We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and NetApp Private Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NAS solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Speed (IOPS/second) – It is most vital for applications that need low latency and high speed for transferring the data."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is replication...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The ability to create LUNs and modify them are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The performance of the All-Flash System is very good. There is more enhanced performance and data production in the solution, which I appreciate."
"Ability to manage third-party arrays and virtualise them: One screen to control multiple arrays. Simplified administration."
"The price-performance ratio is most valuable."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The valuable features are high availability, compression, and a failover mechanism. It's a very highly available storage solution."
"Integration with other NetApp solutions and merging them is manageable."
"NetApp has its own dedicated operating system, so it will not be affected by any wireless piggybacking or malware. That's the beauty of NetApp's operating system."
"Disaster recovery. And I like the security very much. I think they have the needed options for security. Can manage NPS using the same tools and process that we use today."
"NetApp has really added a lot of features over the years to improve the product and performance. They can do things now like control ingress. They can control egress."
"Very stable and very scalable."
"As opposed to cloud, we have full control over security, use, who uses it. We own a number of different companies, so we can partition however we want."
"The solution is stable."
"It gave us a platform which could clearly arrange all our files and volumes."
"Include an option to upload the support package to the IBM ECuRep when opening an IBM PMR."
"The pricing could be improved, but I think it's getting better and better with each version. IBM needs to implement NAS storage again, as this is a big flaw. Dell EMC is very good at this and if you compared them based on NAS storage, Dell EMC would win right away. IBM's solution for NAS storage is very complicated. We don't have a storage box that provides file sharing from itself, we have to put software on it and go through a whole complicated process. It should be simplified."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The ease of installation should be improved. We had issues with the configuration model."
"The customer's expectations are what they get on the cloud, they're expecting even in the on-premises deployments, going forward."
"I would like to have a larger disk. Right now, you can get 57 terabytes in a shelf. Once they get the larger disk and you get larger capacities, it'll be even better."
"IBM FlashSystems is lagging in optimizing storage technologies."
"The interface of this solution could be improved."
"I'm not sure how easy it is to use on the cloud versus on-prem. If they have different user experiences, they should work to make the two as similar as possible to make it easy for a user to understand both even if they only deal mainly with one."
"I would like to see the GUI management simplified in the next release."
"The hardware does not last as long as it could with new software."
"There is room for improvement in the support. It has been a problem for our team."
"The solution could improve by having better support experts. For example, they do not have clear instructions on configuration."
"There may actually be so many features that the end-user gets lost in the volume."
"They need a little more technical people in Akola. Most of the NetApp people are in Bangalore, Mumbai, or Delhi, but there are very few in Akola. I think NetApp has few technicians in Akola because they mostly rely on partners to service this area."
"We had to write a number of custom tools or scripts ourselves to use it as a staging area between our on-premises datacenter and our cloud installation."
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 4th in NAS with 106 reviews while NetApp Private Storage is ranked 12th in NAS with 14 reviews. IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while NetApp Private Storage is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Private Storage writes "Integrates well, useful connectors, and straightforward implemention". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, whereas NetApp Private Storage is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon) and NetApp FAS Series. See our IBM FlashSystem vs. NetApp Private Storage report.
See our list of best NAS vendors.
We monitor all NAS 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.