We performed a comparison between Azure NetApp Files and Carbonite Migrate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Zerto, IBM and others in Cloud Migration."Azure NetApp Files has been stable."
"Since we have NetApp's internally, we use the SnapMirror predominantly for this process in the cloud which is beneficial."
"Using NetApp Files got us out of a really difficult situation quickly, effectively, and at a reasonable cost."
"It's elastic, so it scales with our demands. We can start small, then with the addition of customer loads, we can expand on-the-fly without the need to reprovision something."
"This solution definitely makes us more efficient in being able to provide storage quickly to our customers in the Azure Cloud."
"One aspect of Azure NetApp Files that I truly appreciate is its remarkable performance capabilities."
"It has saved a lot of time. Because in the older, conventional hardware system, they need to raise a ticket to go to storage engineering, then storage engineering would increased the size. Now, it's dynamic. You don't have to do anything. This improved the time by more than 50 percent."
"The critical features of this solution are SnapMirror for replication, data protection, and SnapLock."
"Carbonite Migrate works well in Windows platform migrations and in the case of a VML platform. The migration is smooth in Windows environments."
"Carbonite Migrate is helpful on an infrastructure level."
"The pricing definitely needs to be improved."
"This solution would be improved with more innovation."
"The main hurdle in promoting this solution is the price. Its price definitely requires an improvement. It is more expensive than other options, so customers go for a cheaper option."
"The deployment process is somewhat complex compared to other storage solutions."
"We would like to have backup functionality built-in so that we don't run into the issue where the replication process makes a copy of the corrupted data."
"We were looking for a clustered solution that has over-complicated things because we had it in AWS, which is Amazon. There was a solution for clustered NetApp. That meant there would be two NetApps that were not clustered because there was no solution for a cluster. We would like there to be an HA cluster solution."
"We would like to see more paired regions for the replication."
"Reserved Instances for Azure NetApp Files would improve more use cases, making them more valuable in Azure as the cost would be reduced."
"We find it very difficult to use these tools in a multi-cloud environment"
"Migration in RHEL and Linux environments can be improved. During RHEL migration with multiple data areas, you have to create a similar source environment at the destination. This can be challenging because you have to install it, create the VM, install over it, and mount it at the mount point. Only then can you do the migration."
Earn 20 points
Azure NetApp Files is ranked 3rd in Cloud Migration with 12 reviews while Carbonite Migrate is ranked 16th in Cloud Migration. Azure NetApp Files is rated 8.4, while Carbonite Migrate is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Azure NetApp Files writes "We can expand our storage on-the-fly without the need to reprovision". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Carbonite Migrate writes "Great tool for one-to-one migration, but not suitable for multi-cloud migration". Azure NetApp Files is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Nasuni, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Google Cloud Storage, whereas Carbonite Migrate is most compared with Nutanix Move, AWS Migration Hub, Oracle Zero Downtime Migration and AWS Application Migration Service.
See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Migration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
