Overall Satisfaction with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
We are using S3 as a images and files storage, Earlier we were using our own static ip based server but we faced to many server downs and request failed. So we moved to S3 and now we are very happy with the S3 because request failure rate has gone down. Response time is very low and returning responses very quickly.
- Image and files uploading is very quick.
- Image loading is very fast no lack of images.
- Provides in cache memory for the quick responses
- Costing is too much, They can reduce the cost
- Configuration at the AWS portal is little bit difficult for beginners they can improve.
- Library to use the S3 can be lighter
- We retain our users, Because of improvements in the performance.
- Performance improved, Because of quick responses
- Easy to implement library
When we were implementation the solution of our issue then we find Azure and Google Cloud Storage platforms but we were unable to find the proper documentation for the platform as compared to S3, So we moved to S3 and discarded the other options. Cost wise there are only some minor difference.
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