Overall Satisfaction with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
We are a digital product design and development company. When we build a new web or mobile app, the service we choose to use for application and database hosting may vary, but for serving static assets like images and other file downloads, we are always using Amazon S3. S3 combined with Amazon Cloudfront lets us serve static assets to our users and customers without having to worry about performance.
- Ensures web and application servers don't get bogged down from serving static assets.
- Works with popular frameworks for easy integration in applications to allow user uploading of additional assets.
- Integrates easily with Amazon Cloudfront as a CDN.
- Very little configuration needed to get started.
- The website UI, while easy to use by even less technical staff, but certain options such as allowing public read for new uploads by default instead of manual selection, requires a bit more technical knowledge. (That said there is generally a custom UI built for users to upload files anyway so in our situation this isn't important).
- Fast integration for static asset hosting means we can focus on unique features that have greater business value.
Since we use other AWS products, and since AWS and S3 are more familiar to developers, it is easier for us to stick with Amazon S3 over a similar solution like Google Cloud Storage.
Do you think Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)'s feature set?
Yes
Did Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) again?
Yes