NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) Other Solutions Considered

SteveGrangert
Storage Engineer at Missile Defense Agency
We didn't have any other vendors on the list, although we had one team that tried to push HP on to us and we said no. HP was really the only other possible alternative that we had. We had tossed around a couple of other vendors, but we never really gave them any serious thought. We already knew NetApp, so it made more sense because they could integrate better and that was the main thing we were looking at. The level of integration. Since we had a NetApp that we've had for many years, it just made sense to stick with what we had, but a newer and faster version. View full review »
reviewer950775
Storage Architect at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
Other vendors were not really on the shortlist at the time. NetApp is our standard for now. In the future, I don't know if it will remain that way and we may re-evaluate other solutions. FlexPod may be our future or HCI, but we are using NetApp big-time and it is a successful solution for us. View full review »
reviewer1223544
Consulting Storage Engineer at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
We did RFIs with the different solutions. We were looking at a NetApp, Isilon, and Nutanix. Those were three that we were looking at. NetApp won out primarily around simplicity and ease of automation. It's the different deployment models where you can deploy in the cloud or on-prem, speaks to its simplicity. Our environment is very complex already. Anything that we can do to simplify it, we will take it. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
418,116 professionals have used our research since 2012.
FelmonKahissay
System Administrator at Bell Canada
Comparing it to other vendors, there was more complexity when leveraging the features with the cost of the features available today, based on where the roadmap is. NetApp seems to fit our requirements for now. View full review »
Greg Rose
Principal Engineer at a retailer with 5,001-10,000 employees
We also considered Dell EMC and Pure Storage. The biggest reason we picked NetApp was the ease of actually getting the data to the next iteration but also the other vendors don't have a product that supports everything we needed which is file services and block services. It's a one stop shop and I didn't really want to have to manage another box and a storage device at the same time. View full review »
JoshBishop
Manager at Pramerica
We evaluated solutions like Dell EMC and HP. I think from the reputation that NetApp has, that was definitely the choice for us. View full review »
reviewer1223421
Senior Data Center Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We have not evaluated other solutions, it's not worth it. View full review »
VinodKaila
Storage Architect and Engineer at United Airlines
We have products from HPE, Dell, and NetApp in our environment right now. They each have their share, and each one is equally working. View full review »
StorageA3fb6
Storage Architect at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
The two vendors that made it through the evaluation process were Pure Storage and NetApp. We had Pure Storage and NetApp proof of concepts. Both of them performed admirably. Pure Storage beat out on the performance, but on price per terabyte, NetApp was considerablely cheaper. View full review »
DataCentee24
Data Center Engineer at a non-profit
Because we're federal government, we really can't choose. We've had NetApp for years. I did evaluate a lot of other products. Honestly, at the end of the day, storage is storage and disks are disks; it's all the bells and whistles on the front. Other solutions could probably have accomplished the same task. Ultimately, it comes down to dollars and cents, but I'm not really involved in that side of it. I'm sure they chose NetApp because of the cost. View full review »
AlirezaDanestehpoor
Senior Storage Engineer at Hyundai autoever
We've been using some other vendors products as well. I cannot disclose the name of the vendors that we are using to compete with NetApp. In the industry today, you can't really tell if there is a bad product or good product. It comes down to your requirements. As a customer, first you have to define your requirements. Then, you need to know what you need, what is your goal, how are you going to achieve it, and what your challenges are. We identified those and have compared some solutions. NetApp was our vendor of choice who could help us to fulfill our requirements, especially for some of the challenges that we were facing. NetApp has been able to help us with that. View full review »
Keith Latimer
IT Operations Manager at Idaho State Insurance Fund
We also talked to Tegile and HPE, but nobody else offered up the functionality or snapshots. It was a no-brainer. View full review »
NetworkSb3b8
Network Services Manager at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Dell EMC. We looked at them briefly when they were EMC. We looked at IBM. But Epic pretty much says that NetApp sets the standard and we have to follow that. View full review »
SanEnginf30d
SAN Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Other vendors aren't as straightforward as NetApp when it comes to the deploying, installing, and configuring. NetApp works more efficiently. By saving time, you're saving money. View full review »
DavidGarcia
Systems Engineer at Nordstrom, Inc.
We only evaluated NetApp, and we are slowly looking at VMware, VDI, and the cloud. We went with this solution primarily because of the stability. I also see reducing a lot of storage and cleaning up a lot of stuff. It is pretty good at this. View full review »
AlanHaskic
Systems Management Engineer at Linklaters
NetApp is the largest storage vendor in the market, purely based on storage technologies. I hope it stays that way. View full review »
reviewer1223358
Infrastructure Team Lead at a pharma/biotech company with 51-200 employees
We evaluated Pure Storage and Nimble. I've used HPE 3PAR and Tintri as well. We've looked at a lot of different vendors. Most of them were better in terms of their upgrade process. Nimble and Pure have a hot upgrade process, which NetApp does not have. Although the cost of Pure is a lot more. Nimble was a good product, but they were bought by HP I think, so that will probably go away. I don't see it as much as I did before. We chose NetApp because of its speed and stability. View full review »
Ashwin Bhadra
Senior Manager of Product and Services at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated Nimble, 3PAR, Dell EMC. View full review »
reviewer1223436
Tech Solutions Architect at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
We did go through the whole vetting out process of scoring different vendors and NetApp won, when we went through a Greenfield environment. View full review »
Ed Alexander
Senior System Engineer at Red Hat
We looked at other vendors (Kaminario, Pure Storage, Dell EMC, and IBM), but decided that it made the most sense to stay with NetApp. View full review »
Peg Heffron
Network Professional at a transportation company with 5,001-10,000 employees
The next closest option that we considered was Dell EMC. View full review »
reviewer1223538
Storage Administrator at a software R&D company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We evaluated a solution by EMC, but we found they their filesystem was not as robust. That is the read that we chose NetApp. View full review »
reviewer1223415
Director at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Our shortlist of vendors included EMC, NetApp, and HPE, because we have relationships with all of them. Ultimately, NetApp gives us more versatility. View full review »
reviewer1223367
Storage Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated other options, including solutions by EMC, before choosing NetApp. The reason for our choice is that we already had NetApp in our environment, and the price-point is also a little better than the competing products. View full review »
reviewer1223409
Specialist Senior at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
We considered solutions by EMC, but they were very quickly ruled out. View full review »
reviewer1223364
Sr Storage Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We did not evaluate other options. View full review »
Sandeep Thota
Consulting Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Dell EMC was an option, but we liked the operating system of NetApp. View full review »
SeniorSt396d
Senior Storage Engineer at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We did not evaluate other solutions. Our history with Net App is that it is a stable platform and does what we want it to do. It's not extremely complicated, and it's something which is tangible that we have used and want to continue using. View full review »
SeniorStd2e6
Senior storage engineer at a government with 10,001+ employees
Because we are government, it is an open contract. People have to bid on government projects. We don't have a say in the options. View full review »
reviewer1223394
System Programmer at a energy/utilities company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We did consider using other vendors, but NetApp AFF was the best in terms of reliability. View full review »
PhilHarris
Technical Lead at USAF
We've looked at EMC and Microsoft storage spaces. Neither one of them really compares. My advice to someone considering this solution is that if you can afford it and you will be using it a lot, go for it. View full review »
RajkumarKatke
Technical Solution Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
NetApp met our requirements. View full review »
SeniorIn28f7
Senior in technology and engineer at a marketing services firm
There was one other option we looked at but it didn't have the scalability. It also didn't have the support that we needed. The experience that we have with NetApp support is excellent. View full review »
SysAdminacb3
Sys Admin at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
We were pretty heavily invested in NetApp. We did look at INFINIDAT, but it just wasn't something that we were comfortable with. View full review »
Zakeer Mohammed
Storage Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Other vendors, who do other similar solution products, envy the features that come with this NetApp product. Our shortlist was Dell EMC and HPE. These are the vendors with whom I have worked. I feel all the vendors are very good, along with NetApp. However, NetApp has file-based and block-based features, which gives it additional value. View full review »
Sonu Parmar
IT Manager at TELUS Corporation
The vendors on our shortlist were Oracle, Dell EMC, and Hitachi. We chose NetApp because we were already using it, which make things simple, and its pricing. Also, some of NetApp's features are dominant in the market versus its competitors. View full review »
PrArch3450
Principal Architect at a tech company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Dell EMC was our other option. Both Dell EMC and NetApp are partners of ours. We went with NetApp because of relationships and ease of set up. View full review »
reviewer1223418
Storage Engineer at a software R&D company with 10,001+ employees
We always use NetApp for our file services. View full review »
reviewer1232979
Storage Team Lead at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Traditionally, we are limiting the number of our vendors. We still haven't ventured out to any other vendors. We have consistently been with NetApp. Going forward, I would like to compare AFF vs Pure Storage based on all the parameters. View full review »
PyldItgrn734
Payload Integration at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
In the early days, we were considering Dell EMC but we decided to go with NetApp because its adoption across the DoD is widely understood. View full review »
StorageE3f86
Storage Engineer at a university with 10,001+ employees
Our shortlist would have been EMC, NetApp, and possibly Dell. This was before Dell bought EMC. NetApp was there because of the NFS support. That's why we chose NetApp, because of the NFS support plus their compression and deduplication. The cost savings on that alone was worth it. View full review »
SystemsE2a93
Systems Engineer Manager at a hospitality company with 10,001+ employees
NetApp and Pure Storage were on our final shortlist. NetApp just came in with a better price point that my VPs and CIO couldn't refuse. View full review »
Paul Holt
Executive director IT Systems at MemorialCare Health System
There were really only two on the shortlist: IBM and NetApp. We chose NetApp because we had an opportunity to make all of our environment NetApp. View full review »
Alberto Alberti
Senior System Engineer at ICTeam
starting from a fas 2554 it was the best solution View full review »
StorageEd685
Storage Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Our shortlist was really just NetApp, in our situation. We're pretty much all NetApp. We didn't evaluate anything else for this particular project. View full review »
ITP2310
ICT Operations Manager at a government with 11-50 employees
We also looked at IBM and EMC, but eventually we chose NetApp AFF because we already had people experienced with NetApp AFF. We did not want to invest in new technology completely. View full review »
SeniorEn1c49
Senior Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We were looking at NetApp and Dell EMC. However, NetApp is know for their NFS solution. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
418,116 professionals have used our research since 2012.