If Reduxio could manage multiple Reduxio systems within the same dashboard, or manage them as a single mode, it be very, very helpful for us.

A centralized management would be nice, the ability to manage all cluster in one management portal.

The only thing that I'd like to see, at some point in time, is having the storage array being able to detect a ransomware attack. When you get hit by a ransomware it rewrites every block in your guest's virtual machine. So there should be a way for them to be able to detect that: "Hey, this is unusual, to see every block of this guest being rewritten all at one time," and then flag that as potential malware or ransomware.

I can always imagine possible improvements to anything I use, and despite my gushing praise I am capable of coming up with a few minor ideas. 

I would love to see deeper integration with VMware vSphere/vCenter. Right now, I can edit existing Reduxio datastore sizes in the vSphere web client. Provisioning new datastores that way would be nice. I do not know if it is possible, but making the process more transparent by hooking into VMware's existing pages would be convenient instead of using the Actions menu or having separate tabs/pages.

Adjustable defaults for things like block size and server assignment would be great.

(For all I know, those features have already been released and I ignored an email telling me about it.)

I dislike web interfaces, so I mostly use the old vSphere thick client, but the Reduxio plugin only works in the web interface. I doubt anyone anywhere is making/updating plugins for that, though.

There might be one thing they can improve on. Maybe it should come in stainless steel, just like its DeLorean time machine predecessor. It’s only fitting that all time machines should have a stainless steel option!

Make it easier to use with slightly older versions of VMware. 

The ability to look at data at a file level would be useful, as well as the ability recover at that level. Right now, you can only recover whole volumes.

I am waiting on a feature set in the new version which should allow me to replicate between Reduxio iSCSI SANs for disaster recovery and also to 3rd party iSCSI SANs which are cheaper for an archive or DR target. This feature will be a huge cost savings solution for my business if we can get it up and running and will allow me flexibility to work with an archive level iSCSI SAN of my choosing.

With the latest release, there is now the ability to use secondary storage as a backup target, which was the only request I had. Otherwise, there is nothing I can see needing improvement in the near future.

This is a hard one because I am very happy with the service, and they have gone above and beyond to make us happy. So, I really can't say there needs to be improvement. If I was going to add a feature to the Reduxio unit, maybe it would be helpful to have a mobile app to monitor the storage array remotely.

Scalability. Reduxio has only one product, they don’t have an option, for now, to expand the storage product.

I would love an iPhone app to monitor my system from outside the firewall. I am also looking forward to the latest vCenter plugin with more granular reporting and management.

• Have some hooks into cloud storage for backup.
• Update the system to use additional secondary storage as a resource.

It needs integration with cloud vendors for remote storage, and to be able to restore a single machine from a specific volume.

Integration is needed with other virtual vendors like VMware, Veeam, Hyper-V; that integration needs to be deeper, not just the way that they're using it now. I know that it's under development, but I think this is one of the disadvantages, for now, as a young company. They have to work with the other players on the market. 

Also, they're trying to do this, but they need to show more what their growth plan is, the development, what the next steps are, the future; to let the customers feel and trust that they're not just another storage company, that they are different.

Finally, we have a few small items. We can't call them issues, rather they are unresolved questions about controlling the machine. Each level of support, the technical guys in their company, should have his own user and be able to monitor and gauge areas to manage and control, per person, and not that anyone has everything administrative.

The ones that I mentioned to them awhile back, they addressed, like the ability to replicate to other non-Reduxio systems, and replicate to cloud storage, for example. They've addressed that, and actually it's a part of the features now.

Although, the ability to recover LUNs from any minute is very valuable. It would be helpful to have the ability to recover virtual machines individually without having to restore the full LUN.

We had a brief hiccup during one upgrade process, but it wasn't too extreme. I can't think of any other areas right now. During that upgrade we had a brief outage but it was quickly remedied.

Some of the things that needed improvement have been already been worked on. When we first got it, it was a fantastic stand-alone unit but didn't have a lot of the converged features that are now present, nor the whole clustering capability, where you have more than one in data centers and they replicate. You can recover very easily and very quickly.

Much of what we needed has come to it. I haven't really had the time to think of what would be the nice next improvement.

Would love to have role-based access and an active directory integration.

Capacity possibly need improvement. The product fills a nice segment where top access speed is not needed (i.e., pure flash), but consolidated management of servers is faster and more convenient.

The user interface for the web console could be more user-friendly, while it is flashy, how to find functions is not necessarily obvious.

I think that the only issue that I would like to see an improvement in would be the price.

Room for improvement is a harder question than you might think. Reduxio does its job very well for us. Reliable and fast. The latest release limits web access to the admin console via Chrome only, and that's a bit of a hassle. Would definitely prefer something less restrictive there.

The only critique that we have is it needs the ability to have local users added. You have to log in as one built-in admin account. You can't create your own.

The product meets our current needs and new features are being released as I write this. I am waiting for the vSphere Plug-In with individual VM level control.

It would be nice feature if the GUI had an option to export the current unit configuration to a file or an email recipient. In case of a disaster, this way it would be quicker to get a replacement unit up and running again.

The only thing that I would point out would be the basic administration management of the machine. Everything has rights, meaning that there's either all control or no delegated control. So to sum that up, it would be a feature request for delegated management in the administrative console.

At the moment, I have no complaints about the performance and ease of use. If I had to list a request for future development, there is only thing I can think of at the moment, that would be detailed printable reports.