Spectrum Protect Plus, is an IBM product, that we are using for backup and recovery.

We used multiple platforms to evaluate the products. What we were aiming for was a private cloud server environment in which we could provide application services, infrastructure services, and other similar services for a fee. This was the solution's actual vision. 

To evaluate the product, we needed to consider a variety of factors. One was the product's technical soundness. 

VMware has already been used in several cases, but the issue was that in the case of VMware, we had to procure four to five different solutions. For example, to deliver the same feature set as Nutanix Prism Central, we had to purchase vRealize Orchestrator, vRealize Operations Manager, Orchestrator, the NSX platform, and so on.

We chose Nutanix AHV Virtualization primarily because we did not require other products, for example, when comparing it to VMware, we simply listed three additional products that we required to deploy the VMware hyperconverged option. We chose Nutanix AHV because it was obviously the easier option.

I'm using and testing other solutions like VMware, Hyper-V, and KVM.

We had legacy infrastructure, including physical servers, storage, and network switches, from different OEMs: Dell, Cisco, HPE. We removed all of them and opted for Nutanix AHV.

We use VMware vSAN also but we prefer Nutanix solution. We work on both solutions but we try to quit VMware vSAN for Nutanix solution.

We just had some VM templates on ESXi but that did not cut it. Not by far. Handcrafting test VMs was just too cumbersome.

I've also used VMware solutions. 

Both are basically the same. VMware is like Nutanix. Nutanix has an HCI feature. However, with VMware, we can use the vSAN. This is the same feature for hyper-converged infrastructure. That said, in VMware, you need a lot of licenses since every feature needs a license. In Nutanix, it's different. Everything is built into one product. 

We previously used VMware and Hyper-V. However, we switched to this solution because of its flexibility, usability, and responsiveness. So, when you interact and have VMs running, or there's downtime or an issue, it usually transfers VMs from one node to another when there's an issue on one part of the node.

My initial choice for high availability (HA) solutions is VMware ESXi. If someone asks for an alternative, my first recommendation is usually Dell EMC PowerFlex. In comparison to Nutanix AHV Virtualization, VMware ESXi has the advantage of supporting external storage, making it more flexible for integrating existing storage solutions. VMware ESXi is also perceived as more affordable than Nutanix AHV Virtualization.

I'm also familiar with Microsoft and VMware. VMware has many or more features than AHV. However, for example, the Microsoft Hypervisor is not in competition against Acropolis Hypervisor. It's not as robust. If I had to choose between AHV and Microsoft, I would choose AHV.

I worked with VMware for more than ten years. The first versions of VMware to come out worked on Red Hat 6.3 servers and they were almost unusable sometimes.

Nutanix, in its first version, worked as it should.

I have used several other solutions. With both Cisco and HP, there are limitations in terms of scalability. If you are using VMware then there is a limitation at the host-level.

In addition to this solution, I am using EMC VxRail, Hitachi HCP, and occasionally NetApp. I would rate the Nutanix solution as the top one. My second choice is the Dell EMC solution.

The customer's requirements, as well as the budget, are what decide the suitability of a particular solution.

We recommend using VMware. All organizations in Europe are using VMware because of the marketing. Someone has a vast portfolio of services and is selling many products and services globally.

I have used VMware previously. When comparing Nutanix AHV to VMware in Hong Kong, VMware is more popular and valuable for local IT companies.

We work mostly with Nutanix, VxRail, and vSAN.

We are a VMware shop but always keen on looking at new solutions which work well and save us money. AHV is great but we cant deploy it throughout as we rely heavily on VMware SRM for Disaster Recovery and BCP.   

Previously, we were working with another solid solution, but I am no longer working with them.

The main difference was the complexity. The tiers are very complicated. Nutanix AHV is easier.

We previously used VMware ESXi and Microsoft's Hyper-V.