Depending on your use case, I recommend looking at models that include compression and deduplication features to ensure the required level of UI performance. 

We dedicate the solution to one particular application so we do not face performance issues. An environment with a shared storage array across multiple applications or databases may need high performance storage, more memory, and powerful controllers. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

I rate IBM FlashSystem nine out of 10. It's the best active-active solution for the money. I recommend finding a partner who has expertise in the product. Don't use a team that only installed the product once.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

I rate the solution nine out of ten. The solution is good, but variable-length deduplication and global deduplication can be included.

There are far better products with better support for less cost.

The hardware itself is good, but the code that runs on it is not good at all. We have LUNs that will just go offline, and support has no clear answer. Each result is a code upgrade that does not resolve the problem. There is no built-in historical reporting. That is a costly add-on for an already overpriced system.

My company sells IBM FlashSystem to customers. I'm a salesperson.

My company sold six IBM FlashSystem to three customers. One was large-scale, while the other two were small-scale. The customers use the solution on production and deal sites. The capacity of my customers is sufficient at the moment, so there's no plan to increase the usage of IBM FlashSystem.

I'd tell people looking into implementing IBM FlashSystem that installing and managing it is straightforward. The solution also has excellent performance.

My rating for IBM FlashSystem is nine out of ten.

My company has a partnership with IBM.

We are just a customer and an end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution at this point.

I'd recommend the solution. Everything is fiber from start to finish. I don't need to use a fiber switch. It's an expensive component. However, IBM says I don't need it and I can do I direct line from my own source. It's a supported solution. It's very good.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten so far.

I give the solution a nine out of ten because of the solution's flexibility, scalability, and great prices. Last year's performance was remarkable, and I expect the same this year. IBM FlashSystem truly exceeded my expectations.

I suggest using the ESS for planning and ensuring a thorough conversation with the customer about their desired outcome. Proper planning is essential for successful implementation; if the planning isn't done well, it can lead to having to redo the work. My advice is to plan carefully and talk to the customer to make sure we understand exactly what they need and how to deliver it.

I would definitely recommend this solution to other users. It is suitable for many sizes of business due to the options they offer. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten as it offers great performance and stability. 

I would recommend this solution to anyone else who is interested.

Because technology is evolving at a rapid pace, they should compare the benefits. Of course, solution technology is important, but the most important aspect is service and knowledge.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

IBM FlashSystem provides a very good value.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a seven out of ten.

I would advise others to get somebody to do it for you. Don't do it yourself, or read the book carefully. Our implementation was complicated, so we ended up doing it multiple times. Other colleagues I know in other institutes have much smaller systems than the one we bought. They implemented it in four hours. So, for complex and big implementations, either get an expert to do it for you or read the documentation multiple times before you start, which we didn't.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

I work only on high-end storage. Before recommending a solution, I need to know about the workload, that is, application workload, backup workload, and database workload. IBM provides a free workload script that can be applied to any environment, such as Windows, Unix, or Linux. I need to see the I/O performance, and after which, I can provide the best solution for a customer from Pure Storage, EMC, or IBM. 

I would rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

I recommend the solution and rate it a ten out of ten. 

I would rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others because it is reliable, high performing and user friendly.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

My advice to others would be to go for the big one, the A9000. It is a little bit more expensive but it offers a better total cost of ownership.

In the next version, I would like to see external virtualization. We are currently using LVC for external virtualization, and then we are using the boxes under LVC. If IBM embeds the LVC feature inside the box, I will only need to use the box and then virtualize the smaller boxes behind it. It will simplify my issues.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I would highly recommend IBM FlashSystem and would rate it at nine out of ten. It is definitely worth the cost.

IBM is really open and available to those who want to find out what kinds of solutions will fit their needs. More than that, if it becomes more serious, with potential, IBM can provide you almost everything you need to see in its labs, to show you that the numbers they talk about are not only on paper but in real life. They are real and they can get to these performance levels.

IBM does a lot of customer setups in their labs and they invite the potential customers in and show them. But it's not for everyone. When we have a real potential customer and they demand it, that's what we do for them.

There are no 10s in the market right now. Everybody is evolving. As far as where we see storage going, it's not only hardware, it's also software-defined, and everybody is trying to reach a higher and very comprehensive level. And that takes time. It's not IBM, they need others to get to that higher level so we can have a comprehensive solution. It's not because IBM is an eight out of 10 and somebody is a nine or 10. It depends on the solution and application. In some cases, they would rate a 10, in others you might only give them seven.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

IBM is a good vendor with an excellent product, but the software side of the company still needs improvement. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. All top-tier solutions have room for improvement so I never rate them higher than a seven. 

If someone wants a robust, scalable, and consistent behavior for their site, then they should use IBM FlashSystem.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

This is definitely a product I can recommend based on its performance and reliability. I don't know whether it is cost-effective compared to other similar products because we are an IBM shop from end to end. We chose IBM because the products have been well suited for our setup, and the performance and reliability are excellent.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would advise users of this solution to ensure they have the correct licensing and continue to maintain the product while using it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a customer and end-user.

We are using the V9000, and currently, we have deployed SS9100.

This is a financial Institute. As per regulatory compliance, we cannot share our customer data. We keep our confidential customer data on the cloud that is deployed on-premises.

Overall, we have been happy with the solution. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

Before purchasing this product, I recommend that everyone should do a PoC because there are multiple flash drive systems now available. All storage vendors are now making flash drives because it is a new technology that replaces existing hybrid systems. I would suggest doing some analysis and some R&D because Huawei, for example, is doing well. EMC is also top of the line, with IBM. There are slight differences in features, however, so it is important to do a comparison before making any decision.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

In my experience, IBM doesn't need maintenance at all. Every year, there is a microcode update to get a new feature or fix a bug, but I know some customers who have had the box for more than five or six years without updating it and it still runs well. 

To anyone who's looking into implementing IBM FlashSystem, I would advise you to read the instructions on the box. If you follow the instructions, implementation will be very smooth and easy, even if you're not a professional. 

I would rate this product a ten out of ten. 

Just be careful if you're going to try to use compression, because of the specific issues we've had. If it's a high performance computing environment, just keep it thick provisioned. Get the best performance from it. Don't try to save and then screw up the user experience.

If something fails, it's not going to bring down the application. V9000 is redundant through and through, so it's a great product.

When selecting a vendor, stability, ease of use, and resiliency are the most important things.

IBM FlashSystem offers easy management and durability. I rate it an eight point five out of ten. 

I advise everyone to have a look at their current use of storage and think of single management and live migrations of their data, and how they will save money instead of having multiple vendors to reinstall and migrate data.

The biggest lesson we've learned so far is that hyper-converged storage is good for smaller workloads, but the re-syncing after a failure will be a problem for big workloads.

The IBM System is top-notch and offers all the features we need to keep going for another 5 years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but its marketing awareness can be improved.

I highly recommend it.

Folks that are looking to implement the V9000 really should take a look at the simplicity that an all-flash array can bring to their environment. They should look at the efficiency of being able to take skills that they might have learned within other Storwize products and be able to directly translate those into the V9000.

To summarize: Similar interface, similar support interaction, and the way they can take knowledge that they previously had and be able to directly translate that to their all-flash array decision.

This product has the best quality, performance and cost.

The sales team was great as was the technical team. I now feel the EMC VNX and NetApp are both better NAS systems. If I had to do it over again, I would stayed with the EMC VNX for NAS.

I would recommend this solution because it offers good performance and the systems are fast. In terms of dealing with Oracle, it's really a good choice for customers that have their infrastructure that needs balance. 

I would rate this solution ten out of ten. 

If you are looking for a great flash solution that can be virtualized or utilized as a building block for a scalable flash solution, or if you're looking for flash for a very specific workload, then you may want to consider a FlashSystem 900.

It's probably the most straightforward piece of hardware you can get. The user experience from the interfaces and the price points for the performance a really solid.

I'm an IBM Business Partner, so there's really only one vendor that we go to for our storage. However, even if I weren't an IBM Business Partner, having a pretty stable track record with their products, ease of use, and value delivered for price -- I would probably still recommend a FlashSystem 900 for the use cases I stated earlier.

Just buy it. Support for sure is important when considering which vendor to go for, as well as ease of use and the track record of the code base.

DON'T use it unless you have a new and small NAS environment.

I have been working with IBM for 20 years. Many people are scared of cloud solutions. They do not want to use it, so they use the products on-premise. I recommend the tool to my clients. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. I recommend this solution to others.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

It's a more complete solution and really up to mixed infrastructure and resiliency and has a lot to offer on scalability too

I rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

Almost all vendors are offering data reduction functionalities (deduplication, compression, thin provisioning etc.) in their newest products. Reduction techniques are offering up to 10 times reduction in data but this ratio is not more than 2 or 3 in real life for mixed type of data. Therefore, customers should test the products with their real and different type of data to measure the reduction rates properly.

Otherwise, vendors may offer smaller sizes in their proposal and there might be conflict in between two parties after setup of the product in the live environment.

I would tell them, "The ease of use of the system. If you have a small storage team, then this is the platform for you. It's really easy to manage, really easy to use, and it doesn't take a lot of training." The biggest key to deciding on the product is the support and replacement capabilities.

I would advise colleagues to use FlashSystems. It's a very good solution for us to achieve our goals.

When I evaluate vendors, for me, the historical relationship is very important, and definitely the communication. With IBM, we know the vendor well.

I would just tell them to give it a try. Benchmark it and compare it with the other vendors. Talk to some customers about their experiences.

I rate FlashSystem nine out of 10. I would recommend it to others.

If you have the funds and you require speed, this product is the answer. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

Currently, on the market, I see a lot of different vendors who are offering the same functionalities or even better options for the same or less money. They should try to be more competitive.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a six out of ten. If it was less expensive and a bit more stable, I would likely rate it higher.

In summary, this is a good product and I absolutely recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. Engineers think that Dell EMC has better storage than Storwize. 

My advice to anybody who is considering this system is not to do it. I do not recommend it. It is a big no.

The biggest complaint that I have about this solution is the support. It is important to have responsive support. We had a RAM issue, and the RAM is the heart of the server. I had to escalate the ticket and wait for thirty days. During that time, my server was totally down, which caused our productivity to suffer. It was a big disaster.

The hardware may be good, but I cannot rate this solution very high because of the support.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

1. Download the IBM Redbook on best practices to implement.
2. Engage IBM support or your integration partner/reseller at a detailed level.
3. Know what you want to do and document your requirements.
4. Investigate upgrade costs and five-year maintenance options.

This is highly reliable storage. Other than not having very high IOPS requirements, RAID5 would be good enough for application and database LUN. But before creating the RAID group/array, the implementer should have proper projections.

For us, it's all about the commodity while selecting a vendor. In addition, the other important factors are their support level, infrastructure, how good they are, and what is their roadmap for keeping the product around.

Give it a try and look at the demos. You will like it and you will want to get it.

It's pretty good; I've been happy with it. I've worked with other infrastructures as well such as HPE, Dell, Logic and Nutanix but I like IBM Storwize.

Have good knowledge about the clients business.

You can use this product for your applications, databases or for whatever other solutions that you have.

Cost and performance are the two things that we consider while selecting a vendor.

Read the Redbook.

The most important thing when selecting a vendor for me is how well the vendor works with me. It's a partnership, not just a sales, “here's a product” kind of thing. If you partner with us, you really get in, dive deep with us, and work through the solutions if needed. That's what makes a good vendor.

This is probably the best unit you're going to find out there.

If they:

• Have to choose from what's out there in the industry
• Are looking for storage efficiencies where they're going to get deduplication and compression
• Are looking for pure speed

Then the IBM FlashSystem is the way to go.

If they need efficiencies, like compression and deduplication, then they need to look at the IBM A9000.

Support is the most important thing when looking at vendors.

I rate the solution an 8 out of 10 and would recommend IBM FlashSystem to others.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

I'm not sure if the company I work for has any business relationship with IBM. I am just an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's been quite good overall and I like the capabilities it has. 

Reliability is the most important aspect while selecting a vendor.

I would recommend to use it.

If cost is not a factor, I would definitely say IBM is good. Their business partners are good. For instance, they will try to get you vouchers to get training. With EMC, we never really got any training. It was all a cost for us in the public sector. We have to evaluate what training we can take, because I have a jack-of-all-trades type of role.

Definitely give it your time. Give it your time, get some IBM folks to show you some benefits and maybe do a demo. It's a great solution.

When looking for a vendor, support is important, as well as market position.

We provide this solution to many customers.

I rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution 6 out of 10.

IBM FlashSystem is very simple and plug-and-play. I would recommend it.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

If you are going to go with a V7000, you will not regret it. Be sure to clarify what you need, and it will give you the expected results.

If they are cost conscious and have a release table solution, this is probably the best solution available.

For resilience, you need to buy two of these devices per site as RAID only applies within in each memory card, i.e., the whole array is not resilient if a card fails. Failover would only be possible for a standby device.

Get the control box first, without any expansion boxes, and make sure you add at least three SSD drives, because this system has an auto tiering option. Thus, your frequently used data will be automatically placed on SSDs and be accessed faster by hosts. Data for shared folders, which is not so important, you can keep on older storages virtualized by the V7000, or put on bigger, cheaper, and slower disks.

Go ahead and implement it. IBM storage provides you everything that you’ll need for a block-level architecture, as they have many different products which provides you with a variety of options to meet your needs.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

Please make sure that you will be getting proper after-sales support from IBM.

Read anything and everything you can, such as documentation manuals and best practices that are coming out. Stay plugged into the IBM communities and leverage services if this is your first engagement for capacity and sizing.

Test all of the products as you evaluate them.

Take it for a test drive. You’ll be impressed.

My basic advice is to work with partners who really understand what they're talking about. Anybody who sells one of these boxes doesn't necessarily have the capability to supply or support them. Be very clear that you're dealing with organizations that have the experience to actually deploy and support you. 

That would be what is critical. Because it's not something that we just rack it up and switch it on and it works. There are many things involved. 

Also, initially, before purchasing, the sizing is very critical. There has to be enough time spent on performance metrics, analyzing the workload requirements, and things like that.

Before the purchase and after the purchase and the deployment, there needs to be quite a bit of involvement. This is why I would advise the customer to work with partners of IBM or Hitachi. 

Whoever you're talking about, and who has experience. Not somebody who just comes and says, "I'll do anything, and for the price, I'll give you the best deal." 

The best deal is not always the best deal. 

Once you buy it and it doesn't work for you, ultimately you are paying more.

I would rate IBM XIV and eight out of ten.

We use the on-premises deployment model of the solution.

In terms of advice, I would give to others, I would say that you need to have the proper training for the solution. You need to train your staff on this product because it's not a straightforward implementation or a straightforward product, so you need to have some knowledge about the storage and how it works. Then plan and size your infrastructure prior to your deployment. We planned for five years in advance, and we are happy with the solution because we did our homework prior to implementation. 

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

The most important criteria while selecting a vendor are reliability and their level of maturity.

It's not the best solution, but it's very reliable.

It depends as every company is different. Some companies choose reliability, while others prefer the market. You have to assess your own stuff and see accordingly, what fits your bill.

Make sure you look at a wide variety of products. That way you can come to an intelligent decision on what platform you are going to go with.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I recommend adding a pair of SAN switches to the Flash solution, otherwise it's a waste to use as and direct attach storage.

This product is so easy to use.

Have it checked over, test it out and try it. Compare it to the other competitors and make a decision from there, because I think this will definitely be a winner.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a seven out of ten.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

Check IOP values and disk speed. Check often for updates and firmware. Make absolute SNMP settings for warnings and alerts.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten. 

IBM FlashSystem is fast and reliable. However, we also use Huawei, which is more reliable and has less frequent upgrades. I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

Consider which type of disk to use: All flash, High Capacity Drives, SSDs.

My most important criteria when selecting a vendor are price, stability, support, and scalability.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. It is a good storage solution, but there many other options out there with more resources.