We also evaluated VMware, but at that time, VMware was not mature, and it was not within our requirements. That was the reason why we chose this solution. Another reason was that our technical evaluation team found Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure to be more suitable for our architecture.

We evaluated VMware solutions. It was very expensive compared to Nutanix. Nutanix features are better. We're paying less for more features and functionality. 

VMware is the only competition I can think of.

A standard SAN solution is quite fast in terms of storage, if you size it well, but the main challenge with a SAN solution will be scaling up. If it's not sized and planned well, it will be a big challenge and we would need to invest huge money in the SAN architecture.

In our selection and evaluation process of various solutions, we found that Nutanix is the best solution on the market, so the decision was made to only support this solution with our customers because other solutions do have more or less drawbacks.

The main benefit of Nutanix is that they are doing things in a simple way. For example, Nokia had smartphones, and then came Apple with a smartphone. Apple consolidated and simplified the use of a smartphone. Nutanix is inheriting these principles of convergence and making things simpler.

In terms of comparison of Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure application and database performance versus a standard SAN solution, in most situations, Nutanix is above the expectations of our customers. They are surprised by the better performance. You can have the same performance as its competitors, but you would need more resources, which means more hardware. It is not that they cannot do it. It is possible, but you need to buy more hardware.

We evaluated other hyper-converged solutions like Dell but chose Nutanix because we already used Nutanix’s AHV and hardware.

During the selection phase, we went with a couple of important, key vendors that have a similar type of solution and we did a test PoC demonstration. After looking into all the parameters and our requirements, and having done the PoCs and demonstration, and looking at the platforms in a lab for a couple of weeks, we finally selected Nutanix.

The primary difference was the cost. The cost of NCI was quite competitive. Another issue was scalability. We can scale it in a fraction of the time. The third point was the integration with third-party solutions. And the fourth important point was the automation. Nowadays, everyone is looking to automate tasks as a key factor in reducing human efforts and technical staff.

I wasn't involved with the original comparison for VDI, but I do recall that solutions like VMware and vSAN were reviewed.

We looked into Simplivity. The main difference was the cost between the two options. 

Before choosing Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure, we evaluated other options like Cisco HyperFlex and VxRail VMware. We chose NCI over the others because it is cloud native. Unlike other solutions that bring software from other places and can't handle storage, Nutanix is a whole ecosystem.

We explored the options by re-iterating our previous solution and came short of delivering support for additional demands like VDI. Re-Iterating also meant up-staging storage because of the ONTAP-OS upgrade. So, a change was due, either way.

We evaluated AWS, Azure, and Nutanix, and since we are already a customer of Nutanix, we preferred to go with Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure. Most of the features we got with NCI are because we are already a customer and already have the setup on-prem from Nutanix. We found the other options very costly and would not have got many of the features we are getting with NCI.

We only compared VMware and Nutanix, who are the best players in the virtualization area.

We previously looked at VMware to build our hyperconverged environment. We started looking at costing and lifetime of products and it was quite shocking from my point of view. Because I feel a server must at least have the ability to run for five to seven years and then have scalability. And the thing with VMware is you've got quite a short shelf life on the setup. Meaning, you've got five years and if your system is not fully built, you start from scratch.

VMware versus Nutanix - number one, the cost is much lower with Nutanix. The hardware needed for operating the system is much cheaper and that played a major role in the choice that we made between Nutanix and VMware. The other major thing is the support that we got from the Pinnacle Micro guys. Actually, that's one of the major points why we made the choice for Nutanix. They were very, very intuitive with your company, they knew what we needed, what possibilities to look at, what risks to assess, that kind of stuff.

Before choosing Nutanix I also played with VMware's ESXi open source setup. I also played with Nutanix's open source setup. When we setup Nutanix, it was a lot more intuitive and a lot more user friendly, versus the setup from VMware, which is not bad either. I'm not saying it's a bad product, don't get me wrong. It's just different.

I use VMware vSAN as well. I outsourced a team of five to help me configure the servers. I'm not sure if it's better or not because we just started the new cluster of VMware vSAN, but I needed to pay for their knowledge. One product that we are implementing requires the use of VMware. That one product is the reason why we implemented VMware. 

I evaluated some other VMware options, but cost-wise, Nutanix Acropolis AOS was the best deal.

The Evaluation included VMWARE and Hyper-V. The software defined features required including software defined storage, Performance throughput, scale out architecture etc which were not directly related to hypervisor selection but more geared towards Software Defined Data Center put Nutanix Hyperconverged and to fully leverage its functionalities put AOS in front.

We evaluated the successor models of our former systems. New NetApp Filers and new Blades, but the pricing was similar so we went with the better solution. We never used NetApp Vendor support (we did it ourselves with support from a netapp partner) and Dell Server support was poor (I can google manuals myself). Buying Nutanix includes superior support. You should call Nutanix support if you are doing a ProofofConcept!

We evaluated Cisco HyperFlex, Dell VxRail, and HPE SimpliVity. Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure has better features, local team support, and hardware associations.

Evaluating other products was not my call, that was also for senior management. I was asked to review Nutanix only. Before we started implementing it or the sign-off happened, I did find the product suitable. When something is new in the market, you have to get used to it and you feel uncomfortable. That's normal for everybody and that happened to me. The only differences were that the GUI did not have certain features that were in vCenter, but I think we have everything covered now. There have been improvements while creating the current version of the product.

I evaluated VMware and Dell solutions.

We looked at other options like VMware and Citrix, but Nutanix was the only solution that offered us scalability and the option to add extra notes without any problems. 

We also work with SimpliVity and VMware.

We evaluated VMware vSphere with VSAN and NSX, as well as Azure Stack.

We evaluated HPE SimpliVity.

Before choosing this product, we also evaluated Simplivity, Stormagic SvSAN, and VMware VSAN.

We spent a substantial amount of time evaluating many other options, including VxRail, EqualLogic and Compellent, the Dell M series blade chassis, NetShelter, Cisco UCS, as well as SimpliVity. Plus we evaluated Nimble vs Nutanix.

I evaluated VMware vSAN.

The team that did the evaluation was not my team so I can’t speak about the specifics. I know they looked at SympliVity as well and there was some lively discussion around the merits of both products.

We looked at Simplivity as well but decided on the Nutanix because it was a better fit for our VMware licensing. We were able to simply replace (4) of our existing VMware hosts with (4) Nutanix nodes in a single appliance.

We actually evaluated quite a few different hyper-converged infrastructures prior to bringing on Nutanix as a partner and they are the best in the market from that perspective.

Not really. Once we found Nutanix, all other options seemed like lesser options.

Before choosing Nutanix, we had looked at a few different options. Option one was to expand current SAN/Servers. We looked at a few others in the early days of “hyper-convergence” such as SimpliVity, Scale Computing, Maxta and Pivot3. The only vendor with a complete solution in our minds was Nutanix.

We evaluated VxRail before implementing this solution.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing Nutanix. 

We evaluated VMware vSAN.

We checked other options, too, such as EMC, EqualLogic, and Nexenta. But the easiest and the one with the most scalability was Nutanix.

We evaluated HPE Hyper Converged and VMware.

We did our homework and we did study the technology in Nutanix Acropolis AOS before choosing it.

The only comparison was VMware site replication. 

We looked at other options like VMware and Citrix, but Nutanix was the only solution that offered us scalability and the option to add extra notes without any problems.

This was the only hyperconverged solution we considered, simply because they were the most mature solution that we felt was right for our environment.

We were given demonstrations of other solutions, but we were satisfied with all of the features that Nutanix offers.

Yes, we evaluated a few other hyper-converged platforms, but Nutanix was the obvious choice because of its software-only structure with no dependence on hardware components.

We tested this solution against VMware and Nimbus.

As a VMware partner we also evaluate VSAN in our lab as a possible alternative but this solution lacks many of the Nutanix advantages. I compared VSAN to Nutanix some years ago when Nutanix was purely a storage layer.

Today, Nutanix offers end to end management, visibility and standardization which offers maybe the biggest benefit. I am personally also not a big fan of the VSAN object storage approach (as opposed to the Nutanix or EMC ScaleIO block based implementations) which causes many bottlenecks and architecture limitations.

Beforehand, we evaluated using vXRail as a hyper-converged solution, but the cost and usage issues made us opt for Nutanix.

We looked at SimpliVity and VMware vSAN.

At the time we checked, this solution was unique.

We evaluated other solutions before choosing Nutanix Acropolis AOS, such as VMware VxRail.

When comparing Nutanix Acropolis AOS to VMware VxRail, in terms of features, VMware VxRail provides a lot of options, such as integration with block storage and other products. The GUI for the browsing product or the console for the VMware VxRailis very simple.

A lot of people have VMware expertise, they don't feel many challenges while using the VxRail platform, it's quite easy. However, the cons with VMware is that you need to buy a license for every feature that you add on. It's not a full-fledge bundle license. Many features have extra costs and licenses.

VMware vSAN.

IBM, UCS, and NetApp.

SimpliVity and FlashStack.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated VMware vSAN.

We did look at other solutions before ultimately deciding on Nutanix. We choose Nutanix due to the fact that it's easier to operate and maintain.

We evaluated Cisco HyperFlex and SimpliVity.

VMware is already in the market and we have been using VMware first. Now Nutanix just emerged as the leader. That's why we are comparing them.

We evaluated many solutions but finally went with this one. We went with Dell. That is a portable device. We found this one to be better.

I did not evaluate other options.

No other products were being reviewed at the time of this POC but we chose not to implement it.

Yes, we did look at your traditional hyper-converged solutions.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

We evaluated SimpliVity and HPE solutions. Both failed us in term of economical cost and did not offer features that Nutanix has.

SimpliVity and Dell EqualLogic.

Before the purchase we were evaluating VMware only.

We evaluated VMware VXRail/Rack and SimpliVity. We did PoCs. The hands-down winner was Nutanix!

I have not evaluate other options because for the past three years, Nutanix has been the leader in hyperconverged solutions.

I have evaluated SimpliVity OmniCube.

• VMware vSAN
• HP CS200

Cisco HyperFlex

Dell vXRail

Hp Simplivity

The local Nutanix representative in our region is not very good, so we are stopping our work with Nutanix products for the moment. We have worked on nice projects together in the past but for now, we are stopping our work with them.

None.

I evaluated Cisco HyperFlex. It was very weak. We also compared EMC2. They have a hyperconverged solution, but I don't remember what its name was. We also evaluated Simplivity, which is now part of HPE. All of them lacked a lot of features compared to Nutanix.

For example, automatic sync is not there. To guarantee the performance in all of them, you have to go with all-flash nodes. Nutanix is more cost-effective because we can mix a hyper solution and still get better performance than all-flash from those vendors.

HPE Simplivity.

We investigated several other products and went with this one due to their demo and in depth sales pitch.

I have some customers who tried Cisco HyperFlex and HPE HC380 besides VMware vSAN. None of these were so attractive as Nutanix when they compared hypervisor flexibility, scalability, and support.

No.

I evaluated EMC as well. I went with Nutanix because of the price.

I have some customers who tried Cisco HyperFlex and HPE HC380 instead of VMware vSAN. None of these were so attractive as Nutanix when they compared hypervisor flexibility, scalability, and support.

We evaluated VMware vSAN and HPE VSA.

We have tried VMware solutions: vSphere, vCenter, vSOM, and SRM.

I looked at VMware vSAN, and HPE VSA.