1. Home
  2. Enterprise Backup Solutions
  3. Amazon S3 Reviews
  4. User Review of Amazon S3
10+ years of experience with Amazon S3
Updated September 14, 2021

10+ years of experience with Amazon S3

Anatoly Lubarsky | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)

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.
  • Hosting static resources.
  • Hosting backups as external storage.
  • Hosting simple web sites.
  • S3 is low maintenance so saves a lot of time and money.
  • S3 is cheaper and better quality than most competitors.
  • S3 is more established than many competitors.
I think [Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)] is cheaper than Azure Blob Storage (at least at the time I selected it). It is a low maintenance product and it is more reliable.

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

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.