I feel like the author of the article doesn't actually know what FUSE is and that article is AI generated as the comparison tables smell of LLM hallucination.

I feel like the author of the article doesn't actually know what FUSE is and that article is AI generated as the comparison tables smell of LLM hallucination. If you don't care about acceptable latency, metadata operations, indexing, finding files without already knowing the full path, proper synchronisation between clients, then sure mounting S3 over FUSE is nice, heck I even use it myself, but it's not a replacement for NFS. You could use S3 object storage with something like JuiceFS/SeaweedFS to make metadata operations acceptably fast (in case of Redis backed JuiceFS, lightning fast), but you're no longer just using object storage and now have a critical database in your infrastructure to maintain. > Speed: Matching NVMe performance (5-10 GB/s) through kernel bypass and parallelization. Say wha? Not sure how a userland application is supposed to 1) create a tcp connection to connect to s3 or 2) respond to fopen without going through the kernel. They're in for a shock when they find out you can do NFS via FUSE too.