Dell EMC Unity XT reviews

We use this solution for block storage delivery to the cloud.

This solution provided us with the capability to manage expiring equipment that we didn't have before.

This is a tier-three solution and it gives us what we need for archiving and backups.

We have used this solution for less than one year so I don't have any improvement suggestions yet.

I have used this solution for less than one year. 

The technical support for this solution is good. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I have previously used HPE 3PAR 7400. We switched over to Dell Unity because 7400 was being retired and did not offer two-factor authentication. The biggest difference between the two solutions is security and Dell is offered at a lower price point. 

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment took less than two days. However, to get all the paperwork through the government officials took about six weeks.

We evaluated HPE Nimble.

Generally, one person is required to do the maintenance. There are eight of us that can do the maintenance in our company. Overall this solution provides exactly what we needed, which is fiber channel block storage in the cloud.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

This solution is used for primary storage. We have a single installment with many units throughout our on-premises environment. We only have one XT unit and it is used for one of our core environments. It provides critical services such as DHCP and DNS.

This solution helped us reduce our physical footprint and power consumption. 

The inline deduplication and data reduction capabilities have been the most valuable.

I have been using this solution for five years. 

This is a stable solution.

Scalability of this solution could be improved. 

I would rate support for this solution a six out of ten. A few years ago, I would have rated it an eight or nine out of ten. The biggest challenge is responsiveness and getting to speak to someone who really understands our challenges. 

Neutral

We previously used VNX. We switched solutions to have an updated platform and integrated NAS services.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It is a plug-and-play deployment. It took half an hour to deploy and required two people. It requires routine updates for maintenance. 

We have experienced a return on investment using this solution. 

This solution offers great pricing. 

We evaluated NetApp before choosing Dell. We are more familiar with Dell's products which is why we decided to use this solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We are a hospital with many business applications running in-house, as well as File Server Business Apps, which is why we need a three-tier architecture for NAS and storage.

The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it's a single block, a complete block that includes both NAS and SAN. This was our ultimate requirement because we do a lot of file sharing.

When compared to other solutions, particularly HP, they lack the complete block.

The complete block and file sharing are the most usable features.

The features we need are already included.

They can certainly improve in terms of monitoring. The monitoring could be improved, and more features could be added.

We have 600 to 800 users.

This solution is extensively used; it's a hospital, and we use it 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

I would rate technical support a four out of five. Technical support is good.

Positive

We have already found a solution. We have already purchased the solution from Dell EMC. Not the usual traditional HCI, we used the standard traditional one instead of HCI because our environment is more compatible with the previous set.

I've previously used the VNX, this one is superior to the VNX. And, in particular, the NAS file sharing feature. It's easier than before when compared to the other one.

The HP does not have the complete block. They have their own SAN, which is not in a single block. We cannot configure everything from a single, interface.

Multiple blocks are required in the HP one to control and monitor everything.

Because we previously used Dell EMC VNX 5600, the initial setup is very simple.

It is easier for us to move ahead with the same company.

I maintain this solution, it only requires one person.

The initial setup was handled by an integrator, and the rest of the migration was completed by myself.

It's extremely competitive. We checked both HP and Dell and we determined that Dell EMC was a better option.

Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis.

I don't recall the amount because that part, the financial part, is handled by the finance team. We are not aware of this, we are technical evaluators.

Definitely. This is something I would recommend to others who are interested in using this solution. Many people are unaware that HP does not have the entire block, despite the fact that HP's technical team claims to have it. Specifically, companies looking for NAS and SAN both together should consider Dell EMC over HP, because HP has a separate nest server as a separate server that they are providing you. However, they mention that the NAS is also available there, but it is on a separate server.

I would rate Dell EMC Unity XT an eight out of ten.

We use it for the hosted data store in VMware environments. I also work with it as a solution itself.

It's easy to use, easy to manage, easy to troubleshoot, and the process support is good. 

We can run our environment as we need and run it in the whole flash. Unity is dynamic. We can only save the usable capacity on Unity. 

We need to improve the controller to work as active-active. We also need to improve the snapshot on the Unity site.

I have been using Dell Unity XT for eight years. 

It is a scalable solution. One engineer and one technician work on this solution.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment takes three to four hours.

The technical support team is fast and responsive. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We currently provide data solutions to both HP and a banking client. The banking client utilizes our DNS solution. I have introduced our kit for selling the smart technology integrated into our offerings.

Scheduled components are sourced from Korea based on their quality selection, with the actual purchase taking place in Vietnam.  

The storage dynamics are managed uniformly on a global scale, whether it is a simple or wide-ranging configuration.

They place a strong emphasis on service, occasionally requiring approvals. However, with full installations, they have achieved almost uniformity. Their storage approach differs from a consolidated business-based model; instead, it is application-centric. Their investment in solutions is geared towards specific needs, such as the banking or information system, acquiring smaller storage units individually.

I have been using this solution for 15 years. 

The discussion revolves around the Ports program, which has been implemented and operates as a single system based on my direction. Additionally, adherence to government requirements is necessary.

The preference for Unity arises from its investor-driven segmentation, specifically tailored for application data systems, eschewing any consolidation. Despite possessing numerous units, there is doubt whether it is feasible to invest exclusive authority for each application separately, eliminating the need for consolidation.

The consideration of scalability introduces the ability to simply add on hardware, particularly with SaaS and HTTP. However, certain aspects, such as metadata or previous HTTP pages, present challenges that necessitate careful attention.

The initial support for the second job from PA in Vietnam is highly commendable and competes well. Moreover, my NDA has proven to be exceptionally effective.

Positive

We are currently undergoing a conversion involving the installation of hardware and configuration. Initially, the focus was on infrastructure areas, specifically addressing endpoint agents. Subsequently, the emphasis shifted towards application-centric operations. I oversee the configuration and setup, encompassing both hardware and software aspects. 

The hardware setup is primarily based on production, involving tasks such as TCDR for the production environment. They initially acquired storage from Zero Ten, utilizing EMC. Over time, they transitioned to HTTP storage, and presently, they are considering a comprehensive replacement of their storage solution. The ongoing shift is towards a more advanced data system, albeit not classified as high-end.

It is an average priced solution.

I would rate it 8 out of 10. 

I've been working with this solution for about six to seven years. It is deployed on-premises and on the cloud.

It is scalable, and we usually recommend Dell Unity XT to small and medium companies.

I would rate technical support at eight out of ten.

Positive

It takes about eight hours to get Dell Unity XT up and running. Fine tuning may take longer.

The installation can be managed by two people and the configuration by one person.

It's an expensive solution, particularly for medium companies. One device costs about 30,000 euros. The support contract is quite expensive as well. We are currently looking for other lower-cost solutions.

Overall, I would rate Dell Unity XT at six out of ten because it's an expensive solution.

We primarily use the solution for storage for our online services.

The response time is good. It is suitable. 

The product is easy to use. It's not complicated at all.

We do have some sanctions in our country, and this solution is one of the options we have available to us. 

It is easy to set up the solution. 

You need to self-study. We'd like, however, to get professional training. It would be ideal to have some online sources available to us to help us understand its capabilities.

We cannot connect directly with Dell due to sanctions. We'd like to be able to connect to the distributor directly as sometimes we sometimes get the wrong information. It would help with transparency.

I've been dealing with the solution for about six months. 

It has been really stable up to this point. There are no bugs or glitches. It does not crash or freeze. 

There are three of us using the solution. We have more than 3,000 customers using the product. 

It's scalable. Everyone has been pretty happy with its capabilities. 

I've never dealt with technical support in the past. 

The product is not complicated to set up. The implementation is simple. 

It is quick to deploy. It took us about three weeks. 

We gathered the hardware, and we used the servers to connect to the host. It was pretty simple. 

We handled the deployment in-house with instructions or by looking at YouTube for direction. 

We have not witnessed an ROI at this point. That said, we do see that it is worth the money.

I'm not sure of the exact licensing cost of the solution. 

We are a broker. We're users. We are medium-sized, not enterprise-sized. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. It is easy to use, scalable, and easy to set up.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. 

We are resellers and deploy the solution for our clients as a guard for storage on virtual machines, databases, and their VDI. 

The solution allows for easy, useful replication with good features for VPLEX and VIVO. 

The solution should include a free process in the HPE portal that uses serial numbers to verify that hardware is genuine. We find Chinese hardware easily but it is difficult to determine if it is genuine which causes problems. 

The solution should allow for connection and replication with other storage models such as HPE, IBM, and Hitachi.

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is very stable and I rate it a ten out of ten. 

The solution is scalable within the storage limitations for each model.

For example, category 380 allows for one device. To scale up, you need to add additional software or hardware like VPLEX.

I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

Our company handles software issues but uses technical support for hardware replacements. 

Due to sanctions in Iran, I am not permitted to contact technical support directly but must submit issue tickets through authorized agents. I am unable to rate technical support because I do not have direct access to them. 

The initial setup is very easy. 

Depending on the size of the project, we assign two to ten engineers for setup and deployment which can take a total of one to three hours. 

We also provide six hours administrative training to our customers via small, on-the-job courses we have created. 

Most licenses for the solution are free but upgrades are available when adding additional software or storage. 

The solution little or no cost so I rate it a ten out of ten. 

Supply of genuine hardware is challenging and there should be more availability in the market. I rate the solution a seven out of ten.