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 stability is perfect. The reliability is 100% and the latency is always lower than 1 millisecond."
"Pure Storage FlashArray has significantly improved our data center performance. It handles high workloads efficiently, providing better performance in the environment. With increased storage capacity, it has led to improved overall system performance. The tool's technology is a standout feature. It has helped me reduce storage costs by 15 percent."
"On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the most comfortable pricing, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Data deduplication features make it easier to manage storage and forecast growth."
"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."
"The predictive performance analytics is a very good feature, as our system is performing better than before."
"The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive."
"It's easy to use, and the maintenance upgrades to get free controllers work really well."
"The ratio between the physical storage and the storage we use is very high."
"It provides a full feature set without separate licensing (deduplication, compression, snapshot, asynchronous replication, stable performance, etc.)."
"Scale out is a differentiator for them, especially in the enterprise market. It's key for a lot of customers."
"The GUI is very straightforward and easy to use."
"The capacity that we're saving by using Kaminario's K2 is giving us a four-to-one ratio for our deduplication."
"Data reduction and snapshot abilities: Smaller footprint in the datacenter (lower cost for power, cooling, etc.)."
"The most valuable aspect is the use of solid-state storage drives instead of spinning drives."
"The increased performance is many times above our previous array performance in all metrics. Integration with vSphere features is also a definite plus."
"Performance. Mostly with our default settings it's good. All of the factory settings are fine. We don't have to tune it."
"It is a stable solution."
"I like the ability to snapshot, and the cloning features are valuable to us as well. I like that I can quickly and efficiently snapshot the data and move it to wherever I need to locally or in the cloud. Also, I know that when I take the snapshot that all of the data will be there and that it will be usable when I need to use it."
"The performance is outstanding when it's all Flash. That's the biggest bang for the buck that we get."
"The ability to do SnapMirror or SnapVault for data resiliency and backup."
"The Active IQ feature is a productive mechanism that automatically collects reports and users' statuses."
"The most valuable features of AFF are its speed and the responsive support from NetApp."
"The most valuable aspect of NetApp AFF is the money it saves our organization."
"I'd like to see a move towards individual VMs for what the performance of each VM is in a VD infrastructure. I can see the overall volume, but I would love to see things in a more granular level on the VM side."
"We haven't seen ROI."
"Just some nit picky stuff, like allowing servers and volumes to be grouped. Therefore, it would easier to work with them in the GUI."
"There's always an opportunity for new feature functionality."
"I would like a feature to integrate with external or cloud solutions. For example, if I want to use this storage for a backup from the cloud, I want to have integration with the cloud vendors, such as Microsoft, Oracles, or Amazon. It could be available as an API to allow seamless integration. Additionally, the solution could improve by having native integration with a cloud provider, such as VMware or Microsoft, this would reduce the need to use third-party solutions to complete the task."
"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."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve in the area of cryptographic information in the consoles. The user-friendliness could improve. The Pure Storage FlashArray team should come and log into the system with their maintenance credentials and then pull out the information as evidence of cryptography."
"Most of our upgrades have not been as smooth as they should have been."
"The interface look and feel could be improved."
"I would like to see them work with Cisco, so it comes off the FIs, instead of having to go through my 10-gig network."
"The system currently has a 15TB LUN size limit and that snapshots need to be scheduled through script API instead of the GUI."
"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."
"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 them to improve the look of the product’s external casing and shelves."
"A single pane of glass to monitor/manage multiple arrays would be helpful."
"Access to technical support should be improved for our region. Technical support is good, but they're very hard to access."
"From my perspective, everything works well. They've already announced that they have some features in their next release that make the existing investment more usable, by adding software features to your existing legacy hardware investment."
"The product should be more competitive and come up with additional features. They should keep the client always in mind and as the top priority. This would be the best way to compete with other solutions."
"I think adding more features to make it more cloud enabled will help us with cloud tiering and simplify the whole cloud operations when it's integrating with our on-prem AFF products. That is one area where we would like to see more improvements from NetApp."
"The quality of technical support has dwindled over time and needs to be improved."
"When comparing with Pure for example, with Pure you have no maintenance anymore and with NetApp, you still need maintenance."
"It would be very useful if we could do the NFS to CIFS file transfer, but it is not supported at this time."
"The response to basic problems could be faster. They usually respond fast when there are critical issues, but you always want it right now."
"We'd like to see improvement in the time to retrieve from the Cloud, whether it's on-prem to cloud and whether it's public or private cloud."
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 PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series.
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.