We performed a comparison between Hitachi Content Platform and Scality RING based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the versioning and the ransomware protection."
"One of the most hidden valuable features is ensuring that you don't have bit rot, so it will go and check every single object that's stored on the system, then ensure that if there's a problem, it'll be repaired from either a local copy or remote copy, depending upon your configuration."
"The product provides the fastest technology."
"Hitachi is a big company, so it's a very strong product."
"Companies can scale the solution."
"The features that I have found most valuable are their retention logs. The other thing I have found most valuable is the way they handle the BHEA. Basically the DNS and everything is managed by itself. It is seamless to the users."
"As an architect, I like the management features that come with Hitachi Content Platform because it makes things easy."
"Another feature I like is the life cycle management that helps me with data storage efficiency."
"I think it's the economic factor. This solution has the lowest cost for storage systems."
"The most valuable feature of Scality RING8 is its performance and good interface."
"At present, it is complicated to use the CLI command."
"There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms."
"This product's ability to track logs for access still needs to be improved."
"The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly."
"When you want to replace a disk, we need to start the maintenance from the S nodes. We have to automate maintenance so any onsite engineer can replace it after that, but we don't need to do this on VSP platforms. An engineer can come in and replace that specific disk. If also we could do that on Hitachi Content Platform, it would be great for us."
"The solution could use more integration with clouds."
"Two things that can be improved are pricing and configuration. Mostly the pricing is an issue. And if I were to add anything, I would say more integration with backup solutions such as Veeam Backup."
"The only thing is that it should be more cost effective."
"Scality RING is not easy to learn for someone new. It is a little bit difficult. There are a lot of components to it, and you also need to understand them to work with it effectively."
"Scality RING8 could improve by having more features. We have to use two automation tools to meet our needs. We would prefer to use only one."
"When we used this solution in 2015, it was not scalable at all. I don't know if they have improved on that, but at the time, scalability was just horrible."
Hitachi Content Platform is ranked 15th in File and Object Storage with 12 reviews while Scality RING is ranked 13th in File and Object Storage with 4 reviews. Hitachi Content Platform is rated 8.2, while Scality RING is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Hitachi Content Platform writes " Integrates well with existing systems but technical support for the platform needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Scality RING writes "Offers UTIPI (Unified Tiered Infrastructure Per IOPS) feature in billing but lacks extensive testing ". Hitachi Content Platform is most compared with Dell ECS, MinIO, NetApp StorageGRID, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Pure Storage FlashBlade, whereas Scality RING is most compared with Dell ECS, MinIO, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Qumulo and SwiftStack. See our Hitachi Content Platform vs. Scality RING report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object 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.