algorithm could be quite good so that it is placed on the edge of the customer network. But this will lead you back to on-premise infrastructure, so it cannot fix the whole cloud.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for a few years now, but it's very sporadic.

I would rate the stability of this solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

I contacted technical support a few times. Our technical support is under a premium plan. They were very good.

Positive

The initial setup is fairly easy. It's not difficult. It is mainly a hybrid solution.

I would rate the pricing a four out of ten because there is a lot of competition out there.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage a six 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.