Neither tier provides fast access to files. If you are storing data with very little intent to ever retrieve it, AWS's Glacier and Glacier Deep Archive tiers of storage are actually cheaper than Backblaze B2. You want a much simpler pricing structure to work with.You want cheap storage pricing but need fast and frequent access to your files.You are looking to store a backup of your data on another provider, or have to store data over long periods of time for archival and compliance purposes.🤔 Strongly consider Backblaze B2 over S3 if You need some of the more management-oriented native features on Amazon S3, like the ability to tag resources.AWS's Glacier and Glacier Deep Archive tiers of storage are actually cheaper than Backblaze B2, although neither tier provides fast access to files.There is a lot of intra-regional data traffic between storage buckets and other cloud services on the same provider.You are doing a lot of data analytics off your stored data (e.g., S3 to Snowflake).🤔 Strongly consider Amazon S3 over Backblaze B2 if The B2 API is slightly better in that we dont go through. You require HIPAA-compliant storage (although Backblaze is happy to enter into a Business Associate agreement with you). As long as you use multiple threads, I make the radical claim that B2 can be faster than Amazon S3.You need data cross-region replication factors greater than 3 (Backblaze has a limited number of regions).If you are planning to use many AWS services, the same rule applies. Your object storage is already deeply embedded with the rest of the AWS services, like Amazon Athena or AWS Lambda.Who Should You Choose, and Why? ✋ Only choose Amazon S3 if

Backblaze vs aws