We performed a comparison between Reduxio [EOL] and SolidFire 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 security operating system is its most valuable feature because it's very simple, easy to use, and operate. You don't have to do very serious training to operate this equipment. It's user-friendly and pretty straightforward."
"Data reduction and compression. Sub millisecond latency."
"This solution is very scalable."
"It helps to simplify storage because it has an easy front-end to access everything."
"The console is simple to use. It has good performance. It is easy to install, understand, and manage, with a good ratio of deduplication and compression. It is doing its job."
"The all-flash disc is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The speed is the most valuable feature, along with the ease of getting it connected. We were able to get it online in less than a day."
"It gives us capacity planning."
"It needs integration with cloud vendors for remote storage, and to be able to restore a single machine from a specific volume."
"The down-to-the-second restore capability, native to the device is a valuable feature."
"I like the Reduxio TimeOS, specifically. That feature's pretty good. I haven't seen it in any other product. They're the only ones who have it."
"The pre-processing dedupe engine they have instead of post-processing."
"The Reduxio box has improved our resiliency and management overhead."
"With only a few clicks, I can provision or modify storage."
"Efficiency of data management (Tier-X tiering, and NoDup inline dedupliclation and compression) provide for quick response time (+150k IOPS) during regular usage."
"Reduxio delivers a self-contained system with all of the features rolled in and functional."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its scalability."
"The most valuable feature is the performance, as well as how you manage performance on the system."
"The system efficiency is excellent overall."
"I would say in terms of architecture and in terms of functionality, the product is quite good."
"The dashboard is such that you don't need to be a storage expert to administer it."
"Templates are already predefined for it. If you're coding it up, it will take two days. You can pick up a template right there from the API, and it just works for you. Implementation done in 10 minutes."
"The scalability and being able to implement it quickly."
"SolidFire has seamless performance for the nodes and extensions. I also like the tool’s scalability. The product’s performance does not get affected when we scale either up or down. This is not the case with other products."
"CIFS and SMB Shares cannot be mounted directly."
"The price should be lower."
"Most of our upgrades have not been as smooth as they should have been."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI."
"When we were doing some tests, we found that there was an I/O freeze when they were switching the controller."
"The problem is that we can only make a few groups, around five or six groups. I like groups and we need a lot of them. We had to put all the information in only a few groups and cannot make a more detailed separation of them."
"Pricing could be better in comparison to other solutions."
"It would be helpful to have the ability to recover virtual machines individually without having to restore the full LUN."
"The only thing that I would point out would be the basic administration management of the machine. Everything has rights, meaning that there's either all control or no delegated control. So to sum that up, it would be a feature request for delegated management in the administrative console."
"Integration is needed with other virtual vendors like VMware, Veeam, Hyper-V; that integration needs to be deeper, not just the way that they're using it now. I know that it's under development, but I think this is one of the disadvantages, for now, as a young company. They have to work with the other players on the market."
"The latest release limits web access to the admin console via Chrome only, and that's a bit of a hassle. Would definitely prefer something less restrictive there."
"I am waiting for the vSphere Plug-In with individual VM level control."
"The user interface for the web console could be more user-friendly, while it is flashy, how to find functions is not necessarily obvious."
"The only thing that I'd like to see, at some point in time, is having the storage array being able to detect a ransomware attack. When you get hit by a ransomware it rewrites every block in your guest's virtual machine. So there should be a way for them to be able to detect that: "Hey, this is unusual, to see every block of this guest being rewritten all at one time," and then flag that as potential malware or ransomware."
"The only critique that we have is it needs the ability to have local users added. You have to log in as one built-in admin account. You can't create your own."
"Though it is a stable solution, its users may face some security issues at times...The security provided by the solution is one area that can be improved."
"So feature-wise, I would say more reporting tools that could be merged into it."
"One of the challenges we faced while using SolidFire was that the product line that we were using in our company was discontinued."
"We had some false positives, power supplies failing, and that's really been about it. We had a couple of glitches during some upgrade processes but nothing that was really concerning to us."
"SolidFire could improve in terms of hardware robustness."
"They could do a file-based NAS: SolidFire NAS-based. It's probably not its niche, but that is our direction, not to use block, and it's block. Solid state block is what it is."
"I would like to see integration with the cloud, number one. Being able to spin SolidFire in the cloud."
"We are looking for, potentially, on the Active IQ reporting side, to do reporting based on the datastore. Right now, I can report on the whole SolidFire, or I can report on just a certain datastore or a volume. I'd like to take all of my VDI infrastructure, which as an example would be multiple datastores."
Earn 20 points
Reduxio [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while SolidFire is ranked 19th in All-Flash Storage with 33 reviews. Reduxio [EOL] is rated 9.8, while SolidFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Reduxio [EOL] writes "Its access speed and now its recently released features makes Reduxio not only an equal, but also better than your older version SANs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolidFire writes "A versatile storage solution suitable for various workloads in cloud environments providing scalable architecture, granular Quality of Service and consistent performance". Reduxio [EOL] is most compared with , whereas SolidFire is most compared with NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore and VMware vSAN.
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.