Amazon S3 vs Microsoft Azure

• Nearly every web framework now has integrations with the service as an easy plug-and-play storage solution.
• General integration is so good there are tons of third-party tools like Transmit (for mac) you can mount S3 as a remote disk for easy access, and even Amazon's own web portal for using S3 has gotten quite good.
• It's incredibly easy to offload all the expensive bandwidth operations for your typical website or app to S3, and, assuming your services are not yet HTTP2, you even get the benefits of sharding.

Read full review

• Active Directory integration. Azure allows for solutions outside your environment to pull your AD information in a non-intrusive fashion to help you automate certain functions such as single sign-on.
• Great for deploying new applications without having to stand a server or develop a system in-house.
• Cloud computing at its best. So many features available to accommodate your networking needs with great security and resilience.

Read full review

• There is no true hierarchical filesystem in S3. So for example, if you have a file like /images/pizza/1.png, and you delete 1.png it deletes the entire directory structure. Now many tools will place an empty dummy file at /images/pizza to make it appear as if the structure is there – but if you do these operations via api it can be a bit of a gotchya.
• The bucket namespace is global, so it can be really hard to get a sensible bucket name. Honestly no idea why they made that global.
• While you can serve S3 content at your own subdomain, you have to have the proper bucket name to do so and this can get pretty cumbersome. Ideally, there would be a better way to mask S3 buckets at a DNS level.

Read full review

• MS technical support -- in most cases is horrible. Unless you use the support of MS partners, but that makes the cost higher.
• Comparing to other competitors on the market, customization of the virtual servers is not the most strong side of Microsoft Azure.
• Prices of services. That needs to be improved. In a small environment it is only so critical, but when you start growing it becomes a significant cost raise.
• We had issues transforming legacy servers and services from physical to virtual based on Azure. We had to use third-party solutions.

Read full review

• A very high return of investment
• Many of our core products depend on S3

Read full review

• It has saved us lots of time and money. Well worth implementing.

Read full review