We performed a comparison between NetApp AFF and Reduxio [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive."
"It is noticeably easier to manage than other appliances that we have."
"With Pure Storage, we don't see any latency or IOPS. It has been a very seamless integration."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are management and administration user-friendliness, provisioning, and performance."
"My rating of Pure Storage is a ten out of ten because of the price for performance and footprint - the overall value."
"What I like most about this solution, is the speed, resiliency and scalability."
"Pure Storage FlashArray has significantly improved our data center performance. It handles high workloads efficiently, providing better performance in the environment. With increased storage capacity, it has led to improved overall system performance. The tool's technology is a standout feature. It has helped me reduce storage costs by 15 percent."
"It helps us maintain uptime much better than other solutions we've used in the past, and the support is extremely quick and responsive."
"The ease of use, the SnapMirror capabilities, the cloning, and the efficiencies are all good features."
"The stability is solid. It doesn't fail on us, which is exactly what we want. We are in a critical business that we can't have any percentage of downtime."
"We have SQL clusters across the United States. It has sped up our IOPS and made it a lot easier for users."
"The performance is outstanding when it's all Flash. That's the biggest bang for the buck that we get."
"The most valuable features are the performance and the storage efficiency, due to the compression and deduplication... The efficiency is very important because we can buy fewer disks for more data."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity. It is easy to use."
"If the AutoSupport is well configured, then you need not to do a monitoring. You will get call and mail when any issue is completed."
"We have had issues before on our infrastructure where 20 to 30 percent of the people would come to us pointing the finger at the storage technology or storage back-end. That is now virtually zero."
"Takes advantage of deduplication and compression through as much of the content of VMs which are similar."
"Reduxio allows you just spin a dial and go back to just about any time… in most cases (depending on the policies you’ve set) to go back within one second granularity for a couple weeks in the past."
"It has improved our backup and recovery window, because you can have two Reduxio machines linked up, so every block that changes on the primary storage array gets replicated to the secondary storage array. If one side or the other goes bad, you just recover from the other side."
"Most storage arrays when you buy them, they call it a "forklift upgrade," where a forklift comes in there and pulls out the old storage, and brings in a new storage. But with Reduxio, it can use all your old storage arrays, whether they're NetApp, or IBM, or EMC, or HPE, as targets for doing backups."
"The pre-processing dedupe engine they have instead of post-processing."
"We like the way the Reduxio is designed, the way the managing/operating end is just so much easier; fewer steps, more intuitive steps. It has a number of features baked into it that, in other products, are additional licensed components, like compression and dedupe."
"The down-to-the-second restore capability, native to the device is a valuable feature."
"Enables multiple hosts access to the virtual machines by providing for moving VMs due to maintenance or host failure."
"The time-to-market could be better at times, but I think that's true for all vendors of hardware."
"In the configuration, which we brought in or tested it in, it has a very limited config as far as the array goes. That said, it still did more than our anticipation."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve in the area of cryptographic information in the consoles. The user-friendliness could improve. The Pure Storage FlashArray team should come and log into the system with their maintenance credentials and then pull out the information as evidence of cryptography."
"It would be nice to have a better view of the allocated capacity on their Platform as a Service solution because we have to do some manual calculations to understand how much we are going to pay every month to use the storage that is allocated."
"The way Pure Storage does the controller storage warranty or replacement has been an issue for some people who just replace the controllers every couple of years, and that's where some of the confusion with pricing and support has come in. They should be clear on the way the controller replacements happen, as it is important to know whether or not you can get a good return on them, because it can be a little confusing."
"I recognize it's a difficult challenge, but I would like to see them make the pricing more reasonable."
"I think replication is one area that still needs improvement. Earlier, Pure Storage FlashArray only had IP-based replication. There was no API-based replication, but they have enhanced the feature now. However, they need to work on API replication for C-type of arrays."
"It's not so scalable. It's got moderate scaling capabilities right now. The clustering technology needs a bit of work, they need to improve that."
"The quality of technical support has dwindled over time and needs to be improved."
"They should provide easier integration with multiple systems."
"The response to basic problems could be faster. They usually respond fast when there are critical issues, but you always want it right now."
"There is room for improvement with the user interface. There are a few things that cannot be done in the GUI. We do a lot of things through the CLI, but that's grown out of a lack of ability to do them in the GUI. An example is QTrees. You can manage them within the GUI, but the GUI is missing a few options."
"The dashboard needs improvement. The dashboard needs some uplift"
"AFF could introduce different subscriptions on the platform."
"This solution should be made easier to deploy."
"I would like to see better tutorials available, beyond the basics, that cover subjects like MetroCluster and automation."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Needs some hooks into cloud storage for backup. Also they should update the system to use additional secondary storage as a resource."
"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."
"It would be helpful to have the ability to recover virtual machines individually without having to restore the full LUN."
"Maybe it should come in stainless steel, just like its DeLorean time machine predecessor."
"Needs to be made easier to use with slightly older versions of VMware."
Earn 20 points
NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews while Reduxio [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage. NetApp AFF is rated 9.0, while Reduxio [EOL] is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Reduxio [EOL] writes "Its access speed and now its recently released features makes Reduxio not only an equal, but also better than your older version SANs". NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series, whereas Reduxio [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.
