Not so long ago, object storage was primarily used for lower-priority workloads such as modern app development and archival storage. This is 100 percent not the case in late 2025. We see object storage in traditionally file-based and high-value workloads such as data protection and artificial intelligence. Object storage has several advantages over traditional file solutions, including scale, resiliency, data management, versioning, and in many cases cost.

Object storage, pioneered by Amazon, organizes data as objects with unique identifiers and rich metadata in a flat structure called a ‘bucket’, compared to a hierarchal system of folders and subfolders in a file solution.  Instead of using a file access protocol such as NFS to access the data – access is generally programmatic through APIs.  Users generally do not access object data directly – but rather through software.  The flat organizational structure of object data is unfriendly to humans directly accessing the data and a file solution would continue to be recommended for use cases such as shared departmental drives.

There are many worthy vendors that provide object storage, this posting gives an overview of some of the providers of object storage, with an eye on assisting buyers with selecting the proper vendor.  As migrations at scale can be time-consuming and expensive, selecting the proper product initially can save trouble later.

Some of the important features to consider when selecting an object solution are multiprotocol capabilities, security, company vision and stability, resiliency/multisite features, scalability, data reduction, and data management. A feature with an honorable mention is global namespace.  A global, geographically dispersed, data-consistent namespace is becoming more available as an included feature, but potential buyers should consider utilizing a third-party, cross platform solution if vendor lock in is not desirable.

We are going to take a brief look at each of the following products: VAST Data Universal Storage, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Dell Technologies ObjectScale, MinIO AIStor, and Scality RING.  This evaluation will be limited to storage and data management features only, some of these vendors have many additional features that are beyond the scope of this document.

VAST Data Universal Storage is the first we will discuss.  VAST is a young company that is moving very fast and has claimed a lot of mind share.  Their object functions are multiprotocol with file.  VAST presents with decent security including DoD APL certification and immutable snapshots.  VAST has probably one of the best published visions for the future of their company on the market.  For object workloads they claim a global namespace or multi-site replication.  VAST claims unlimited scale – but has so far not published any EB level installs and has no tiering capabilities.  VAST has excellent data reduction, claiming advanced technology, and features an integrated SQL compatible metadata index.  VAST shies away from definitive statements of their capabilities, and some of their claims have not been borne out in the real world.  VAST is a software company that relies upon uncommon, single vendor technology (SCM) and has zero control over hardware supply chains.  I would consider VAST a risky buy despite their advantages due to their limited hardware compatibility, weak resiliency, supply chain weaknesses, and overblown claims.  Customers should be aware that VAST is a marketing machine and utilizes high-pressure sales techniques.  Potential purchasers should be cautious about purchasing without extensive proof of concept testing, which should include failing a single box (not a node), failing an SCM media device, and ensuring that write speeds are in line with expectations. I could only recommend VAST for buyers that have a desire to jump into the VAST Data ecosystem of applications and data management.

Pure Storage FlashBlade is now in its third generation.  Pure’s advantages are their as a service offering “EverGreen//One” and their proprietary flash storage technology that allows for very large individual drives.  Pure does not do object/file multiprotocol, has average security with immutable snapshots and clusters are limited to 100 blades.  Pure can replicate object buckets to other object solutions, but it is asynchronous without any consistency controls and cannot do multisite deployments with the same namespace.  Pure advertises no enhanced data index and does compression only on this platform.  FlashBlade has limited tiering capabilities and can mix a cluster with different types of blades, but the media is all identical.  The FlashBlade solution is very easy to use and consume.  Pure Storage has many fans of their products, their FlashBlade solution does not seem to be their priority as they are developing overlapping capabilities on their scale up solution FlashArray.  Pure has been coming on strong for the past few years and is also a fast-moving company.  For object workloads, Pure FlashBlade is a good buy for object storage that does not need multiprotocol and the FlashBlade //E product is well-priced.  FlashArray is coming online with more features including object storage and Pure will often lead with that product when high-performance, large scale, and multi-node resiliency are not warranted.   Pure FlashBlade would be well suited for customers that need an object solution that is thrifty on power/cooling/rackspace.  Current FlashArray customers will find FlashBlade very easy to use.

Dell Technologies ObjectScale, formerly known as ECS, is the most well-established and mature of the products discussed.  With the EMC legacy, Dell has been in the object workload business for longer than S3 has been around (It was once called ‘content addressable storage’).  ECS is available as an appliance or as a software defined product.  File abilities are very limited on ObjectScale.  ObjectScale has one of the best security stances around with an available airgap protecting a third copy of the data.  ObjectScale has adjustable data compression but has no deduplication like VAST.  Metadata tags are customizable and multi-site single namespace is available.  Dell is slow to innovate and makes many development missteps.  Dell is one of the few companies around that markets separate file and object solutions, often causing customers to look for a more unified file and object solution.  Dell has massively reduced headcount in the past few years, impacting development and field expertise. The current incarnation of this product has a risk of becoming obsolete as market demands change.  I would consider Dell ObjectScale a risky buy due to Dell’s slow development cadence, high purchase price, and perceived limited lifetime of the product. I could only recommend Dell ObjectScale if the very best security is needed.

MinIO AIStor is seen rarely in the corporate world and is the only open-source solution discussed here.  MinIO offers commercial licenses for those who cannot meet the open-source obligations or require enterprise grade features and support.  MinIO can run equally well in the cloud or on premise and is fully software defined.  MinIO has no file support for SMB or NFS protocol and security is very limited.  MinIO features a real-time continuously updated index of objects and metadata.  Muti-site, active-active replication and global namespace are available. MinIO’s vision is limited as the leading products of the next few years will likely be ‘data platforms’. MinIO is messaging object support only, and selecting this product robs an organization of flexibility.  MinIO would be well suited for highly technical organization that desires a software defined object-only solution that can be deployed anywhere

Scality RING is our final product discussed. Scality is software defined, multiprotocol, and multi-site capable.  RING is well-suited for large, geo-distributed object/file workloads on commodity servers and is generally optimized for capacity and resilience instead of performance at scale.  Data reduction is achieved via compression.  Security would be considered average, but resiliency is very good across failures/upgrades with multi-geo distribution available.  Their metadata service is not as advanced as others in the field, and is optimized for durability and scalability, not for complex metadata queries. Scality’s vision is average and highlights their durability, compliance and flexibility across file and object workloads.  Scality RING would be a good selection for organizations that need a scalable, and resilient software defined solution that has good multiprotocol support.

Summing up, the solution that potential buyers should be looking at depends on what they find valuable.

• If highly technical and needing only object services, MinIO could be indicated.
• For an easy-to-use and sustainable solution, likely Pure should be considered.
• For customers who see scale and resiliency as a priority, Scality Ring could be a good fit.
• While VAST and Dell ObjectScale are not recommended at this time for any specific use cases, they could certainly fit into most object workloads and have many happy customers.

Storage solutions are rarely a perfect fit without tailoring the application’s requirements and the business’ objectives to the available options via a thorough, and ONST analysis.

Although this is not a comprehensive view of the entire object storage market, ONST‘s focus on enterprise, differentiated, and disruptive solutions align with the options reviewed herein.

If you still have questions, thoughts, or would like more information please give us a shout to discuss, we love this stuff!