Microsoft's Blob Storage system on Azure is designed to make unstructured data available to customers anywhere through REST-based object storage.
$0.01
per GB/per month
Google Cloud Storage
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Storage is unified object storage for developers and enterprises.
N/A
Vultr
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Vultr is an independent cloud computing platform on a mission to provide businesses and developers around the world with unrivaled ease of use, price-to-performance, and global reach.
$1
per month
Pricing
Azure Blob Storage
Google Cloud Storage
Vultr
Editions & Modules
Block Blobs
$0.0081
per GB/per month
Azure Data Lake Storage
$0.0081
per GB/per month
Files
$0.058
per GB/per month
Managed Discs
$1.54
per month
No answers on this topic
Block Storage
$1
per month
Cloud Compute
$2.50
per month
Object Storage
$5
per month
Kubernetes Engine
$10
per month
Load Balancers
$10
per month
Managed Databases
$15
per month
Optimized Cloud Compute
$28
per month
Cloud GPU
$90
per month
Bare Metal
$120
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure Blob Storage
Google Cloud Storage
Vultr
Free Trial
Yes
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
Pricing is based on specifications chosen in each product category. Bandwidth is also included up to a certain amount per month.
Azure Premium Blob offers better latency than competitors. It works best with the Azure ecosystem, and competitors lack it. Azure Blob even stands out in storage durability, providing up to 16 nines. It can have various use cases that can suit all the organisation's needs. The …
In our case, Blob storage was not the deciding factor in switching to the provider. It could have been a knockout criterion if Azure had no or an incompatible object storage (key attributes: reliable, cost-efficient, and reasonably fast), because Azure's internal alternatives …
Blob storage lets us control the file source/hosting and retain everything within our Microsoft ecosystem. Blob is less feature-rich than some of the other products. Still, we consider it as a value-added product included within our environment, and alternative products are not …
Azure Blob Storage was used only because we were already using it for other projects, and it has a good reputation for being a reliable cloud provider. It also has widespread regional availability and allows for data replication. It can also be easily accessed via the API or by …
We didn't actually evaluate anything but Azure Blob Storage since it worked so well for backups and Audit logs and the price point was good enough for us.
Azure Blob Storage is the best choice to store files when the app runs in Azure. It also has some advantages over S3, like Shared Access Signatures, that make it easy to control access to files directly via a URL. Azure Blob Storage is very fast and we have not had any major …
S3 seemed to be just as functional as blob storage in our analysis. The only real difference is we already were on the Microsoft platform with 365, and it was an easy system to continue to learn. That was the only real deciding factor between the two that made any difference …
Ease of use and availability to actual usage makes it my first choice. I feel like IBM Cloud is where azure was 5 years ago in terms of implementation and ease of use. AWS has some great functionality but it almost feels like you need to learn how to work under the hood of a …
We chose Google Cloud Storage for its superior integration with BigQuery and AI/ML tools. Unlike AWS S3’s complex tiering or Azure’s offline archive, Google Cloud Storage offers millisecond access even for archival classes. This simplified our architecture while providing the …
Google Cloud Storage feels much more intuitive to use versus Amazon S3. I really prefer Google's Node SDK and web interface, and find Google Cloud Platform's access/identity management much more straightforward.
This software is perfect for the organization where a huge amount of data are generated. The software has the perfect features by which the organization can store their information safely. The software has the features where one can share cloud with colleagues for project …
Google had the easiest and most secure file sharing abilities, and was a more trusted name for our clients to be assured that their files would remain private.
We have used Amazon S3 for similar needs, or for solutions that don't support Google Cloud Storage. For us, Google Cloud Storage works much better since it's integrated into Google Cloud Platform. Since we use Google Cloud Platform, Google Cloud Storage is part of our cloud …
The two services are very comparable, but we have many different services that all run on the Google Cloud Platform and therefore Google Cloud Storage made more sense as our storage solution rather than looking to an outside service like S3. Either one of these options would …
Google Cloud Storage has been experiencing less technical issues and is more straight forward to use, for our technical team, it saves training time by having a straight forward help and FAQ section. We needed very little training, as opposed to previously used other tools …
Google Cloud offers Google Cloud Storage, while AWS offers Amazon Simple Storage Services. In Google Cloud services, data transmission is a fully encrypted format on the other hand, in AWS, data transmission is in the general format. Google Cloud volume size is 1 GB to 64 TB …
The big difference against other competitors that offer a Cloud storage solution, is the fact that Google Cloud Storage and other Google Cloud Platform products are billed in the local currency. This fact saves a lot of money because in some countries we have to pay for …
Aside from Google Cloud Storage, we've used AWS S3 and have found the two comparable. In fact, GCS is one of a large number of object storage systems that are compatible with S3 (including DigitalOcean Spaces, IBM Cloud Storage, and Azure Blog Storage). When it comes to these …
Google Cloud Storage effectively outweighs Google Drive's limited capabilities. This software, being a paid version, allows for much room for extra storage space, faster loading times from my experience, and easy sharing features. Compared to Google Drive, Google Cloud Storage …
I chose Google Cloud Storage due to its implementation with Google Firestore. Both worked off each other and made our connection with Google Firestore a lot simpler.
Google Cloud Storage is the only right option for media and document files. Unless you need to work with structured information where Cloud SQL or Datastore may be better options, storing files in Cloud Storage is easy and right to the point. Also, prices are worth considering …
Google Cloud Storage compares very similar to Dropbox. The difference of using Googe Cloud Storage is that it is part of a big bundle of products that you are probably already using. If you are a big Google user then it would make sense to get Google Cloud Storage. This way you …
Google Cloud Storage is the only one I have tried. But when researching we looked at Google Cloud, as well as Microsoft and Amazon. Google was more expensive, but seemed to be more of what we were looking for. Again, not really my department.
If your budget is limited, or if you are just starting your business and you're looking for a cloud storage service, this is a good option which is reliable and cheap.
Google Cloud Storage is really a different application. It does not have the data parsing capabilities and it is simply a cold storage option in our use case. This means it is less flexible and has limited uses, but the uses it does have it, performs very well. There is a very …
Guru and Google Cloud Storage are different in many ways. They are by no means the same product, but our team has begun to move away from Google for our documentation of processes. Guru has a superior system for organizing documents and articles.
I have used Microsoft One Drive, Dropbox, Box, Amazon Cloud Drive, and Google Cloud Storage. All of this cloud storage software do pretty much does the same thing, but the difference for me is in ease of use— for me the easiest to use is Google Drive. I will say this, I use …
Easier to set up and has a natural interface that is well known to users so it is easy for them to assimilate. Google Cloud Storage is faster than any other option we tried and works perfectly with our Chromebooks. From an ROI perspective, it is the best option for a medium …
We tend to only select Google Cloud Storage when we're using other Google products as it makes integration easier -- but we tend not to choose it for situations where we can use a competing offering from Azure or AWS. We tend to implement the most Azure and AWS by far, and …
Vultr comes in at the lower end of the spectrum in terms of the breadth of the services they provide compared to the larger vendors, but they are consistently demonstrating their commitment to growing their service offering and platform features. We selected Vultr because of …
Vultr has a greater offering of servers whilst staying reasonably priced compared to some of the larger infrastructure providers. They may not have all the services as some of the other providers but they don't need it when they can do what they do with the services they provide.
Vultr has better support and competitive pricing. The network is solid and globally deployed. IP reputation is clean, and security is tight. Ease of use and documentation is really good. User experience has been the best I ever experienced. Low stress, reliable …
The performance beats upcloud. The only thing I really liked about upcloud better was the backup offerings. They had more flexible backup plans, but I love the every other night plan on Vultr as well.
AWS and Google Cloud are great platforms, but the price is complex and their VMs are rather expensive for what they are. I believe these services may be better for more mission critical servers or taking advantage of being able to use their cloud servers rather than just run a …
CloudCo was not listed. In comparison, the pricing of the competition is in a place where I wouldn't retain any margin for smaller customers, that's why I use Vultr for those. Vultr's self serve interface and UI is much better and more customizable for the general architect. If …
Vultr has been a more cost effective solution in some areas. Compared to AWS EC2, Vultr has been a lot more cost effective for our environment. Vultr has the right vCPU, RAM, and storage for our needs. In the object storage space, Vultr has not been the best fit for our …
Vultr offers the same services as all the major cloud providers however Vulr offers a clear pricing modeling with no hidden fees. This has been incisive in deciding which provider to go with. I have never encountered any downtime with their services Technically, Vultr has the …
From the perspective of the above, Vultr provides the best balance of cost vs. performance for us. Cloudways stacks a large fee for each VPS you spin up, and this quickly escalates. Linode comes closest (at least when I used it a few years ago) to Vultr, and 3 years ago this …
Vultr is much easier to get started with, less things to configure, a simpler interface. To deploy and manage a server is much easier. I am sure for a production SaaS app there are features in AWS and Azure that are needed, but for dev/test environment, I prefer Vultr.
Vultr is a dream to use after coming from AWS - the products are intuitively named, don't require gaining a certification to use, and have better documentation. Vultr's documentation is a little less comprehensive and organized than google cloud's; however, its pricing and …
Blob storage is well suited to hosting/sharing zipped files rather than several smaller files, as folder enumeration/listing is not supported. Files uploaded are case-sensitive, so users need to be educated on the correct naming convention format if they are delegating the file-sharing process outside of IT.
[Google Cloud Storage is] great for storing and playing large video files, and even sharing them securely with others, whether or not they are part of your organization. No need to download video files before watching, and can also be used to store any other kinds of files.
Vultr is amazing for anyone who needs a server and wants to spend time taking care of it, or for someone who wants in on it. WordPress Minecraft kids can use Votr. The scenario is not as appropriate for the people who do not have as much technical knowledge and capacity and don't want to invest in it, not because of Votr itself, but because VPS is not kids' play. Even though we have a Minecraft server and they're quite easy, there will come a time when, if you put your business infrastructure inside Vultr or any VPS, you need to take care of it. Otherwise, it will have a problem.
Really great, easy to use interface helps us manage files easily. Storage is fast and inexpensive, so we don't have to spin up storage instances locally
Great set of command-line tools to manage data and storage options via scripts and apps, as well as an SDK means we can build GCS into our orchestration and operations tools
Robust integration with other Google cloud tools means that we don't have to think too hard about using GCS for a variety of storage tasks as we interact with other Google services.
the ability of increasing a specific configuration without the need of upgrading the whole plan, for example i might need to add more memory but i'm satisfied with my current processors and hard disk capacity (or vise versa)
Solving the problems of taking an image to the server if the server capacity (hard disk) is bigger than 1TB (which i'm currently facing a big problem because of that)
after all of the investment made in the tool and considering how many teams use it I think we would not be likely to move away from this tool. A lot of our information including historical is already here and we are happy with the capabilities of the tool currently
Just a great product with no bells and whistles, which is the advantage. We spend very little time learning and using Vultr and more time using the systems we have in Vultr to complete our tasks. Not having to worry about the IT overhead is huge and saves a great deal of time
Blob storage is fairly simple, with several different options/settings that can be configured. The file explorer has enhanced its usability. Some areas could be improved, such as providing more details or stats on how many times a file has been accessed. It is an obvious choice if you're already using Azure/Entra.
I would rate Google Cloud Storage’s usability as excellent, particularly for developers. The web console is clean and intuitive for basic tasks, while the CLI tools offer powerful automation. Although navigating IAM permissions has a slight learning curve, the comprehensive documentation and seamless integration with other Google services make it highly efficient.
easy to use and configure. great bang for the buck. I need an affordable solution to host in the cloud data from systems installed at our client's site with the ability to drill down and change the configuration remotely. Vultr enabled us to do that in an efficient and affordable way.
For performance i give Google Cloud Storage 10 of 10 on performance because even though there are other softwares that do exactly the same thing as Google Drive, it still works exceptionally well. It is very fast, and and far as integration, the only software I have used with it that integrated was Google Docs, and of course it integrates perfectly.
Microsoft has improved its customer service standpoint over the years. The ability to chat with an issue, get a callback, schedule a call or work with an architecture team(for free) is a huge plus. I can get mentorship and guidance on where to go with my environment without pushy sales tactics. This is very refreshing. Typically support can get me to where I need to be on the first contact, which is also nice.
We have never used official support from Google for our Google Cloud Storage, but there is plenty of documentation in place already. With a small amount of work, anybody should be able to get started. Once needs get more complicated, there is still documentation from Google, but also plenty of community support for common use cases around the internet.
Vultr makes it easy to contact technical support. The techs are very competent. In a number of occasions they have bounced the responsibility back to me when they could have saved us all time and heartache by simply implementing the solution directly
overall I was not directly involved but hears the teams were satisfied with the implementation. the teams that used the tool did not encounter major issues, it was as expected with minor issues and bugs that were resolved later. The more significant learning curve was actually starting to use the tool
Vultr implementation seemed based on open-source tools and basic cloud principles - some things were more complicated to do compared with more developed cloud providers, but on the other hand it was more extensible by open-source tools.
In our case, Blob storage was not the deciding factor in switching to the provider. It could have been a knockout criterion if Azure had no or an incompatible object storage (key attributes: reliable, cost-efficient, and reasonably fast), because Azure's internal alternatives do not work. As these were fulfilled or even overfulfilled (configuration options), the effort required to migrate was well justified, given the S3-based object storage.
Google Cloud Storage compares very similar to Dropbox. The difference of using Googe Cloud Storage is that it is part of a big bundle of products that you are probably already using. If you are a big Google user then it would make sense to get Google Cloud Storage. This way you can have all of the tools you need under one roof. I selected Google Cloud Storage because I was already using Google's other products and I was very impressed by those products so it was an easy sale.
Vultr has better support and competitive pricing. The network is solid and globally deployed. IP reputation is clean, and security is tight. Ease of use and documentation is really good. User experience has been the best I ever experienced. Low stress, reliable hosting I would recommend to anyone. It helped me easily scale and expand my business.