Pure Storage FlashArray Other Solutions Considered

SrManagee02f
Sr Manager at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Prior to choosing this solution, we evaluated Dell EMC. We looked at Nimble but they weren't all-flash at the time so they didn't last very long. I am sure that we probably looked at an HP product but I don't think we ever really wanted to do business with them. View full review »
James-Kelly
Senior Systems Administrator for Research at Chapman University
We had existing relationships with vendors who had spinning disk technology. What we weren't getting was the type of flexibility for automation and copy management that all-flash technology offered with the same level of functionality. Spinning disk, if you're going to copy things, is zeros and ones on a piece of metal or glass, being moved to another piece of metal or glass. There is physics involved, physical changes. All-flash is largely a metadata-based environment, which means you can make copies of things by changing a few bytes in a table somewhere. Pure Storage was chosen because we wanted to move our university's database environment forward in terms of optimization and automation for everyday database administrator activities. I work with a lot of different storage technologies, including other all-flash solutions, and Pure Storage stands out. View full review »
Thayne Yost
Senior Network Engineer at US Dept of Energy Idaho Operations Office
We did evaluate the HPE 3PAR and HPE all-flash systems, because we were a legacy HPE environment, where everything we had was HPE. Beyond that, we didn't really investigate any other vendors. We read some white papers on Dell EMC, but we didn't talk to anybody about them. Pure was very responsive when we talked to them when we were just investigating on what to buy. They were always the first ones to get back to us and talk to us. They came onsite multiple times to help us with any questions that we had. That level of customer experience was really helpful in making a decision. We decided to go with Pure Storage more for the Evergreen Storage subscription. With Pure Storage, it was a little bit more to initially get it in, but then you have the Evergreen Storage subscription, which is essentially less than the support on HPE, and that came with the upgrades down the road. HPE subscription support would only cover failures. It didn't have any upgrades built in to it. So, if five years down the road, we went with the HPE system then we would have had to buy whole new storage array to upgrade it. That really played a lot into us wanting to go with Pure Storage. We didn't want to have to do this multiple times. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage, NetApp, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: October 2019.
370,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
SeniorMa7726
Senior Manager of Technical Alliances at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated Hitachi, who was our current vendor. We evaluated Dell EMC for the VMAX and XtremIO. Then, we evaluated Pure Storage. We are also a NetApp customer, so we evaluated them. However, we don't run any block storage on NetApp, only files. View full review »
Operatio6735
Operation Manager at a government with 5,001-10,000 employees
I wasn't a decision-maker in the decision-making process. Had I been, I would've considered Nimble All Flash Array. I wouldn't consider anything else. Everything else that I know of in the storage industry is not worth us having insanely low latency for that. That's not our number one concern. View full review »
Virgilio Albert
Owner at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Normally, when we go to compete for a customer, they are looking at all the most important brands. Dell EMC is part of most storage bids. There is NetApp and sometimes we face IBM. In our territory there is Hitachi, which is a great product, but usually it's not on the shortlist. Finally there is HPE. Those are the brands that we normally find we're competing with when we offer Pure. In the end, so far, haven't lost one deal where we involved Pure. We have won deals against NetApp, which is a great product, we have won deals against Dell EMC - and that is the brand to beat. But when customers compare Dell EMC with Pure, there is no competition. Pure is, by far, better. View full review »
Sre61c6
SRE at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We have a bunch of different storage, like Isilon from Dell EMC, NetApp, HPE 3PAR, Cohesity, and Pure Storage. They're all different functions, and Pure is our warrior, if we need something really fast, really low latency. View full review »
Derek Small
President and Principal Architect Engineer at Technetics
The competing vendors are NetApp, Nimble, and IBM. I don't run into a lot of Dell EMC. Customers pick Pure Storage for performance. There is no comparison performance-wise. I also install Nimble for storage, and Nimble has flash and all-flash, as well. However, if you are looking at the performance numbers, these Pure Storage is just killing it. View full review »
CloudAdm1d74
Cloud Administrator at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Pure was on our shortlist. There are not a whole lot of other competitors that do what Pure does. They architected their own SAND right from scratch and it's a versatile product. View full review »
ITsuper677
IT Supervisor at a insurance company with 501-1,000 employees
We looked into a couple other vendors. I am currently still using one of the vendor. Then, with Pure, we looked into some solutions from Dell EMC or HPE. Pure seemed to be a bit more cost-efficient. It also had better reviews from what we could find online and with references. Because they do the compression and dedupe on the backside, I have seen better numbers of the Pure Storage box than on the other competitors that I have in my environment. View full review »
Delmar Tanner
Sr Systems Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
We looked at two other solutions but we liked that Pure seemed a bit easier to use. That, and we had recommendations. View full review »
SystemEnd4f8
System Engineer at a consultancy with 5,001-10,000 employees
In the past we've considered EMC, Dell Compellent (Dell EMC), NetApp and of course Pure Storage. We had Dell Compellent in the past and there were some issues with the implication and the way that it used storage. We had firmware trouble with it, which drove us away to seriously consider other brands offerings. We considered EMC, except EMC was expensive. Pure came in at a better price point than EMC and performed better than Compellent. View full review »
Sean Bettencourt
Supervisor of Systems Engineering at a software R&D company with 501-1,000 employees
We also evaluated Dell EMC, 3PAR, Nimble, Tintri, and NetApp. View full review »
TeamLeadc75a
Team Lead at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
In addition to this solution, our customer considered another Dell EMC option, as well as one by Hitachi. They chose this because of the simplicity, and the fact that it is all-flash meant that they didn't have to worry about performance. View full review »
DBA0bbf
DBA at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
I have used InfiniBand in the past. We are now looking at building a new data center, and the vendors on our shortlist are Pure and InfiniBand. View full review »
SeniorVib215
Senior Vituralization Manager at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
We did evaluate other solutions, including IBM. The other vendors also had a Flash, but Pure was the best because of the performance. That's why we shortlisted them. View full review »
SrITAnal8af3
Sr IT Analyst at a local government
We looked at Pure, NetApp and Nimble. Pure is simple to set up and manage on a day-to-day basis. If you want to upgrade, you can simply call in and they do everything on their side. NetApp, for instance, requires you to be on top of firmware, drivers and updating. You must initiate the upgrades, do the upgrades, follow all the steps. With NetApp, you need a lot of insight to manage it and it's difficult if you have only one person dedicated to that. View full review »
CloudInfd4f4
Cloud Infra Manager at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
I did a POC with three different vendors. Pure won out due to its resiliency, adaptability and the IOS and the feature sets. I was able to pull up all three discs at the same time and it never failed. View full review »
SysAdmin3d53
Sys Admin at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at Hitachi which we did put in place for some of our dev environments. We also spoke to IBM. We used to use Texas Memory Systems which was bought out by IBM and we reached out to them to see if there was an equivalent and there wasn't. View full review »
Sarkis Kotelyan
System Administrator at VERIFI
We were looking at Dell EMC. We were looking at a couple of other vendors, including NetApp. We decided on Pure Storage because of the deduplication and compression that they were advertising. View full review »
Infrastr0f81
Infrastructure Manager at a insurance company with 501-1,000 employees
We initially looked at Pure Storage and Dell EMC Unity. We made the poor decision of going with Unity and eight months later we went with Pure Storage. View full review »
Infrastrcbc2
Infrastructure Architect at a health, wellness and fitness company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at HP, NetApp, Pure, and EMC. EMC gave us better-performing storage for a better price. View full review »
Andrea Spaziani
Chief Information, Facility, Purchasing and Services Manager at Roma Metropolitane S.r.l.
We evaluated EMC XtremIO and NetApp FAS. View full review »
Kelvin Foo
APAC System manager at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We also considered Hitachi Storage and NetApp. Our decision was ultimately based on two factors: simplicity of the usage and overall performance. We ended up choosing this specific product because we had good support from the application team and we liked the performance coming from the product itself. View full review »
SysAdm3408
System Administrator at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at Pure Storage vs Dell EMC, but we thought Pure Storage has newer, better technology developed from the ground up, whereas Dell EMC is a patchwork solution. In addition, the price was more favorable. View full review »
CTO6a2e
CTO at a health, wellness and fitness company with 201-500 employees
I looked at a half a dozen other products and Pure won over across the board. View full review »
Chaan Beard
Senior Data Center Solutions Architect at ChaanBeard.com
We also looked at Nimble, which is now owned by HPE, and E8, Dell EMC, and NetApp platform. View full review »
Directorf1b0
Director of Information Security at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I have used NetApp, IBM, and EMC XtremIO in the past. We selected Pure because of its reputation. We also considered vSAN, but we ultimately went with Pure because of the ability to do things that vSAN couldn't do at the time. It has since changed. I don't know if that would change my mind about going with Pure, but I don't regret the decision. View full review »
Strategy2bd0
Strategy Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
We have received good feedback from customers, in general, using Pure Storage compared to other competitors in this space. We had an employee who used to work for one of the competitors, Dell EMC. After a year of selling Pure Storage with us, Dell EMC offered him a good job to come back. However, after selling Pure Storage, he was unable to go back to selling Dell EMC knowing what Pure Storage is capable of doing. View full review »
SystemsA417a
Systems Admin at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
There were several vendors we looked at. We also looked at Nimble, but we did not do at PoC of them. We just liked the way Pure was pitched to us overall. View full review »
Architec2276
Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Traditionally we have been buying massive storing arrays from EMC and from Hitachi, but most of them were built for very high tier applications. For VDI with your desktop, you really don't need that so it was easier for us to go for an array that used high-speed devices, providing Hadoop capabilities because the nature of your desktops are literally the same. So we needed to look at newer technology, and this really was one of the first ones to be there, and it was very popular. We did a study on the market and found that VR was one of the leaders in this space, so we brought them in. View full review »
Jim-Davis
Director of IT at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We considered other options. I have used the others, EMC and NetApp, etc. We have looked at all of the platforms, and to see what Pure was able to do within a PoC environment meant that we never turned back our PoC environment. We just bought it and kept running with it. It was an amazing product based on what we had seen out there in the market. View full review »
Tim Kovars
Sr. Systems Engineer at Quarles & Brady LLP
We looked at Nimble and EMC. View full review »
Peter Golledge
Unix and storage manager at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
We considered different products from Dell EMC and NetApp. We didn't choose Dell EMC because it was a cost issue. For NetApp, there was an ease of use difference and we felt that Pure Storage was an easier product for our team to use. We chose Pure Storage primarily because of its combination of performance and ease of use. View full review »
IctAndSebb6d
ICT and Security Specialist at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
We also evaluated NetApp. It was between NetApp and Pure. The reason we went with Pure Storage wasn't a technical decision, rather, it was just purely cost and the Evergreen maintenance that Pure provides. It just makes it easier when we have a new drive and a new chassis every three years. View full review »
Alberto Zanon
CIO at NGS srl
Our customers will usually also evaluate HPE 3PAR. It is a good competitor because they put emphasis on their infrastructure. In the end, the customers pick Pure Storage because of me. I don't sell 3PAR because I don't believe in the solution. View full review »
SystemsA5733
Systems Analyst at a government with 501-1,000 employees
We're constantly on the hunt, and we always keep three to four vendors in. Usually, it's been the bigger players, the IBM's, the EMC's. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, but we were looking for something a little different this time around. View full review »
Parikshit Goutam
IT Manager at a consultancy with 5,001-10,000 employees
We also considered Hitachi and Dell EMC XtremIO. Pure Storage made the cut because of its PoC performance. View full review »
Jon Waite
CTO at CCL
The main solutions on our shortlist at the end of the process were NetApp, EMC, and Pure Storage. We ended up buying both NetApp and Pure Storage because we always like to have at least two different vendors involved in our data centers. The decision not to go with EMC was because of the design that they'd done for an all-flash storage solution. It didn't fit with what we were trying to do. View full review »
QaEngine77f9
QA Engineer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
We did a vendor search, which included a big payments project across Asia-Pacific for a company that could do data provisioning very quickly. Then, Pure Storage was chosen. We also considered Dell EMC, HPE, and IBM. We picked Pure Storage because of its ratio per terabyte and speed. View full review »
Marcel Colsoul
Technical and Pre-sales Consultant at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
When comparing Pure Storage and Dell EMC, I think that Dell EMC has to improve its real performance. Also, Pure Storage is a lot easier to install than the Dell EMC product. View full review »
Michael Raunig
System Engineer at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
We did not evaluate other solutions since our partners were using Pure Storage, so we decided to move forward with Pure Storage. View full review »
SocialAr4d8e
Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
We also evaluated Dell EMC and locally attached storage. We chose Pure Storage because it had the best performance of all the products that we tested. Also, its virtualization performance is extremely fast, and it has good ease of use. View full review »
SystemAd0ccc
System Administrator at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
We also evaluated Nimble, EMC, and HPE 3PAR. We ended up going with Pure because of the architecture, speed, and support. View full review »
SystemsE5fd9
Systems Engineer at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated a second IBM-based storage solution, and after that, Pure was the second one that we looked at. We heard so many good things about it that we leaned towards that way. View full review »
Francis Pascual
Systems Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
We needed to choose a new investment because our solution couldn't do data provisioning very quickly. The main solution that the bank normally had was EMC. We looked into HP, IBM, and Pure Storage. But, cost, rate per terabyte, and speed is why we chose Pure Storage. It was a no brainer. View full review »
ComputeS90b1
Compute Storage Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Dell EMC was another vendor we looked at. View full review »
Sartor John
IT Manager at Haworth
We looked at Pure Storage, EMC and HPE. We chose Pure Storage because of its innovation. View full review »
SrManage7091
Sr Manager at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We evaluated EMC and HP. View full review »
ITManage17e2
IT Manager at a government with 51-200 employees
We evaluated Tegile, Dell EMC, and Pure Storage. We chose Pure Storage for performance and cost reasons. View full review »
ITOffice3736
IT Officer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
We evaluated Oracle and Hitachi, but Pure Storage had the better pricing. View full review »
Sun Kim Dosik
SDDC Senior Director at SK Telecom
We also evaluated EMC and HPE. We really needed high performance with large amounts of data. We weren't happy with other vendors, and the speed and the volume of data that they could store, handle, and compress. View full review »
CTO77ed
CTO at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
We actually originally went with a competitor's product, and after about eight months, a lot of wrangling, had them buy it back from us. And then we bought similar Pure Storage product, and it's just been great. View full review »
David Beaulieu
Digital Architect at CBC
Compuverde. But, we like to have data sheets and a more traditional storage than a complex unit. View full review »
Michael Glickman
President at Computer Network Architects, Inc.
We looked at everything. In dealing with this, we got mission-specific. It's like different kinds of planes or sailboats: What's the mission? For this high-performance mission, that's what Pure is about. View full review »
Georg Dueren
Cloud Solution Architect at Dimension Data
NetApp is the biggest competitor, then SolidFire, and not so much Dell EMC anymore. View full review »
NetworkSe0b1
Network Specialist at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
We only considered Pure Storage. My company stays focused with one solution (product) for approximately three years. Then, every three years, we make discussion whether to keep the solution or not. View full review »
SrTechMa1007
Sr Tech Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
We also looked at Dell EMC and NetApp but Pure Storage performed better. View full review »
Dave Petroski
Senior Architect at Southwest Gas Corporation
We did an evaluation of Dell EMC, Pure Storage, and NetApp. View full review »
ChiefTec2f46
Chief Technology Officer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We considered Dell EMC, we looked at Nutanix, Cohesity, IBM, HPE. We ran quite a bit of the gamut. View full review »
Cecilia Lenasdotter
Network Engineer at Altura Credit Union
We evaluated Pure Storage, Nimble, and Dell EMC. View full review »
NetworkE15cd
Network Engineer at a logistics company with 201-500 employees
Darktrace, which we are also using. View full review »
Venu Kulkarni
Senior Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
We also looked at IBM and Oracle. We did internal evaluations and we decided to go with Pure Storage. We chose Pure Storage because of the processor's performance. View full review »
Anand AYYANGSR
Systems Engineer at PayPal
We were looking for an all-flash solution, and Pure Storage is the best solution right now. View full review »
Nikolay Georgiev
Infrastructure engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We also looked at NetApp. We chose Pure Storage because we did research and heard good things. View full review »
Frank Thompson
Director of Network Services at Engage
We always consider other storage options. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage, NetApp, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in All-Flash Storage Arrays. Updated: October 2019.
370,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sign Up with Email