Cloudian HyperStore vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP comparison

"Considering a customer's need for a cost-effective solution, Cloudian HyperStore fits well for data protection scenarios."

"The tool has S3 capability. Its scalability is excellent. From a security and encryption perspective, the solution supports SSL encryption. It is a seamless solution offering data encryption, quality service, and security encryption."

"It is very durable and that is particularly important."

"Cloudian HyperStore is one hundred percent stable."

"The cost was the main reason we chose to use this solution."

"The most valuable features are its scalability and Amazon S3 compatibility because we can move back and forth with a hybrid cloud."

"The initial setup was straightforward. We started with a small pilot and we then moved to production with no downtime at all."

"So a lot of these licenses are at the rate that is required for capacity. So they're they're able to reduce the license consumption and also the consumption of the underlying cloud storage."

"With NetApp, you can integrate malware scanning or malware protection. This is something valuable that is not offered in SaaS solutions typically."

"The stability has been really good."

"ONTAP is great for helping you migrate on-premise workflows to cloud environments."

"The storage tiering is definitely the most valuable feature... With respect to tiering, the inactive data is pushed to a lower tier where the storage cost is cheap, but the access cost is high."

"One of the features our customers like is that it can be used from one cloud provider to another. They can use it from Azure to AWS or vice versa. That way, they don't need to use the same provider for backups. If something goes wrong on the primary site, having the same data in another cloud service provider is important."

"The ability to see things going back and forth has been quite useful."

"It is a cloud-based environment and at times, it is not very simple to use."

"Cloudian HyperStore needs to incorporate AI and predictive analysis. It would be helpful if the solution could analyze and predict how to manage data better. The end users should not have access to protected documents. They should be able to drop the documents. The capacity management dashboard can be better. We also want two-factor authentication using Google Authenticator or Microsoft Authenticator as MFA. Hence, the user would access the console not just by logging in with a password and username but with third-party applications as well."

"As it is an S3 solution with the same protocol as the one we have with AWS, having better integration with AWS will be beneficial."

"The cost needs improvement."

"I would like some more performance matrices to know what it is doing. It has some matrices inherent to the Cloud Volumes ONTAP. But inside Cloud Manager, it would also be nice to see. You can have a little Snapshot, then drill down if you go a little deeper."

"Multipathing for iSCSI LUNs is difficult to deal with from the client-side and I'd love to see a single entry point that can be moved around within the cluster to simplify the client configuration."

"I would want more visibility and data analytics where we can see anomalies within the shares within the GUI."

"NetApp's support could improve"

"I would like to see them improve the perspective of start and search in the panels. This would allow for better visualization of the contents that are captured in the tool."

"The solution is not stable when using single nodes. This is a problem. NetApp should work on this solution to make it more stable with HA nodes and resolve this issue."

"When it comes to support provided by NetApp, they have room for improvement. Every time we go through their support, we end up answering the same routine questions."

"Our fees are approximately half a dollar per gigabyte."

"The solution is cheap."

"If we wanted to use the AWS solution, we would have to manage two or three different platforms and pay more money than what we should have to pay, as some of the features don't even exist. If we wanted to, we could use AWS cloning, but it is useless because it uses more space, is more expensive, and takes more time."

"It is expensive. There are no costs in addition to their standard licensing fees."

"If a customer is only using, say, less than 10 terabytes, I don't think CVO would be a good option. A customer using at least 100 or 200 terabytes should get a reasonable price from NetApp."

"Compared to other storage vendors, NetApp, is not always able to compete with their pricing. Yet, we acknowledge the ease of use ONTAP brings with the AWS integration."

"They give us a good price for CVO licenses. It is one of the reasons that we went with the product."

"The solution's pricing is reasonable."

"The pricing of this solution is definitely higher than what the typical Azure Files and AWS solutions charge, but given the features and the stability NetApp has provided, we are okay with it. We are not complaining about the pricing."

"The cost is quite high."