We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Backup solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users."
"We have never had any issues with scalability."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"We went from an organization with minimal to no disaster recovery. I was able to spin up the disaster recovery environment with AWS rather quickly and meet business requirements."
"The initial setup is really straightforward."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"Its functionality and technical support are adequate to help prevent failure due to errors."
"The Cloud Manager application that's on the NetApp cloud site is easy to use. You can set up and schedule replications from there, so you don't have to go into the ONTAP system. Another feature we've recently started using is the scheduled power off. We started with one client and have been slowly implementing it with others. We can cut costs by not having the VM run all the time. It's only on when it's doing replication, but it powers off after."
"NetApp's XCP Migration Tool... was pretty awesome. It replicated the data faster than any other tool that I've seen. That was a big help."
"The most valuable features are that it's reliable, simple, and performs well."
"The solution’s Snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are the best thing since sliced bread. Rollback is super easy. It's just simple, and it works. It's very efficient."
"The fast recovery time objective with the ability to bring the environment back to production in case something happens."
"We're able to use the SnapMirror function and SnapMirror data from our on-prem environment into Azure. That is super-helpful. SnapMirror allows you to take data that exists on one NetApp, on a physical NetApp storage platform, and copy it over to another NetApp storage platform. It's a solid, proven technology, so we don't worry about whether data is getting lost or corrupted during the SnapMirror."
"So a lot of these licenses are at the rate that is required for capacity. So they're they're able to reduce the license consumption and also the consumption of the underlying cloud storage."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"I would like some more performance matrices to know what it is doing. It has some matrices inherent to the Cloud Volumes ONTAP. But inside Cloud Manager, it would also be nice to see. You can have a little Snapshot, then drill down if you go a little deeper."
"I would like to see them improve the perspective of start and search in the panels. This would allow for better visualization of the contents that are captured in the tool."
"We want to be able to add more than six disks in aggregate, but there is a limit of the number of disks in aggregate. In GCP, they provide less by limiting the sixth disk in aggregate. In Azure, the same solution provides 12 disks in an aggregate versus GCP where it is just half that amount. They should bump up the disk in aggregate requirement so we don't have to migrate the aggregate from one to another when the capacities are full."
"The encryption and deduplication features still have a lot of room for improvement."
"The support is good in general but the initial, front-line support could be improved. Because I have already been using the product for so long, when I call support I would rather talk to somebody who is a little bit more advanced or senior, rather than talking to the first-level support. Usually, it takes some time to reach out to their senior support."
"Cloud Volumes ONTAP's interface could use an overhaul. Sometimes you have to dig around in Cloud Manager a little bit to find certain things. The layout could be more intuitive."
"It definitely needs improvement with respect to clustering and with respect to more collaborative integrations with Azure. Right now, we have very limited functionalities with Azure, except for storage. If CVO could be integrated with Azure that would help. When there is any sort of maintenance happening in the cloud, it disrupts the service in Cloud Volumes ONTAP."
"I would like to see better integration with Active IQ."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 37th in Cloud Backup with 11 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 10th in Cloud Backup with 60 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with Azure Site Recovery, AWS Backup, Oracle Data Guard, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery and Zerto, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Cloud Storage and Red Hat Ceph Storage. See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP report.
See our list of best Cloud Backup vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Backup reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
