Azure NetApp Files is a Microsoft Azure file storage service built on NetApp technology, giving users the file capabilities in Azure that core business applications require, with pricing plans for different performance tiers.
$21,474,836.48
per month
IBM Cloud Object Storage
Score 7.1 out of 10
N/A
IBM Cloud Object Storage is an IBM Cloud product in the endpoint backup and IaaS categories. It is commonly used for data archiving and backup, for web and mobile applications, and as scalable, persistent storage for analytics.
$5,000,000,000
per month
Pricing
Azure NetApp Files
IBM Cloud Object Storage
Editions & Modules
Restore
$0.02/GiB
per month
Backup
$0.05/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Daily - Replication frequency is once a day
$0.11/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Hourly - Replication frequency is every 1 hour
$0.12/GiB
per month
Cross Region Replication Minutes - Replication frequency is every 10 mins
$0.14/GiB
per month
Standard Storage
$0.14746 per GiB
per month
Premium Storage
$0.29419 per GiB
per month
Ultra Storage
$0.39274 per GiB
per month
One-Rate Plan
As low as USD $12/TB a month
per month
Standard Plan
Free up to 5GB—no minimum fee, pay only for what you use
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure NetApp Files
IBM Cloud Object Storage
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
Azure NetApp Files (ANF) cloud file storage service is charged per hour based on the provisioned ANF capacity. Customers can provision a minimum of 4TiB of ANF capacity and then add additional provision capacity in the increments of 1TiB. Cross Region Replication pricing varies by the desired replication frequency per unit of data, and the region of the destination volume.
The One-Rate and Standard service plans for Cloud Object Storage include resiliency options, flexible data classes and built-in security. Pricing is based on the choice of location, storage class and resiliency choice.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure NetApp Files
IBM Cloud Object Storage
Considered Both Products
Azure NetApp Files
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Azure NetApp Files
Attribution in Google Analytics (Adometry), Acoustic Content (formerly IBM Watson Content Hub) and Amazon Augmented AI (Amazon A2I)
We tried the same with Azure File Share (Azure Storage Account), but it has a really small limit (5TB per share). It didnt fulfilled our requirements, as we have some on-prem shares with 60+TB each, still to be migrated. We have also evaluated a different approach, which is …
The solution is amazing. It scales up and down, which is quite unique for a cloud solution and also it is billed to you on a per-hour basis, which provides a great opportunity to save the cost when you don't need it. Compared to others, we really liked that option for Azure …
Azure NetApp Files is very well integrated with Microsoft Azure, we use the same request methods that everyone knows from Azure. NetApp and Microsoft has built a very efficient solution that allows you to transfer virtually any service to the Microsoft public cloud. Azure …
We briefly looked at Amazon Elastic File System. From the small amount of research we did, Amazon EFS was comparable, but in the end we already had a NetApp infrastructure and were a Microsoft shop, so melding them together using Azure NetApp Files made sense.
I did not have a say in the selection process, but I am a satisfied user. I have used and tried other products or cloud storage applications; however, I was not impressed, as many of them have limited functionality and have some issues with security. My department was in need …
As Google Cloud Storage is our main product for this kind of thing, it remains the standard but in terms of overall performance, flexibility, stability, durability, and scalability, IBM Cloud Object Storage has put it through its paces. I think having a product put Google …
Amazon S3 has a more complex pricing model. It charges as per the requests, which will be more costly for us compared to IBM cloud object storage. The safety of our data is the main focus, and this is guaranteed with IBM.
Along with IBM Watson for AI and machine learning, IBM Aspera for fast data transport, and IBM Cloud SQL Query for data analysis, IBM Cloud Object Storage works seamlessly with other IBM Cloud services. For research initiatives that call for a variety of tools and services, …
We selected IBM Cloud Object Storage against S3 for following reasons:1. 1. We already use a lot of IBM's cloud services, IBM Cloud Object Storage would have been easier to manage. 2. It is really cost effective with the features it brings in.
Amazon S3 is a great service to safely back up your data where redundancy is guaranteed, and the cost is fair. In the past I have used Amazon S3 for data that we backup and hope we never need to access, but in the case of a catastrophic or even small slip of the finger with the …
As far as the other cloud storage services are concerned, I have limited experience. I used pleased by IBM cloud storage because it provided a smooth, running environment for my data science projects. I used IBM Watson Studio and the experience was smooth. I used IBM Db2, and …
IBM Cloud Object Storage is a product that gives us greater scalability, and important security features such as WORM, in addition to Simplicity and Enhanced file access
At the end of the day it is an IBM product that gives us a guarantee of being very robust, it is very safe, and reliable, and it also allows flexibility.
The previous cloud OSS platform that we used was provided by Google. Functionality in OSS is restricted in several ways. The setup and configuration steps are complicated, making the software difficult to operate. We had no problems at all during our time at IBM. Buckets may be …
Previously, we were a user of alibaba cloud OSS. There are some limitations on OSS features. Also, not easy to use due to some complex configurations and setup processes. We didn't face any difficulties here in IBM. Easy configuration and management of buckets can be done with …
It helps to scale performance greatly. Also, it is easy to learn and is developer-friendly, has high data handling capacity, and is easy to administer.
Amazon S3 service is also a good option, but based on features it provides compared with IBM Cloud Object Storage, it is less suitable. IBM Cloud Object Storage [is] also integrated with more services, like IBM Cloud SQL and IBM Aspera, which AWS does not provide to transfer …
For us, with Azure NetApp Files, the ease of use has been big. We have an operations organization where ease of use is key--also it simplifies migration to the cloud. Azure NetApp Files eliminates a common cloud-first barrier by creating the right infrastructure environment for agencies' resources, budgets, and skillsets. We would like to be able to version the files that are coming in. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back and, at least once, clean it up. They could probably improve the versioning and other advanced features. The replication is not available in all the Azure Availability Zones.
IBM Cloud Object Storage is well suited for businesses that require scalable and cost-effective data storage solutions. It excels in scenarios involving massive unstructured data, like multimedia content, backups, and archives. However, it may be less appropriate for organizations with minimal storage needs or those requiring high-performance, low-latency access to data, as it's optimized for durability and data integrity rather than real-time data retrieval.
We have found that it scales very well. In some cases we had a large existing storage infrastructure and were able to migrate it while other times we started from scratch with low storage demands and Azure NetApp Files fit the bill each time.
We have been impressed with the replication capabailities.
The read and write speed when interacting with files is a major asset.
Cloud storage allows you to save data and files in an off-site location that you access either through the public internet or a dedicated private network connection.
Cloud storage delivers a cost-effective, scalable alternative to storing files on on-premise hard drives or storage networks.
Cloud storage services provide elasticity, which means you can scale capacity as your data volumes increase or dial down capacity if necessary.
Business continuity of Storing data offsite supports business continuity in the event that a natural disaster or terrorist attack cuts access to your premises.
For my use cases, it has been a very smooth experience. Even my new colleagues have been able to get on top of things very quickly. This shows how easy it is to work with
We rarely face downtime or access issues with IBM Cloud Object Storage. It’s mostly available when we need it, even during peak hours or heavy data loads.
I would give it a 9 because it works smooth with our AI and analytics tools, no major slowdown. Pages and dashboards load fine most of the time, and reports finish in decent time even when data is heavy.
I have been working in IT sector for more than 15 years. I have worked with various vendors. IBM's sales team, support team have been really helpful. After we start to use their product, their UX design team also contacted us to get feedback from us. They are really interested about our experience.
I just researching and applying the tools on their platforms to ensure a good learning path, based on my needs. Reading the documentation related with resources, tools. Is too big, but I am trying to know more about it every day. It is a good way to know more about their resources. A new way to attract new customers. At the end of the day, we are all involved in improvement and automation of our tasks and resources for customers and end-users.
IBM's professional service for migrating data and implementing new cloud environment was perfect. They started to help us before we begin to bring together all data such as how can it could be best to transfer all data without problems. During the migration they watched all the process closely to prevent any failure. Lastly, after the migration, they gave us trainings on implementation.
We tried the same with Azure File Share (Azure Storage Account), but it has a really small limit (5TB per share). It didnt fulfilled our requirements, as we have some on-prem shares with 60+TB each, still to be migrated. We have also evaluated a different approach, which is Komprise archiving solution, to archive older files to Azure BLOBS and free up some space on the on-prem storages to accomodate new data.
As Google Cloud Storage is our main product for this kind of thing, it remains the standard but in terms of overall performance, flexibility, stability, durability, and scalability, IBM Cloud Object Storage has put it through its paces. I think having a product put Google through its paces is always a good thing, both for businesses and for the industry overall.
Scaling up the number of users can lead to significant increases in licensing costs, which, while not a technical limitation, can be a practical constraint for some organizations
The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option.
In our company, we moved from on-premise to IBM cloud, our ElasticSearch Solution storage in block storage to an ICD elastic search solution with Object storage, and we reduced our cost by more than 45%.
Object Storage is a managed service, so you can have savings in your storage-managed team.
We have improved our data availability because the Regional solution of COS is distributed in three different Availability Zones.