We performed a comparison between Hitachi Universal Storage VM [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 most valuable features are extremely low latency, high IOPS with VMware, inline deduplication and compression."
"The speed is one of the most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray."
"Running SAP on Pure Storage helps a lot without doing any further tuning to improve application performance. Our internal clients are happy."
"The first year, we started out with one or five terabytes and it took what was 20 terabytes of storage down to less than one terabyte."
"The speed is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The ease of use. That's what our customers love. They say it's very easy, they don't need special training, they don't need to call us or any other company or integrator to help them do their job. That's the main reason they purchase Pure."
"Having an intuitive user interface to get things running is great."
"We find the ease of usability and setup valuable."
"The most valuable features are simplified provisioning and management, de-duplication, and built-in encryption."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the deduplication and the ability to move data to different clouds."
"The speed of data retrieval is the most valuable feature. We mostly use it for our SAP database and we are getting good IO from the hard drive."
"Performance. Mostly with our default settings it's good. All of the factory settings are fine. We don't have to tune it."
"We are spending less time putting out fires, so there's a tangible benefit right there."
"We have never had a failure. We can upgrade as we move along with zero downtime."
"Scalability is excellent. If we need more space, it's a no downtime solution. It's harder to get the funding than it is to get the solution itself."
"The performance is the most valuable feature."
"Organizations can reduce data storage footprint and lower power and cooling costs, helping to adopt "Green IT.""
"As long as they always improve on IOPS speed, that's all we're really looking for. The faster the storage can be the more we can do speed of application and speed of use."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"The credentials on the iSCSI interface are only available to type in with the Chrome browser, and not with the Firefox browser."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"The internal garbage collection process has been fixed recently in some OS updates so it is more efficient but that could be just a little better."
"Pure Storage will have issues with positioning in the near future since its a relatively new company. For now, customers need a PoC to trust using the solution, as it can't stand on its brand name alone. They need to improve Pure Storage's marketing."
"Larger capacity and more storage ports would be the two things I'd like to see."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve by being more secure."
"The exterior display needs to be improved."
"We have been seeing some challenges around the application layer implementation. We are having some teething problems now with the cooperation between the application layer and backups to things, like SnapCenter. This may be a question of product maturity."
"The dashboard needs improvement. The dashboard needs some uplift"
"The certification classes are good, but they don't cover enough of the material, and the exams only test on what is covered in class."
"The graphical interface is still heavy and slow. Needs more improvement in this area."
"It's a little behind on security. It's starting to get into multi-factor authentication, they just started to introduce it but not for all products."
"We only had a few upgrade issues."
"There needs to be compatibility with upgraded applications. We don't want the system to be upgraded, but not have backwards compatible to existing applications."
"There are no RDMA capabilities in CIFS (SMB) and NFS protocols."
More Hitachi Universal Storage VM [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Hitachi Universal Storage VM [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. Hitachi Universal Storage VM [EOL] is rated 10.0, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Hitachi Universal Storage VM [EOL] writes "Good price-performance ratio, provides simplified provisioning and management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". Hitachi Universal Storage VM [EOL] is most compared with , whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell Unity XT, Dell PowerStore, 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.