NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP Previous Solutions

Christian Gruetzner
Architect, Storage Services at All for One Steeb AG
We only used native Azure services. We went with Cloud Volumes ONTAP because it was a natural extension of our NetApp products. We have a huge on-premise storage environment from NetApp and we have been familiar with all the benefits from these storage systems for several years. We wanted to have all the benefits in the cloud, the same as we have on-premise. That's why we evaluated it, and we're in a very early stage with it. View full review »
Padmaja Reddy
Storage Architect at NIH
The company has always been a NetApp shop even before I entered the company. We continue to use it because of the good products. We do market research, obviously. We do see good products, and every year there is improvement. When we want to do hardware upgrades, it's still very good. The way we are trying to develop, it's very seamless for us and not a pain. We have never felt, "We are done with NetApp. Let's move onto something else." I love to introduce other vendors into the mix, just so it's not a monopoly. We still love NetApp as our primary. View full review »
Eyal Shimony
Sr. Manager at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
There was a lot of downtime with our previous solution. Also, the performance wasn't what it should be. Any update that we did required downtime, and there were quite a lot of updates because there were a lot of bugs. That's where Cloud Volumes ONTAP is very good because they're using the same software as in their devices. There are no special needs or special bugs. They're using a very mature a solution. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
426,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Systems Programmer at a university with 10,001+ employees
We had always done block storage and we had a large IBM infrastructure, a large ESX infrastructure, physical servers. We knew that we needed a file service, so we set that up. It was really a first for our university. We switched from IBM to NetApp because we thought we'd get better support from NetApp, and we really have. IBM did a good job, but it was obvious that IBM and NetApp didn't always play well together. IBM was slower to put out patches and fixes compared to NetApp. When IBM was telling us to go to the NetApp site to find support, we figured we'd just switch to NetApp. View full review »
Storage Admin at a comms service provider with 5,001-10,000 employees
We knew we needed to invest in this solution because we were told we were closing the data centers so we had to migrate to the cloud. The management told us we are closing data centers and migrating everything into the cloud. That's what kicked us off. View full review »
Senior Manager, IT CloudX at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Before NetApp we used a home-grown server in the cloud, a Linux server with a big disk. It was less simple to manage. We're also using Avere, a storage solution that was purchased by Microsoft a month or two ago. It's mainly responsible for real-time data synchronization between on-prem and the cloud environment. It's different than NetApp which doesn't provide the kind of synchronization solution that Avere does. It's two-way, real-time data synchronization between the Oracle storage solutions which we have on-prem and the Avere solution that we have in Azure. NetApp does not help with such requirements. View full review »
Ed Alexander
Senior System Engineer at Red Hat
We have not moved off of another solution. Rather, we are expanding to implement a new solution for a problem that hasn't been addressed yet. Specifically, we are looking to use CBO for replication that up to this point, had not been done yet. View full review »
Sr Storage Engineer at Ripe NCc
I first encountered NetApp at Insight 2018 Barcelona. I was there and talked to NetApp. View full review »
Systems Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We previously used Commvault. I have used NetApp before at two previous companies. Compellent is what they already had when we acquired this other company. It would just crash constantly. It is not worth it. View full review »
Pre-sales SE at a software R&D company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Our customer was previously a NetApp shop, and they were already familiar with SnapMirror, so upgrading to the current solution was a no-brainer. They saved money and have the same functionality. View full review »
Sr Systems Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We had previous experiences with deploying ONTAP at other companies successfully. ONTAP makes our storage solutions more flexible. Traditionally, that's hard to do. ONTAP gives you those features which you typically have to build yourself. View full review »
Systems Engineer at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
I've used NetApp for many years. It's something that I know is very stable and reliable. Recommending it to the current company was an easy pass. When I joined the company we were using a different vendor. It was an EMC solution for file, but we moved to NetApp. NetApp has more storage efficiency, the Snapshot feature, and better performance when you have multiple snapshots. View full review »
Storage Engineer at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
We are old NetApp customers and we chose this solution because we wanted to adopt newer technologies. View full review »
James Koepsel
Principal Architect at a aerospace/defense firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We needed persistent storage in the cloud for platforms, and there's really not options right now in AWS or Azure. View full review »
CTO at Poria
We previously used HPE 3PAR and we switched because of the complexity we had with HPE. It was easier with NetApp. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
426,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.