We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Cisco CloudCenter based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something."
"Its security and ease of use are most valuable."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its flexibility."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"You can change it non-disruptively. You can increase the size and decrease the size online, which is a huge benefit compared to Azure disks. It just works seamlessly. You don't need to stop the instances."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"Upgrades are very simple as well because they've allowed us to get updates directly in the CloudCenter Suite manager. If you need to do an upgrade to your setup afterward, you just push a button and it rolls out the parts and retires the old ones. It's seamless and very simple compared to what we've done before."
"Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well."
"Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."
"You can scale it easily."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."
"I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services."
"The solution is agile and it has APIs for integration."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"We would like for the files which are coming in that we can version them. So, if a file is accidentally deleted, there should have a recycle bin option where we can go back, and at least once, clean it up."
"I would like to see multi-zone redundancy so that I don't have to worry about it. I just back up my data to that one SMB share and I know that it's replicated to a different region."
"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features."
"The tool should improve its security on the XDR part."
"The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together."
"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills."
"Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution."
"The solution needs to be more simple."
"You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches."
"I'm not a big fan of CloudCenter. I don't have anything against it, however, the on-premise version has been so hard to upgrade and maintain."
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 3rd in Cloud Migration with 12 reviews while Cisco CloudCenter is ranked 9th in Cloud Migration with 9 reviews. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.4, while Cisco CloudCenter is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco CloudCenter writes "Useful features for configuring down to ports but extremely expensive". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Nasuni, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Google Cloud Storage, whereas Cisco CloudCenter is most compared with Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Automation, Cisco UCS Director, CloudStack and Faddom. See our Azure NetApp Files vs. Cisco CloudCenter report.
See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.
