Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Nutanix Acropolis.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The storage and back-up facilities could be improved. The storage and recording back-up for updates where we can maintain the data server and handle an insurance company. We need day-to-day encrypting of the database. We're purchasing Acropolis and Veritas. That is a big headache. We are using Nutanix for backup and storage purposes. That is now going well in terms of storage and backup. The cloud base is an extra feature. It should be the standard. Nutanix Cloud is not that helpful for us.
There could be better support for high power ESX and other cross-platform applications. A major feature in Nutanix is that it should be able to move from AHV to BFX. I would like to see an improved interface. I think Dell EMC is going to launch ClarityNow to address this.
The product could be improved with more security. The product needs a bit more experience in the market. I think you don't have the possibility to add other hardware. It could be improved with the ability to add and extend.
In terms of the IT different categories, I would like for the governing sections to be able to use it in the IT department. If they can have something like a one view management portal or software similar to VMware that would be an added value.
I believe the only things that may need to improve is that the Nutanix Controller VM consumes quite a lot of resources. If that could be reduced, it would be great. Secondly, I would have liked it if Nutanix were a hardware as well as a software platform. I think they are currently progressing into a software only path. I think that, in the near future, their own hardware will be discontinued. I can understand why they're doing it, but I would have preferred them to continue being a one-stop shop for hardware and software alike. However, so far, for our company, the wish list is completely covered.
One thing I've noticed is that, when you do a shift from VMware to Nutanix, it opens the setup of the VM that's currently running. If people from another site double click on it, it opens the VM instead of the setup of the unit. So I would suggest that this could perhaps be switched. That is so far the only change I would like. I would like it if they could fix the instance where you double click on a VM and it opens the VM instead of the setup. That's the only thing that's a major bother to me.
The GUI for this solution needs improvement.
As of now, Acropolis and VMware cannot talk to each other. Until we have some kind of interface, it would be much better for Nutanix if they built an interface which can talk. Otherwise, if I have a VMware stack and I already have a Nutanix stack, I can create containers, I create clusters on VMware, I create clusters on Nutanix. All of these clusters cannot talk to each other. Then it has to be then subverted as a parallel execution. What happens then is that I have to work in two different environments within my data center. Practically, they are two different data centers but physically and logically, they are one. If they cannot talk to each other that creates a lot of issues. That is something which Nutanix has to develop. For example, Oracle is using a function called GoldenGate. They have a feature called GoldenGate which allows them to talk to various different environments which must really help.
It would be fantastic if there was a built-in layer, in Nutanix, that acted like a cloud interface. So far, we need to integrate a cloud interface on top of Nutanix for billing the usage for specific customers' domains. It would be great if a cloud gateway was built-in, inside Nutanix. Also, one of the very important things that I would like to see in Nutanix, but I'm not sure if it's in the roadmap or not, is to have some kind of caching optimization at remote sites, to build active-active data centers more easily.
I don't have any requests for features. It does everything that I need it to do, and then some.