Amazon S3

Amazon S3

Top Rated
About TrustRadius Scoring
Score 8.9 out of 100
Top Rated
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)


Recent Reviews

S3 stores any kind of object you want!

April 15, 2021
Amazon S3 is heavily used in our company by the development department to store short and long terms files (audio, video, photos, etc) …
Read full review

S3 is a must!

April 14, 2021
Everything that we need to store of data, without worry with size, or speed, we use Amazon S3. That's our safe alternative. From …
Read full review

Reviewer Sentiment

Positive ()
Negative ()
Learn how we calculate reviewer sentiment


TrustRadius Award Top Rated 2022
TrustRadius Award Top Rated 2021
TrustRadius Award Top Rated 2020

Reviewer Pros & Cons

View all pros & cons

Video Reviews

Leaving a video review helps other professionals like you evaluate products. Be the first one in your network to record a review of Amazon S3, and make your voice heard!


View all pricing

What is Amazon S3?

Amazon S3 is a cloud-based object storage service from Amazon Web Services. It's key features are storage management and monitoring, access management and security, data querying, and data transfer.

Entry-level set up fee?

  • No setup fee


  • Free Trial
  • Free/Freemium Version
  • Premium Consulting / Integration Services

Would you like us to let the vendor know that you want pricing?

6 people want pricing too

Alternatives Pricing

What is Amazon Lightsail?

Amazon Lightsail is a virtual private server (VPS) designed to present an easy-to-use cloud platform that offers everything needed to build an application or website, plus a cost-effective, monthly plan.


What is IBM Cloud Object Storage?

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.

Features Scorecard

No scorecards have been submitted for this product yet..

Product Details

What is Amazon S3?

Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) is a cloud-based object storage service from Amazon Web Services. It offers scalability, data availability, security, and performance. It provides great utility for storage management and monitoring, access management and security, data querying, and data transfer.

It is suitable for businesses or organizations of any size to store and protect any amount of data for a range of use cases, such as websites, mobile applications, backup and restore, archive, enterprise applications, IoT devices, and big data analytics. Amazon S3 provides management features for organizing data and configuring access controls to meet business, organizational, and compliance requirements.

Amazon S3 Technical Details

Operating SystemsUnspecified
Mobile ApplicationNo


View all alternatives

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Amazon S3?

Amazon S3 is a cloud-based object storage service from Amazon Web Services. It's key features are storage management and monitoring, access management and security, data querying, and data transfer.

What is Amazon S3's best feature?

Reviewers rate Support Rating highest, with a score of 9.7.

Who uses Amazon S3?

The most common users of Amazon S3 are from Small Businesses (1-50 employees) and the Computer Software industry.

Reviews and Ratings




(1-25 of 66)
Companies can't remove reviews or game the system. Here's why
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
I am using Amazon S3 [(Simple Storage Service)] to store backups, to host static resources, to host sites.
It is a quick to implement, low maintenance solution for storage, backup and hosting.
  • It is easy to do backups.
  • It is easy to host static resources.
  • It is easy to host simple web sites.
  • S3 could be cheaper. Right now it is more expensive than dedicated hosting on average.
  • S3 has room for improvement in Analytics and reporting.
Amazon S3 [(Simple Storage Service)] is best to host static resources for apps and sites like audio files and images. It is good to store backups as external storage. Amazon S3 is not appropriate and expensive to host dynamic site or app. In that case dedicated server would be better.
Matthew Gardner | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon's Simple Storage Service to store both static and somewhat dynamic assets. It is used in conjunction with Amazon's CloudFront service. It is a simple, cost-effective way to serve assets across our web apps, mobile apps, and websites. It solves the problem of reliable distribution at an affordable price, all wrapped up in a scalable solution. Between our various properties, we distribute over 1TB of data per month across millions of instances.
  • Scalable
  • Reliable
  • Well documented
  • Hard to use
  • Not for non-developers
  • Bad online UI
S3 is a VERY quick way to get up and running. Very simple for developers to use and have work. With the rest of Amazon's offerings, it can scale to be distributed via CDN, replicated, etc. If you need non-developers to store/update, though, this may not be the solution for you. The UI is far too confusing and easy to make a mistake on, and if you use CloudFront you need to invalidate, etc. with new uploads which is hard to grasp as a non-developer. As well, other companies have far less expensive solutions which scale just as well.
Peter Hamilton | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We store user-generated content, backups, raw event data, logs, and other raw data in S3. This data is used by our product in serving content to our users, by our operations team to maintain site availability, by our analytics teams, and by our developers to debug our production systems.
  • Durability
  • Easy access
  • Interop with AWS products as well as third party vendors.
  • Finding files in large buckets.
  • Simplify permissions.
  • More transparent compression.
If you have data you may someday need but don't have immediate high volume access patterns, S3 is great.
Serving images and static content via s3 works very well and provides smoke performance (and can be coupled with CloudFront for distribution if necessary). Do not treat s3 like a general-purpose key-value store. Do not try to coordinate or create consensus using s3.
It's simple, it works, and when it doesn't AWS is pretty good at helping. There's just not that much that can go wrong.
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon S3 as an additional way to safely backup our server and user data for our entire company and all of our clients. It is a cost effective, redundant service that gives us and our clients piece of mind that their data is secured. It has a storage location in Canada as well which lets us keep our data inside the country which means our user data stays put.
  • Cost effective
  • Easy setup
  • Setup and forget
  • Multiple data centres
  • Free first year!
  • Bills in local currency
  • Can set a budget
  • Global unique bucket names
  • Costs vary per region
  • Costs could balloon
Amazon S3 is a great service to safely backup your data where redundancy is guaranteed and the cost is fair. We use 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 delete command we know our data and our client's data is safely backed up by Amazon S3.

Transferring data into Amazon S3 is free but transferring data out has an associated, albeit low, cost per GB. This needs to be kept in mind if you plan on transferring out a lot of data frequently. There may be other cost effective options although Amazon S3 prices are really low per GB. Transferring 150TB would cost approximately $50 per month.
I have never had an issue with Amazon S3, in ten years I have never had to contact their support team for any issue. Not even billing. I think AWS is the only service that I can speak of that I have never had to contact support at least once. So I honestly cannot provide any specifics about their support.
Sam Othman | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We mostly use this for archiving old data that is infrequently accessed. It has been a good low-cost solution to get away from using on-prem NAS or even further back external hard disks and even CDs. It has ticked a lot of boxes for us in the sense of keeping this data safe and secure without the potential of data loss through external methods.
  • Low cost
  • Multiple tiers of storage
  • Great API
  • Not a lot of features.
  • Can be complex to set up properly.
For archiving old data that is infrequently accessed it is perfect. You can choose to let it go into cold/glacier storage which saves even further costs but at the expense of accessibility. I like that you can set access rules to automatically move it to the next storage tier after a certain amount of time that it has not been accessed.

I also use it a lot with PHP via the API. We have some custom in-house applications that have a fair amount of data uploaded into them. S3 has been a perfect solution to store these files, taking the load off web servers and never having issues with running out of storage.
We have not had to contact the support team for this service as we have quite a strong team in-house and each of us has a skill set that complements the others. We generally find our way through most things through trial and error and S3 has been no different. AWS in general has its own logic and it can take a little bit to get your head around it and get it configured right, but once you are at that point, it just works without any hiccups or downtime.
Adam Lauer | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Amazon S3 is the backbone of our data storage. We store 90% plus of all data in S3. It also serves as a backup and disaster recovery plan as we take other storage solutions and back them up to S3. It is also used for data flow and transfer from/to internal/external vendors.
  • Storing mass amount of data.
  • Cheap storage options.
  • Versioning of objects.
  • Different cost tiers for what you need.
  • Notifications on Object changes.
  • The UI is clunky and not great.
  • It can get costly fast depending on how you use it.
  • There are underlying/unknown issues that make you have to consider how to store you data to achieve maximum rewards.
  • We use S3 as an entry point (landing zone for data). We can then transform (normalize) the data and store it again.
  • S3 has great services built around automating tasks to be done when an object is updated/created/deleted.
  • S3 has built-in replication for back up and disaster recovery.
It is not great that some of it features require you to think about how you want to store your data. For example to get the cheapest usage it is recommended to use less objects with greater size instead of many objects of tiny size.
It depends on your tier within Amazon on how great of support you get. For us we have a dedicated Point of Contact that is great in taking in what we need and discussing it with the S3 team. The best thing is features we need or suggest have a good chance of landing on their roadmap.
Abdullah Khawer | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Review Source
We are using Amazon S3 for various purposes. We are using it to store backups, to store logs, to store audit trails, to store artefacts, to store website images and to store some other data required by the application. It is being used more like central storage that is economical to serve the purpose of data storage.
  • Fast as Key-Value Store.
  • Save as many data as you want.
  • Cheap.
  • Easy to use.
  • Versioning.
  • Ability to create events.
  • Object searching.
  • Filter data by suffix.
  • More fast and economical query method.
It is best when you want to store a lot of data like backups, data lakes, logs, etc. It saves a lot of money. It also provides archiving facility. You can also enable versioning on objects which can help in versioning builds and artefacts. You can use it to enable events to do something upon data creation or deletion on it. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is a great service that serves a lot of purposes. You can use it to store data in many formats like jpg, gzip, txt, csv, parquet, avro, etc.
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) shouldn't be used if you're looking for storage like RDBMS or NoSQL.
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Our department was looking for storage service that works smoothly and can make our task easily using for storage big amount of data. So we found that Amazon S3 is the suitable one. S3 is monetary and dependable distributed storage which I'm utilizing [regularly]. Presenting some more highlights like referenced in Cons above could make it exceptional and it would be a shared benefit over different items.
  • More security and safety
  • Flexibility for options
  • simple to use
  • Integration
  • When the document is erased the record is [not immediately] noticeable since S3 sets aside some effort to refresh. This occasionally makes disarray
  • pricing
  • AWS S3 is not compatible with desktops
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) well fit since it is an item stockpiling administration for the cloud. You can store any measure of information and access it anyplace on the planet. You may quit [beng] contingent upon hard drives for your web applications, and begin utilizing Amazon S3 to store your media records, log documents and so forth.
From other of less appropriate S3 has cans to store objects and these pails have all inclusive names. So for instance, you likely will not have the option to open a can named "photographs". Arranging security is somewhat precarious. You must be cautious which cans will be public and which will be private.
Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
At this moment it is used at the IT department level, down the road we would like to expand this usage, but we are trying to see how we can safely enable all AWS users with security and compliance in mind. At this moment it allows us to store some temporary data for different infrastructure deployments.
  • Easy to upload.
  • Easy to access.
  • Simple web interface.
  • Too many options for regular user.
  • Doesn't check centrally set policies and creates errors that do not represent the problem.
It is great for temp infrastructure artifacts during deployment or if you are using containerized apps and Kubernetes. This would be a place to store your files. Whether those are public or private documents, it is a great location to store. Additionally, it is a great place for archives. Storing old data for a really cheap price is something that you can't get on-prem.
Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use S3 to store files that we offer to subscriber customers.
  • Scales automatically.
  • Is always available.
  • Is cost effective with different storage tiers.
  • Slow access.
  • Difficult to manage files on large repositories.
  • Users are locked on it as migration to other services isn't easy or cheap.
Very well suited to storing files that have a long "shelf life." Less suited if you need to move then (download or upload) multiple times because you pay for bandwidth.
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
In my organization, we use S3 for nearly every aspect of asset storage -- user files, user profiles, saved application states -- as well as for hosting our primary web frontends (static React.js applications). It's used by the whole organization, both extensively throughout engineering to host our software and assets, and additionally by our operations and other teams as a general purpose host for special content.

It solves the business problem of exposing any sort of asset to external users, as well as serves as a complete website hosting and deployment service stack for static websites.
  • Fantastic developer API, including AWS command line and library utilities.
  • Strong integration with the AWS ecosystem, especially with regards to access permissions.
  • It's astoundingly stable- you can trust it'll stay online and available for anywhere in the world.
  • Its static website hosting feature is a hidden gem-- it provides perhaps the cheapest, most stable, most high-performing static web hosting available in PaaS.
  • The whole AWS ecosystem has a lot of confusing and unintuitive configuration options, and S3 is no exception. Thankfully it's so broadly used that you can reliably find solutions on external sites like StackOverflow.
  • Getting IAM permissions just right for Static Website hosting require a little trial and error since S3 defaults to security instead of open access.
  • While S3's file type inference is decent, some new file types (such as .wasm) aren't inferred correctly, so you have to configure their MIME types after uploading them in order for them to serve correctly.
I've used S3 continuously for projects large and small for over 10 years. It's just such a common and essential tool in software development. Hosting assets/images, or providing file upload abilities to users, come up very often throughout software, and S3 is hands-down the best place to serve and store files. It's flexible enough that you can use client libraries to perform direct uploads rather than writing your own handlers, etc. S3 is a tool that immediately has value for file hosting and storage, and then extends as far as you need it to for all manner of asset management.
Joshua Dickson | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) to persist large blobs of data that would be otherwise expensive or otherwise challening to store in one of our database systems. We use S3 primarily for areas of the business where it's important to easily store large pieces of data, such as images and large JSON data sets, or where it is important to share that data between multiple types of services.
  • Highly available and redundant; we do not worry about the service having downtime
  • Simple usage from multiple different frameworks using Amazon's SDKs, or roll your own
  • A large number of bucket policies and security adjustments to tailor usage to customer needs
  • Regional support for storing assets in particular locations around the world
  • Web console can be very confusing and challenging to use, especially for new users
  • Bucket policies are very flexible, but the composability of the security rules can be very confusing to get right, often leading to security rules in use on buckets other than what you believe they are
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is particularly well-suited for cases where you have already made the decision to use Amazon's cloud software resources and need to add the option of storing files for use from one or more services. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is also a good choice for its native integration with Amazon's CDN, Cloudfront. In general, using Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) will make less sense if you are already using other services from another vendor, such as Azure.
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Amazon S3 is heavily used in our company by the development department to store short and long terms files (audio, video, photos, etc) with different policies in the cloud. We trust AWS services, security and infrastructure. S3 is used in conjunction with many other AWS services. For example: with Lambda to perform operations when a file is uploaded, with Cloudwatch to save logs, with Cloudront to serve as CDN and cache, to store files for the web and mobile app, to store static content for the website, etc.
  • store any kind of file
  • store static content for websites
  • store logs and backups
  • set up different policies
  • It still needs to integrate with different ecosystems
  • They need to improve the search. They should offer more options.
Amazon S3 is well suited for hosting any type of object. Highly recommended if already using with any other AWS service since integration becomes easier. It is good for any organization that has a dedicated IT Department. Not recommended if the company does not have a team with experience in AWS services that monitors it since it could end up being a mess or expensive.
April 14, 2021

S3 is a must!

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Everything that we need to store of data, without worry with size, or speed, we use Amazon S3. That's our safe alternative. From applications that use it to temporary keep files, to final destination of others, even to keep websites files, S3 is a great and safe alternative. It's the perfect companion to a lot of services, not only AWS.
  • Static Website Hosting
  • Files needed by applications
  • Backup
  • Default bucket limit (i think it needed to be more)
  • Graphical ACLs
  • Cheaper FTP / SFTP price
Backup your environment (from dumps to local files), it is a great alternative. If you think in put your files, and know when they need to be deleted, you may use the bucket policy to automate it for you, If you need that your application receive or send some files, S3 may keep these files too.

Its less appropriate when you need speed to access files. It's not slow, but depending of the speed you need, it's not recommended, yet, cause they're always improving.
Grant Shellborn | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Used across our organization it is the primary data store now for our files rather than Windows file service.
  • Lost cost
  • Easy access from our AWS services
  • Works well serving files to our users
  • A simple file management interface would be welcome.
If you use AWS then Amazon S3 is a great file store service.
James Hilton | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon S3 across the whole organization to store business material, marketing material, web assets, and customer generated content like images and certificates. It is very good value, very reliable, and very fast. Access via the console and the API let's us upload and download data from many locations. The cost is so good that we don't concern ourselves with any kind of limitation to how much data we create.
  • File storage
  • Reliability
  • Speed
  • Value for money
  • Better explanation of the security features
  • Status alerts when put uploads are propagated to different edge locations so you know the customer is getting the latest version of the file.
  • A hard drive syncing application like Google Drive sync and one drive sync.
Amazon S3 handles file storage exceptionally well and has the necessary features to be useful to anyone. S3 would not be ideal as a substitute for a computer hard drive but would be as a backup for that hard drive, or an extension of it, which you can delegate access to and where your internet speed is the only factor to consider.
Ramindu Deshapriya | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is the quintessential large storage solution used by our organization alongside cloud applications. We use it for storing static files to serve through applications, storing application logs, storing large file, serving static websites through AWS CloudFront, storing machine learning models to be used by AWS Lambda functions, and many more use cases. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is used across applications for many client solutions we have developed on AWS.
  • Quick access for large file storage
  • Emulating a file system through S3FS
  • Versioning objects within buckets
  • Fine-grained access control
  • Serving as backend file storage for many types of applications running on AWS
  • Needs more convenience functions for managing files
  • Could provide more integrations with traditional relational databases
  • Could use even more granular access controls, for example on the object/prefix level
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is well suited for large, unstructured data storage and for querying that data using a range of integrations (e.g., AWS Redshift and AWS Athena). It works very well serving static files associated with applications as well (e.g., file uploads, images, etc.). However, Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) does not serve well as a remote file system or snap-mounted storage for compute engines or VMs.
Mark Nowowiejski | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
S3 (AWS) is used by my department for storage of files that we are going to process in conjunction with other AWS products such as Transcribe, Translate and Polly. The Glacier feature is also an extremely cheap and durable place to store large video files that are infrequently accessed.
  • Highly Available
  • Fast upload/download times
  • Supports pretty much any type of file
  • Can host static websites
  • Very Secure
  • Integrated seamlessly with other AWS products
  • Deleting files involves extra steps
  • Setting up Security/Access Lists can be difficult if you're not familiar with AWS IAM
  • Some of the files size caps can be cumbersome for video
  • Naming Conventions of Buckets is restrictive
I use AWS for all my personal work because it's fast and integrates with so many other AWS products that I make use of daily. I love the fact their are various storage classes such as Standard, Infrequently Accessed, One-Zone and Glacier that allow for generous discounts. Glacier Storage within AWS is extremely cheap if you can afford to wait 12 or so hour to 'thaw out' your files. *Also there is an 'Intelligent Tiering' option with AWS will assign the most cost effective storage class for you based on your usage

It's great for storage of files you need to keep for regulatory purposes but will likely never need to access again.

I personally store all my music/photography files on AWS so it's almost impossible to every lose them
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We used S3 for storing data on the cloud so that the data is available for our customers constantly without any dependency. We also use S3 to host static websites. S3 has different classes for storage so data can be stored according to customers' needs and charges and are levied accordingly.
  • Host static websites.
  • Store data as object and key.
  • Needs to integrate with multiple ecosystems.
  • Integration with Route 53 is difficult for hosting.
Amazon S3 is well suited for hosting a static website in a very short time and also for storing a huge chunk of data while using AWS services. It was difficult for us to integrate it with Azure cloud services as S3 has tight AWS integration.
Support is always available and they never waste your time.
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
  • Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is used by the department of engineering to host several static websites. The apps are written mainly in Angular and Jekyll.
  • We host the websites in S3 buckets, distribute them through Cloudfront which provide a CDN and an SSL connection, and then set up the domain that will be used through DNS configuration at Cloudflare.
  • Outstanding UI/UX (drag & drop features help a lot)
  • Per-file permission system (make a file public or not)
  • Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) does not provide SSL. Right now, you always need to use Cloudfront if you want to have SSL.
  • Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is what you are looking for if you require to host static files. That includes serverless websites, images, videos, etc.
  • Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is not suited for web sites that run on a backend (Django, ASP.NET web forms, etc.) because it does not run any server for them to execute.
It does its work. I have no complaints.
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon S3 storage to archive and store all of our data. S3 is being utilized by our entire organization and enables all of our satellite offices and remote users to access company data from a centralized geo-redundant location without the added cost of building out of our infrastructure.
  • Centralized location for all your organizations data.
  • Great 3rd party API and integration.
  • Cost effective if properly monitored and maintained.
  • Ease to use and set-up.
  • Permissions can become complex.
  • UI needs to be updated and looks dated.
  • Tech support should be improved.
I would highly recommend S3 if you can dedicate IT staff to properly manage and monitor S3. For a small organization that is not able to dedicate the staff that is required, S3 could become expensive.
Overall, Amazon S3 has worked out great for our organization. It has enabled us to build out a centralized storage solutions for fraction of the cost that a on-prem solution would have required. If properly managed S3 is a great asset to any organization. There a few small things that need improvement like the UI and storage monitoring but over it's been great.
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon S3 as our off-site remote backup storage solutions for our entire storage IT infrastructure. We have our on-prem storage infrastructure being backed up hourly, weekly and monthly to S3. Amazon S3 has enabled our organization to have a disaster recovery plan at a cost-effective price without the need of maintaining an offsite storage infrastructure.
  • Very simple to setup and administer.
  • Can grow with your storage needs.
  • Cost effective.
  • Geo redundant.
  • Fault tolerant and reliable.
  • If not managed correct it could get expensive.
  • Searching needs to be improved and is not effective.
  • Better reporting would be great.
Amazon S3 is great for any organization that has a dedicated IT or IT Department. You can build out a fully redundant and can scale as your remote backup needs grow. But if not correctly monitored, the storage usage of S3 could become extremely expensive.
Amazon S3 provides great value and scale with your exact needs. I would give S3 a 10 if it provided better reporting and was a little less expensive.
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon S3 to store files, long term, and short term, from our servers and to share files for various purposes: sending to clients, serving files over the internet on our sites, etc. It acts as our central location for files we serve over the internet.
  • Ability to have files switched over to long term storage after inactivity.
  • Backups of files available if a loss occurs.
  • Access to files as needed from multiple points and availability.
  • Region availability all over the globe.
  • Easier API integration and better documentation.
It is well suited to storing files from, or for, servers and internet access.
The support team is knowledgeable but takes some time to respond unless you're paying for priority support.
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use S3 for reliably and securely storing audios, medical transcriptions, application logs and pretty much everything else. S3 is our go-to cloud storage service as we are already invested in many other core AWS services like EC2, RDS and CloudWatch. We have been using S3 for around 10 years now, and so far, we have never had an issue with it.
  • Reliable and secure way to store objects in cloud: Storing any type of file(text, pdf, doc, csv, etc) is very easy with S3. Fetching this stored content as and when you require is also pretty easy and can be done using both the console and AWS CLI. Appropriate permissions can be set up for buckets using IAM roles/policies.
  • Versioning in buckets: S3 gives you a very handy feature to store multiple versions of objects stored in a bucket.
  • Lifecycle policies: You can set up lifecycle policies in S3 that can move your older objects to IA or Glacier. This setup is very easy and can be done within minutes for a bucket.
  • Replication: The cross-region replication that S3 provides is wonderful. Beware of the inter-regional data transfer costs though.
  • No support for object versions retention: There can be a retention policy(days or number) for object versions that are stored in S3 so that we don't have to worry about paying extra for all the old versions of an object in the bucket.
  • No feature for replication within a region: Currently AWS does not support replication within a region. Also, having to enable versioning for buckets in which you need replication makes it even more costly.
  • Confusing pricing: The pricing model of S3 can be a little confusing for a new customer with questions regarding data transfer from other AWS services, between buckets or data transfer to the outside world.
S3 can be used to store your application logs or objects that need to be frequently accessed. It can also be used in conjunction with AWS Glue for data transformation tasks or to host a static website. The entire Simple Monthly Calculator service of AWS is hosted on S3. S3 would not be recommended for use as a database service or where the change needs to be reflected instantly. Since S3 provides eventual consistency, there is no guarantee that an update made by someone will actually be seen by someone accessing the same object just after. This is in contrast to a database wherein if a change is committed, it will start showing instantly to everyone else.
AWS has always been quick to resolve any support ticket raised. S3 is no exception. We have only ever used it once to get a clarification regarding the costs involved when data is transferred between S3 and other AWS services or the public internet. We got a response from AWS support team within a day.
Score 6 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use S3 to host customer-facing static content. It's a reliable, inexpensive and API-controllable way to do this, which has allowed us to build up in-house publishing workflows that push content to S3 on-demand as it's created. We initially considered using this in tandem with Cloud Front for global edge caching, but have since decided that S3 alone is sufficient for our needs.
  • Fast: S3 is quite fast, even when compared to other similar hosting and storage setups that aim to compete with S3.
  • Reliable: AWS, in general, has great uptime and reliability.
  • Powerful: S3's APIs are quite powerful and fairly flexible, meaning that with sufficient engineering investment you can do a whole lot with S3.
  • Expensive: S3 isn't cheap; when the speed and capacity is overkill, we've ended up looking elsewhere for hosting and storage.
  • Complexity: S3 is (like the rest of AWS) a profoundly complicated platform, and there's a steep learning curve to use it.
  • Customer support: AWS has not had particularly meaningful or useful customer support in our experience. You're really on your own with the platform.
If you need a powerful, fast and API-accessible storage or archiving solution, and you're willing to invest the time, S3 may be a great solution for you. If your use-case is particularly cost-sensitive, or if you are turned off by the complexity of Amazon's APIs (and the paucity of customer support), this may not be the platform for you. The additional cost and complexity of working with S3 really need to be worthwhile to take the plunge.
I should caveat this review with the fact that we have not paid for or used AWS Premium Support, so our support experience is with their baseline customer support setup, but we've found that lacking. Some of the biggest roadblocks we've run into have been resolved by random commenters on Stack Overflow, which is never a great state of affairs. Customer support is not a reason to recommend S3.