Cloudian HyperStore vs NetApp ONTAP comparison

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

"Approximately 40% to 50% of my time is saved using Pure Storage FlashBlade compared to different products."

"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."

"The most valuable feature is Safe Mode."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."

"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."

"The main feature I have found to be product replication."

"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."

"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."

"Cloudian HyperStore is one hundred percent stable."

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

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

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

"We do not face any glitches or downtime."

"We have been able to save about 10 to 15% on space using the space consumption features."

"There is a faster release cycle now. Also, they are doing all types of cool stuff in their cloud volumes, replication, and tiering."

"The performance of the hardware is good."

"Clustered ONTAP makes it very easy to manage large amounts of data, measured in petabytes. One person can manage all that."

"Scalability is perfectly fine. Right now I only have the two nodes and one shelf. I'll be able to easily upgrade additional shelves. They gave me plenty of cabling when I got the unit so all I have to do is disconnect and reconnect the cabling and that's it."

"It has the ability to bring up disaster recovery quickly."

"The MFS report is the best feature for us."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."

"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."

"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."

"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."

"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."

"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."

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

"NetApp should focus on a hybrid cloud solution because none of the media houses are opting for cloud storage. The files are quite heavy, and it becomes quite difficult to maintain them on the cloud. If NetApp can provide such a technology and fill the gap of storing media files onto the cloud, it would give them an advantage."

"In terms of areas where NetApp ONTAP could be improved or enhanced, I believe they should improve the volume replication, specifically the synchronous replication in a block-based SAN environment."

"I would like more diagnostic generation. Right now, it's a pain to go into the controller and do a full diagnostic and export."

"For administration, there is no user interface present for NetApp ONTAP, so I have to rely on the ONTAP CLI."

"We would like to be able to provide feedback immediately after receiving technical support."

"Technical support is not in person nowadays. We have to wait a long time to get an engineer. Then, most of the time, their engineers are not good enough to understand our problems. While we might not be able to explain the problem well, or they are not able to understand the problem well, their solutions are slow to resolution. The response time for tickets is bad nowadays."

"NetApp ONTAP has similar areas of improvement as NetApp Private Storage regarding decreasing the error rate, improving the GUI, technical support and stability, and reducing the price."

"The back-up side of the solution could be improved, as could the archive. We still have to rely on third-party backup programs and other archiving solutions. If it was offered by NetApp itself, it would be much better."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional."

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

"The pricing is relatively expensive due to the FlashBlade technology. However, for companies needing quick and reliable data access, the cost is justified."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."

"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."

"The product is very expensive."

"The solution is cheap."

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

"NetApp ONTAP is a pricey product, but you pay for what you get. I rate NetApp ONTAP a five out of ten for its pricing."

"It helps us save money using compression and deduplication."

"This solution helped our organization reduce our overall cost of storage. Because idle data which was residing on high cost tiers, once we sifted the ONTAP, we were able to scale and place it where it should be, then offload the data which was unnecessary to different locations."

"It's not an all inclusive model. You have the option to purchase modules to make the entire ecosystem coherent. I would like the option to pay one price and get everything all inclusive, like OnCommand."

"If you start narrowing down NetApp versus price point, then comparing it to the feature set and take away all the bloat that other companies will try to add on, there is no other option. It comes down to just NetApp."

"Additional costs exist if you want a license for a feature like SnapMirror."

"It has been cost-efficient. Compared to our legacy Dell infrastructure, we have realized cost savings. It is good."

"The product costs an arm and leg; it's expensive."