Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Spectrum Scale vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
We are definitely in the process of reducing our footprint on our secondary data center and all those snapshots technically reduce tape backup. That's from the protection perspective, but as far as files, it's much easier to use and manage and it's faster, too.
The most valuable feature of this solution is that it makes our data readily available and we don't have to go through a lot of trouble to access it.
The fast recovery time objective with the ability to bring the environment back to production in case something happens.
Multiprotocol is the most valuable because Amazon was not able to provide us with access to the same data from Linux and from Windows clients. That was our value proposition for CVO, Cloud Volumes ONTAP.
ONTAP's snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are pretty useful in recovering your data from a time in a snapshot. That's pretty useful for when you have an event where a disaster struck and then you need to recover all your data. It's pretty helpful and pretty fast in those terms.
Replication to the cloud is the most valuable feature. Deduplication and compression are also very important to us. We are in the process of adopting to the cloud. We are going to AWS and we are trying to do a safety technician call out with integration to the cloud. NetApp allows us to move some of the volume to the cloud, at the same time that we continue providing the cloud services that we have on premises.
For us, the value comes from the solution's flexibility, speed, and hopefully cost savings in the long term.
The initial setup was straightforward. We started with a small pilot and we then moved to production with no downtime at all.
We can also create test cases. We can even throttle down performance or release more performance. So, we can run more precise test scenarios.
When we do to do more scaled load testing, we can run more dense workloads and still have the same results across all specific nodes
The newer versions of this solution are much more stable and easier to manage.
As a function of our core business, it's a sought after tool that helps us provide analytical support across a wide spectrum of client needs. It's allowed us to test out in our connected restaurant - "TheWorks" - a fully-functional restaurant experience center that allows our clients to discover the value of our connected solutions firsthand. We deploy vSAN in this customer-like environment within a hyperconvergent infrastruction (HCI) to give our clients a better understanding and help optimize data and the end-users' experience.
The most valuable feature is the ability to continue our business needs and have higher visibility. It has definitely increased our business productivity levels.
To me, VMware is a leader of the visualizations. I think everyone just follow VMware.
I have used VMware for 15 years and I never had any problems with stability.
vSAN provides default HA configurations, where if any host goes down, the VM moves around within the host. Even though the disks are local, the VMs moves around with the vSAN disk and vSAN provides a high availability on its own.
I think the challenge now is more in terms of keeping an air gap. The notion that it is in the cloud, easy to break, etc. The challenge now is mostly about the air gap and how we can protect that in the cloud.
We would like to have support for high availability in multi-regions.
The integration wizard requires a bit of streamlining. There are small things that misconfigure or repeat the deployment that will create errors, specifically in Azure.
Not a perfect ten because it's not very efficient with upgrades and management.
In terms of improvement, I would like to see the Azure NetApp Files have the capability of doing SnapMirrors. Azure NetApp Files is, as we know, is an AFF system and it's not used in any of the Microsoft resources. It's basically NetApp hardware, so the best performance you can achieve, but the only reason we can't use that right now is because of the region that it's available in. The second was the SnapMirror capability that we didn't have that we heavily rely on right now.
I would like to see something from NetApp about backups. I know that NetApp offers some backup for Office 365, but I would like to see something from NetApp for more backup solutions.
I would like this solution to be brought to all the three major players. Right now it's supported only on AWS and Azure. They should bring it to Google as well, because we would like to have flexibility in choosing the underlying cloud storage provider.
In the next release, I would like to see more options on the dashboard.
When we talk about improvements for vSAN, there is some way to go from a at least stability perspective. Adding all these new features is nice, but we are now at the level that most of the features you need in production are there.
Upgradability could be a bit easier sometimes. We are now where vSAN can be updated without ESXi, but there is still enough dependency. So that would be good if that actually would uncoupled even more.
This solution would benefit from better collaboration with Cisco for driver updates.
I would like to see the availability of more template based VMware systems. Combined with the ability to check and measure multiple and converging data segments. Another issue I've seen is that the tool seems to be slow when first starting up.
I would love for this product to be cheaper and easier to configure.
It is an expensive solution.
The vSan product uses a software system called Vsphere to monitor the system. It is sometimes difficult to manage the PCs within the systems.
There is a room for improvement on the latest version of compatibility with the VMware product, especially for vSAN and with other vendors on their motherboards and driver configurations.
Pricing and Cost Advice
For NetApp it's about $20,000 for a single node and $30,000 for the HA.
Our licensing costs are folded into the hardware purchases and I have never differentiated between the two.
Cost is a big factor, because a lot of companies can't afford enterprise grade equipment all the time. They skimp where they can. I would recommend that they improve the cost.
Cloud is cloud. It's still expensive. Any good solution comes with a price tag. That's where we are looking to see how well we can manage our data in the cloud by trying to optimize the costs.
I know the licensing is a bit on the high-end. That's when we had to downsize our MetroCluster disks and just migrate to disks that were half used. We migrated into those just to reduce maintenance costs.
In addition to the standard licensing fees, there are fees for Azure, the VMs themselves and for data transfer.
The standard pricing is online. Pricing depends. If you're using the PayGo model, then it's just the normal costs on the Microsoft page. If you're using Bring Your Own License, which is what we're doing, then you get with your sales contact at NetApp and start figuring out what price is the best, in the end, for your company.
They allow a special price if you are working closely with them. Since we have a lot of NetApp systems, we got some kind of discount. That's something they do for other customers, not just for us. The price was fair. In addition to the licensing fees, you're paying Amazon for your usage...
ROI from an administrative perspective is clearly much better because I only have to deal with one user interface.
I'd love for this product to be cheaper.
The only problem I have with VMware is the price. It is a good product, but it is expensive.
With vSAN, we didn't find the market that competitive.
The vSAN is somewhat expensive to license.
The vSAN licensing is not an inexpensive product. It does cost more than hypervisor.
We did consider other hyperconverged solutions. It usually came down to price. vSan was the most cost effective thing.
What made us go with this solution was price point. When you can utilize existing storage infrastructure, and not have to continually purchase new SAN products out there that are going up in price as time goes by, then it's a wonderful thing.
out of 4 in Cloud Software Defined Storage
Average Words per Review
out of 38 in Hyper-Converged (HCI)
Average Words per Review
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 34% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
The leading enterprise-grade storage management solution, delivers secure, proven storage management services and supports up to a capacity of 368TB. Software service supports various use cases, such as: File shares and block-level storage serving NAS (NFS, SMB / CIFS) and SAN (iSCSI) Disaster Recovery, Backup, and Archive DevOps Databases (SQL, Oracle, NoSQL) Cloud Volumes ONTAP is offered in a standard single-node configuration or in a High Availability (HA) configuration.
VMware vSAN is the industry-leading software powering Hyper-Converged Infrastructure solutions.
What vSAN Does
Learn more about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP
Learn more about VMware vSAN
|Rohit, AdvacnedMD, D2L, Trinity Mirror, Eidos Media, WireStorm, Cordant Group, JFK Medical Center, ALD Automotive, Healthix, City of Baton Rouge, ON Semiconductor||Read Some Case Studies At Home Cloud CaribCINgroupDiscovery Check out the Rest of our Customer Stories Here|
Comms Service Provider10%
Software R&D Company40%
Comms Service Provider7%
Financial Services Firm5%
Software R&D Company31%
Comms Service Provider12%