We performed a comparison between Kaminario K2 [EOL] and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."The speed is one of the most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"The most valuable feature is how it simplifies the management of the SAN."
"The reliability is very good."
"The most valuable feature is it never goes down. We can expand and create volumes."
"The most valuable features are extremely low latency, high IOPS with VMware, inline deduplication and compression."
"I use all the features of this solution and I find them to be easy to use and functional, such as the compression and capacity to expand."
"They have really good baked in analytics to show you trends for growth history, so it does help with future planning for data growth."
"We've been using FlashArray's snapshot for backups. Their replication across sites and response time are also excellent."
"The increased performance is many times above our previous array performance in all metrics. Integration with vSphere features is also a definite plus."
"The ratio between the physical storage and the storage we use is very high."
"Implementation of the solution is very simple."
"Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms would have had us license separately."
"Logic/software management"
"Inline compression"
"The GUI is very straightforward and easy to use."
"It provides a full feature set without separate licensing (deduplication, compression, snapshot, asynchronous replication, stable performance, etc.)."
"NetApp AFF has helped to simplify our clients' infrastructure while still getting very high performance for their business-critical applications. One of our customers uses the vSAN environment in the release, then they use NFS for their VMware VCF environment and TKG environment. In this case, when they move to NetApp for the TKG and the VM infrastructures, they use AFF for block, CIFS, and NFS. It provides a single storage with NFS, block, and CIFS with deduplication, team provisioning, and compression. Everything is in there, which makes it very good to use."
"The most valuable feature is speed."
"It has a good interface. Its configuration and flexibility are also good."
"It scales well, probably more so than the FAS. Because of the storage density with the SSDs, we can't buy enough SSDs to max one out."
"It should scale far beyond our needs. I don't think we will ever hit the edge of it."
"The Snapshots and just the overall flexibility of the product have been great."
"The most valuable features for AFF are the speed, durability, back up, the time, the workloads that we are using currently are much faster than what they used to be. We're getting a lot of different things out of All Flash."
"Setup was simple and easy."
"The setup needs to be improved the most. They can do a little more with the user interface, but the setup is what I would like to see made a bit easier."
"In terms of the future, I have been excited by some of the copy data management stuff that they're talking about building into the environment. There are feature sets where I've done a lot of automation work. So, I am always looking forward to extensions of their API. They're also talking about a phone home centralized analytics database being used as a centralized management console with a list of new cloud features, but this doesn't seem finalized."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"Pricing could be better in comparison to other solutions."
"The internal garbage collection process has been fixed recently in some OS updates so it is more efficient but that could be just a little better."
"Self-backup is the only feature lacking in this solution."
"They could improve the price."
"It would be good to have metrics of the box's performance so we can see what it delivers, but currently, I can't see what it's actually doing."
"The management graphical interface needs more improvement."
"I would love to see capacity on its DRAM. I know it's not cost effective for them to do it, but I think that it could be a big differentiator and was a big differentiator from the beginning."
"Access to technical support should be improved for our region. Technical support is good, but they're very hard to access."
"I think it should have better performance with small files. With big data, its performance is top notch, but it is difficult to load small files."
"I would like to see LDAP for the management panel; I've been notified they might be currently working on it."
"Improved scale and budget planning with flexibility of the solution for budget needs and efficiency for growth with the great optimization ratio due to the nature of our use."
"I'm hoping to see Active Directory integration. Right now, you still have to use a local admin account to log in and manage everything."
"The front panel of the drive shelf doesn't always seat firmly."
"I think for us, improvement would probably be the changes in how the flash is actually used inside the system and how we manage the actual disk and stripes within the system."
"The product has size limitations on fax volume. They have increased from 100 to 300, which is still less than other vendors. Or flex groups are not supported."
"Going forward, I would like improvement in the response latencies, capacity size, cache, and controller size."
"You have a limit in terms of how much you can expand storage. It sounds like a lot. However, over the years, as you grow, it may be smaller than you think."
"NetApp AFF could improve SAN storage because it feels as if it was not put together at the beginning, it functions as an afterthought. Additionally, the cloud features could be more mature."
"It would be nice to have better integration between SRM and VMware, as I've had some issues with that."
"I would like there to be a way to break out the 40 gig ports on them. We have a lot of 10 gigs in our environment. It is a big challenge breaking out the 40 gig coming out of the filer. It would be nice to have good old 10 gig ports again, or a card that has just 10 gig ports on it."
"This is an expensive solution that could be cheaper."
Earn 20 points
Kaminario K2 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. Kaminario K2 [EOL] is rated 8.8, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Kaminario K2 [EOL] writes "Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms license separately". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". Kaminario K2 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell Unity XT, Dell PowerStore, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and VAST Data.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.