IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

NetApp FAS Series OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

NetApp FAS Series is #3 ranked solution in top Deduplication Software, #3 ranked solution in top Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) tools, and #5 ranked solution in top NAS tools. PeerSpot users give NetApp FAS Series an average rating of 8 out of 10. NetApp FAS Series is most commonly compared to Dell PowerScale (Isilon): NetApp FAS Series vs Dell PowerScale (Isilon). The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 24% of all views.
What is NetApp FAS Series?
NetApp FAS Series offers powerful, affordable, flexible data storage for midsized businesses and distributed enterprises. NetApp FAS Series, named a 'Champion' and 'Best in Overall Value' by Info-Tech Research Group, is affordable, and is a more powerful storage platform than other systems in its class.
NetApp FAS Series Buyer's Guide

Download the NetApp FAS Series Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: May 2022

NetApp FAS Series Customers
Children's Hospital Central California, Plex Systems, PDF PNI Digital Media, Denver Broncos, PDF KSM Legal, Clayton Companies, Virginia Community College
NetApp FAS Series Video

NetApp FAS Series Pricing Advice

What users are saying about NetApp FAS Series pricing:
  • "Low-priced product, but pricing could still be made more attractive."
  • "It's not cheap, but at the same time, it's also inexpensive. It's somewhere in between."
  • "We have considered upgrading to an All-Flash solution but when we evaluated the cost-benefit we discovered that we don't have enough money to invest in it. To maintain the same technology with All-Flash would be too expensive for us."
  • "We purchased it for four years, and it wasn't expensive. It was reasonable. Every company has a different agreement with NetApp. We got everything we wanted with all the bells and whistles and all the features and functionalities."
  • NetApp FAS Series Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    CEO at BDPR Technologies Limited
    Real User
    Reliable, scalable, and stable storage solution which offers multiple features
    Pros and Cons
    • "Flexible and reliable storage solution with multiple features such as cloning, replication, and deduplication. Data migration can be done without any performance implications on the production systems."
    • "No other area for improvement comes to mind other than its price. Making the price more attractive will help this solution have a bigger market share."

    What is our primary use case?

    Most of my customers utilize this solution in the banking sector. They use it for their banking applications. They use it as their main storage.

    What is most valuable?

    One of the features that are so nice and which the bank loves so much about the NetApp FAS Series is its cloning feature. You can clone a database of any size, and when you clone it, the clone itself at the time it is created only occupies a very, very small footprint on the storage. It is when you sever the clone from the main database that you'll have a larger footprint.

    For example: You have a database of one terabyte, then you clone that, and it will occupy just a few gigabytes. This means you now have a clone which you can use for a number of things: reporting, backup, or anything you like. You can even use it to test a new product you are trying to bring into the market. However, the moment you sever the clone from the main database, then it becomes WORM-free terabytes on its own, so that's one advantage.

    The other advantage is that when you want to do a backup no matter the size of the database, you can do a snapshot. The snapshot takes up a very tiny space on the disc. From that snapshot, you can then take your data and migrate it to a backup storage. The backup storage could be via disc storage. It could be cheap and you can migrate it without any performance implications on the production systems, and that's very, very good.

    You can also do replication. You can do one-to-one replication when you have a multi storage and replicate it to under storage, which is located long distance from where you are running your production system. You can do one too many replications and that is okay. You can replicate the data, not just to another data storage, but to multiple data storages, so there's flexibility.

    This solution also has deduplication capabilities, so you can compress the data and deduplicate it so that the space to occupy, or the footprint becomes smaller. 

    There is a lot of data management tools today, and in the past you have to buy your data management tools separately. At present, when you buy NetApp storage, all the software tools are made available to you as a bundle, so that's another thing I like about the NetApp FAS Series.

    What needs improvement?

    The only improvement to this solution that I can propose is for NetApp to make the price more attractive. If the price is more attractive, then it will have a bigger market share. I can't think of any other area for improvement because the price is the only one that really comes to mind.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been dealing with the NetApp FAS Series since 2003.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This solution is very, very, very, very stable. Notice how I mentioned "very" a few times. You can rely on this solution because of its stability.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The NetApp FAS Series is scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    Technical support from NetApp is excellent.

    How was the initial setup?

    In general, the setup for this solution is straightforward.

    If the customer is migrating from a non NetApp storage to a NetApp storage, what we have to do is to map all the data from the non NetApp storage to the NetApp storage, after we have done the initial setup and configuration. Once we've completed that, from there, the customer can use the NetApp FAS Series straight away. We've done quite a lot of that.

    An example is the case of Novacom: a telecommunications company. They were using EMC at that time, so we migrated that data from EMC to another platform, and it went very well. Now, if you're migrating from a NetApp storage to another NetApp storage, e.g. your current NetApp solution is already obsolete, then you want to do a technical refresh and you bought the latest version of the solution, so migration from NetApp to NetApp is the easiest. It will be the easiest data migration because all the tools are there.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Pricing for this solution is not very high, but could still be improved and made more attractive.

    What other advice do I have?

    I've been a NetApp reseller for more than 10 years. I've supplied NetApp storage solutions to quite a number of customers in Nigeria, particularly in Lagos, so I have familiarity with the NetApp products, but that doesn't mean that I've sold all the various types. I've not sold all the various types, but I've sold quite a lot of backup storages, even when they were still producing virtual tape libraries.

    My customers have been using NetApp for more than 10 years. In Nigeria, the most popular NetApp product is the FAS series. My customers always start with FAS. I've just placed an order for a NetApp Storage Acceleration Appliance (SA300) for Unity Bank of Nigeria. The NetApp FAS products: these ones are the most popular products in Nigeria, but there also other variants here.

    Scalability and reliability are what my customers like about the NetApp FAS Series.

    How long the full deployment for this solution takes depends on the complexity of the environment. It also depends on data volume. In some cases, you can get it done within two days, and in some cases you can get it done within one week to two weeks maximum. It could take up to two weeks when migrating from a non NetApp storage to NetApp storage. Otherwise, deployment can go very, very fast.

    My customers love NetApp a lot.

    The number of users of this solution, particularly those in the commercial banks, depends on the size of the customer base of those banks. The customers of the commercial banks are the ones interfacing with the commercial banking application, and there are usually millions of customers, but all of them cannot be on the application at the same time.

    There are also internal users of NetApp within the bank itself: the bank staff who are making use of it for their normal day to day work, e.g. when closing at the end of the day, at the end of the month, or at the end of the year, etc. When you take into consideration the customers of the banks, the number of users of this solution would be millions.

    I'm giving the NetApp FAS Series a rating of nine out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Computer System Administrator at a construction company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Resilient without disrupting the user experience and very stable
    Pros and Cons
    • "For us, the greatest aspect of the solution is the fact that it just runs. It is amazingly resilient. That's very important to us, because we are basically, with some exceptions, have a 24/7 operation."
    • "The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the solution for keeping our information reliable. In our case specifically, here at the operations location, we've got a MetroCluster for redundancy.

    What is most valuable?

    For us, the greatest aspect of the solution is the fact that it just runs. It is amazingly resilient. That's very important to us, because we are basically, with some exceptions, have a 24/7 operation. 

    The newer features will be able to do things without interrupting the user experience, such as moving volumes on the fly, as well as adding and removing nodes to the clusters. That general set of features is pretty important to us.

    What needs improvement?

    The one aspect of the solution that's negative for us is also more unique to us due to the fact that we did a MetroCluster. The tiebreaker piece that does the monitoring of the two different locations, and determines if one is not talking to the network normally (or if it's truly down) is a little difficult. It feels like it was not designed from the beginning to fit well into the other pieces. It feels like it was thrown in at the last minute and it is not smooth. I've actually spoken to NetApp about that. I understand from a little bit of my research that they do have another product out. They've renamed it. I don't know how much they've changed it. I don't know if they have made that a better fitting piece or if it's just got a different name.

    I still have not moved to their most recent version. I believe they have incorporated several updates that I haven't had experience with yet. I'd hate to say, "Oh, we should put it that in there," and it's already there.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have different geographical locations. The different locations probably would have a different timeline in terms of when they started using the solution. The location I am sitting at is an operations-based charter for our location and we have had the FAS type filer for probably 12 years or so.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is very stable. It's quite reliable. We have it going 24/7. It doesn't crash or freeze. There aren't bugs or glitches, at least not that I have experienced. It's good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability is not something that I would have much experience in from this location. We're a smaller site with about 1500 users. It's not something that has to be extremely scalable at our location. 

    From talking to my coworkers at the larger locations, I believe that NetApp has become more scalable than they have been in the past, so they're going the right direction.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The solution's technical support is outstanding. We're more than satisfied with their level of service.

    How was the initial setup?

    In terms of the initial setup, the migration of the MetroCluster, in particular, is more complex. 

    I handle the management and maintenance of the solution myself, unless I need the assistance of a consultant.

    What about the implementation team?

    We had a consultant come in and help us when we went from the non-clustered MetroCluster to the clustered MetroCluster for the different versions. That was a bit more than I wanted to tackle. I brought in the NetApp consultant to do that. I would say it was more complex than straightforward overall. The consultant even noted that when he was here that this is probably not something that, as a customer, he'd want to do on his own.

    The consultant was excellent. He laid out a very clear roadmap of what we were going to do and broke it into three parts so that we didn't have too much on our plates and we could make adjustments in between each part. In the end, it was pretty smooth.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We haven't really done anything with the leasing options that they have recently come out with. We have instead outright purchased the equipment and all of the software that we use from them. 

    It doesn't seem out of the normal range for other vendors. 

    I don't really have a big pro or con stance on the pricing aspect of the solution.

    What other advice do I have?

    We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with NetApp.

    The FAS Series itself is not as complex as a MetroCluster configuration of the FAS. I would say if you're doing the MetroCluster configuration, it's worth it to get a consultant to assist. Almost every time that I have used a consultant, I have been very glad that I made the decision to hire them. I've done the incremental migrations on my own without difficulty, however, the big changes from platform to platform in particular, and from the non-clustered on tap software version to the clustered on tap software version are more difficult to perform. It's worthwhile to get consultants in those instances.

    The single FAS setup, I would say, the first time I did it, was probably the biggest learning curve. Regardless of the vendor, I would probably recommend having a consultant come in for the first time you're learning all the ins and outs of the solution. After that, the migration for the individual FAS and non MetroCluster FAS seems to be very manageable if you've got a certain level of experience. If storage is kind of an extra task for you versus your primary task, you're probably going to want to pull in a consultant regardless.

    I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buyer's Guide
    NetApp FAS Series
    May 2022
    Learn what your peers think about NetApp FAS Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2022.
    597,291 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Temitope Oladeji - PeerSpot reviewer
    NetApp Product Manager at Hiperdist Ltd
    Real User
    Top 20
    A stable and scalable data management solution with a useful unified management feature
    Pros and Cons
    • "I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system."
    • "Interfacing with the cloud environment could be better. I want to be able to move some cloud volume and integrate it seamlessly with my home on-premise storage. Sometimes I have issues with port permissions. NetApp probably needs to improve more on the integration side from on-premise to the cloud."

    What is our primary use case?

    I use NetApp FAS Series for storage consolidation, database management, performance, and data protection. We also use it for unified environments where you run multiple protocols. You can run it through a FAS or an AFF system. Our core applications are running on it, so it's always up.

    What is most valuable?

    I like the unified management feature because sometimes you end up running a single protocol on the entire system. Although it has the capacity to do multiple, you have to go the route to enable that. Sometimes it isn't convenient. You rather have a system for a particular protocol and another system for other protocols, especially in a big environment like mine.

    What needs improvement?

    Interfacing with the cloud environment could be better. I want to be able to move some cloud volume and integrate it seamlessly with my home on-premise storage. Sometimes I have issues with port permissions. NetApp probably needs to improve more on the integration side from on-premise to the cloud.

    Capacity management could also be better. The difference between AFF and FAS has always been an issue, but now we have the advanced disk partitioning technology on the whole FAS systems that can give us more usable capacity. That has been the bigger issue that I had with NetApp in terms of improvement, and they seem to be working on it now.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with NetApp for more than ten years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's a stable solution. The trouble we have with stability is the trouble we created ourselves. Once the system is installed and configured, it's stable. Except sometimes, we want to check out things, and they create some trouble for us. If it weren't stable, we wouldn't be investing in it for the past ten years.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    NetApp FAS Series is a scalable solution. We scale transparently, and we scale out and scale up. If we are scaling up with heavy capacity, it's very simple. Once we loop it, we have it and send it. We don't even have downtime for that. 

    Sometimes it's tricky when we need to cluster several controllers and to scale-out many times. But it doesn't really have a major effect on our business. Sometimes we schedule it to let the business know that there might be some downtime for a period. We are finding ways to reduce the impact, and I think it's seamless. If I have to rate it, I'll give it 85%.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    My experience with technical support has been very good. In fact, most of the things I'm able to do, I learned how from the technical support team. They don't just work. They work, and then they allow me to learn with them. As they are doing it, they put me through, and I'm able to pick up one or two things every time I get their support.

    Although it's in two layers because of the kind of customer I am, we have what we call dedicated service accounts managers. Even before your issues come up, the guy triggers it, and then they are proactive in managing our whole system. 

    But sometimes, we will have issues where we have to raise support cases, and we have a good contractor there. We have four hours of premium support. So far, we always get a response within four hours, and sometimes we have our resolution.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was a complex process, but it's better now.

    What about the implementation team?

    We use a local vendor and integrator most of the time to implement this solution. Initially, the system always comes with about three years of support. I have very good vendors around, and it's great all around. They also come around to support, but first level support, I do it by myself. When it gets complex, I invite the integrator and sometimes the OEM.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    It's not cheap, but at the same time, it's also inexpensive. It's somewhere in between.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would recommend this solution to new users because it's easy to implement. It's easy to install, it's easy to scale, and there is what we call investment protection. If there's a new controller that comes up, your existing controller can integrate with it. You don't have to trade in what you have. It always has forward compatibility and backward compatibility. I will always recommend NetApp FAS Series.

    On a scale from one to ten, I would give NetApp FAS Series a nine.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    AdrianoSimao - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Project and Infrastructure Service Manager at CEDSIF - Ministry of Finance
    Real User
    Reduced the time to market for all of our products
    Pros and Cons
    • "The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage."
    • "I think this kind of infrastructure is mostly obsolete. To keep up with developments in this space, you need to move all these features to an All-Flash solution."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using the NetApp FAS3240 as an integrated solution with a FlexPod that is used to host virtual machines, databases, and applications. It's a large solution with resilience and good performance; to date, we haven't had any complaints about it.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We decided to use NetApp FAS because we needed to decrease the cost of running our infrastructure. When we moved to this solution, we concentrated all the resources on top of it so that if there's something we need, we can offer it up without spending much time or money on new resources. There is no more hassle, beyond attending to the demands of running the FAS.

    At the end of the day, we have reduced the time to market for all of our products, especially when we need to support our clients with new requirements.

    What is most valuable?

    The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage.

    What needs improvement?

    I think this kind of infrastructure is mostly obsolete. To keep up with developments in this space, you need to move all these features to an All-Flash solution. Nowadays, we are working with a massive database involving big data and lots of information (even intelligence), and for these environments, it's not appropriate to run this kind of business. We feel that we need to move to an All-Flash environment in order to offer better performance for the client.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using NetApp FAS since 2010.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability is fine. There have been no problems to date. Since 2010 until today, we have replaced no more than seven disks, but it all depends on the facilities that you are using. I can say that based on this factor, it has been very affordable to use this solution.

    In general, it's a resilient solution with good performance.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We started with two instances, and now we are running four. It was very easy to scale them. We assembled them, connected them, and the business has been running very well.

    On the second upgrade that we did, it was quite different because they started licensing based on the capacity of the disks. I thought this was strange, but technically speaking, it was very easy to upgrade the environment with minimal knowledge needed.

    How are customer service and support?

    NetApp has very good support. I have no complaints about them. When you go to Active IQ, you have all the features you need. You can replace any spare within 24 hours, which is good for business.

    How was the initial setup?

    It was straightforward and took only five working days to deploy. I remember that in the beginning it took quite some time to replicate one side to another because the communication between the sides was not good enough, but once we upgraded the communication, it started running smoothly.

    What about the implementation team?

    We do the maintenance for the implementation ourselves. We have an agreement with the facilities that we have with NetApp, such that it's not tied to the supplier and we can maintain it by ourselves. We have a team which is prepared for this scenario as the first line of maintenance, and if we need more than what we can afford, we open a call and it's very straightforward to solve the problem from there.

    What was our ROI?

    As I have mentioned, we have been using NetApp FAS since 2010 and lately some infrastructure is becoming obsolete. However, after only three years of running it, we have had good results in terms of return on investment. We plan on switching out some of the end-of-life solutions with the rest of the amount invested.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We have considered upgrading to an All-Flash solution but when we evaluated the cost-benefit we discovered that we don't have enough money to invest in it. To maintain the same technology with All-Flash would be too expensive for us.

    What other advice do I have?

    NetApp FAS is a fine product. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Luca Raimondi - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Manager at NUM AG
    Real User
    Top 20
    Reliable and easy to set up storage system; has good stability, scalability, and high availability
    Pros and Cons
    • "Reliable storage solution with an easy setup. It has high availability and makes single file restoration easy. It also has good stability and scalability."
    • "The NetApp FAS Series is not as high-performing and is not as fast. Its speed needs improvement, but this could only be done if it's an all-flash solution."

    What is our primary use case?

    My use case for the NetApp FAS Series is that it's a repository for the VM (virtual machine) and CIFS (common internet file system) share, or network share.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The NetApp FAS Series has helped simplify our infrastructure. There were times it also helped simplify our operations. 

    What is most valuable?

    The NetApp FAS Series is useful, because it makes restoring a single file easy, but after that, nothing more. It's just a repository of the virtual machine, so I could use it or another solution, but it's reliable, e.g. it has two nodes with high availability, so this is the reason we choose to use this solution.

    This solution also accelerates virtualization, but not so much, because it's not an all-flash solution. The FAS2620 is a traditional solution with some cache, so it's not so fast, but it's enough for my company. AFF is all-flash, but this solution: FAS, is not all-flash, but people like it.

    What needs improvement?

    The NetApp FAS Series is not as high-performing for our business critical applications, because it's not an all-flash solution. It's also not as fast, so its speed needs improvement, but this could only be done if it's an all-flash solution.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the NetApp FAS Series for eight years: four years for the first installation, then another four years for the second installation.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The NetApp FAS Series has good stability. I never had any issues with it, so I chose it for the second time.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    My impression on the scalability of the NetApp FAS Series is that it's good, but my usage is just below 50%, so scalability is not an issue for me.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I've used a different NetApp solution, but I cannot remember the exact type of storage. The reasons I switched to the NetApp FAS Series is because I already knew the product. Another reason for choosing this solution is its reliability. I never had an issue with it in the eight years I've been using it.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup for this solution was easy. Planning took one day and the setup took two hours.

    What other advice do I have?

    We don't use the cloud backup solution of the NetApp FAS Series. We just use it in a very basic way, and nothing more than a repository for the VM and CIFS.

    I do the tuning and the troubleshooting for this solution myself.  I'm the only one managing it, e.g. the other members of the IT team are not involved in it, so it's hard to say if it does reduce IT support costs.

    We have not used the NetApp FAS Series in supporting data analytics, AI, machine learning, SAP, and Oracle workloads, nor did we use it to support any asynchronous replication for disaster recovery with MetroCluster.

    I never had an issue with this solution, so I never used their technical support.

    I'm rating the NetApp FAS Series a nine out of ten for availability and reliability.

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Assistant Director, IT at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Easy to manage with good data consolidation, visualization and snapshots
    Pros and Cons
    • "Data consolidation and visualization."
    • "The solution could do more than just data."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use the solution for data storage. We are customers of NetApp and I'm the assistant director of our company. 

    What is most valuable?

    One of the valuable features of the solution is data consolidation and visualization - and snapshots of course. The solution is easy to manage. 

    What needs improvement?

    We'd like to move to a solution that does more beyond just data, like starting to get more to servers and network specialization and data visualization and things like that. Server network and management specialization or consolidation. And also, trying to see a bit more single plane of glass in terms of managing, so that it gives you more insight in terms of what's happening. 

    Ideally the solution should have one console, the ability to use a single plane of glass across the enterprise. Because we have one VRR, one size duplication so just to have one console where you can manage everything else in harmony would be a good additional feature. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using this solution for 15 years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This is a stable solution. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable at the data level because it uses aggregates so you can easily increase data. But of course it's dependent on your provision for growth reports. I don't know how many use the solution but our company has around 600-700 employees and we have two people dealing with maintenance on the product. It doesn't require more than that. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is very straightforward. If you're good, you can get it up and running within a week. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I think the pricing of this solution could be lower because really it's just storage consolidation these days. I think this technology has matured so much. It's time to make it slightly more competitive, it's on the high side for now.

    What other advice do I have?

    Obviously anyone looking at this solution must have primarily a data storage use case. If they have a strong case for data storage, it's a good solution. From there it's just a matter of managing work flows between SAN and NAS which requires planning. You can then manage your capacities very well if you know your data requirements. 

    I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Broadcast System Manager at a media company with 501-1,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    Reliable storage, easy to use, performs well, and the support is good
    Pros and Cons
    • "It's an easy product to use that is stable and has good performance."
    • "The user interface could be improved to have better graphics and the performance analyzer could be better."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using NetApp FAS Series on all of your sites.

    We use it in four major systems for productions in broadcast TV channels. 

    I can say that we use it in Production and Archive environments according to the model and disk structure. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    I can say that we use it in Production and Archive environments according to the model and disks structure.We tested many storages. Netapp was the most successful in terms of performance. We did multiple HD ingests in real-time. At the same time, Editing teams edited on the ingested files. As Ingest, we recorded more than 20 HD cameras simultaneously. We chose netapp when we saw that it was successful in the tests we carried out according to our structure.

    What is most valuable?

    • First of all, I think it is very suitable storage for media.
    • When editing and recording at the same time, its performance is quite sufficient.
    • The fact that it is redundant for the controller provides sufficient security.
    • I can share all volumes as a single space through the FlexGroup structure.
    • You can manage departments independently by creating more than one SVM.
    • Ontap is a very stable and reliable operating system.

    What needs improvement?

    There should be a separate admin web management for each SVM. We are currently managing all SVMs from a single admin interface. it is a problem.

    Real-time performance monitoring requires good software. It would be great to be able to see the audit logs.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using NetApp FAS Series for more than five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    I can say that it is a stable product.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    NetApp has a structure that can grow very easily. You can expand by buying suitable model shelves. You can expand by the value allowed by the controller.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We have opened cases with technical support in Europe. They can connect and together we resolve the issue.

    At times we use support from the support site.

    What other advice do I have?

    NetApp FAS Series can use the cloud services in the storage and can be upgraded to the cloud.

    I could recommend this solution to other media companies to use. It's an easy product to use that is stable and has good performance.

    I would rate NetApp FAS Series a nine out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Principal Storage Architect at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Reasonable price, good file sharing feature, but the file system is not dynamic and the operating system is very cumbersome
    Pros and Cons
    • "The file sharing feature is most valuable."
    • "Its operating system is very cumbersome. However, after you set it up, it runs pretty smoothly. Its file system is not very dynamic. It is very static."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our primary use case was NFS. It was used for designing chips.

    What is most valuable?

    The file sharing feature is most valuable.

    What needs improvement?

    Its operating system is very cumbersome. However, after you set it up, it runs pretty smoothly.

    Its file system is not very dynamic. It is very static.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is pretty stable. I would probably give it a six out of ten in terms of stability.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is scalable to some extent. There is a limit, but then everything has a limit. We were using it at three sites across the US. We ran into this issue of hitting the limit just once in a while. When you are growing a cluster, you usually hit that limit.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Their support was okay. I wouldn't say it was very great, but it was there. Occasionally, they would just go round and round in circles. They didn't know what to do with the case.

    They followed the sun model, which is followed by almost every company. If you open a case and the person is one hour away from his break or the end of his day, he would just say that he will have to give the case to someone else, and then you start all over again.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We have had different NetApp models. FAS has been around for a long time. The newer models are called AFF, and I have used AFF 300 and AFF 400.

    How was the initial setup?

    Its implementation was complicated. It takes a couple of hours if your network and DNS are ready. 

    What about the implementation team?

    There was a NetApp SE on the site to help us.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We purchased it for four years, and it wasn't expensive. It was reasonable. 

    Every company has a different agreement with NetApp. We got everything we wanted with all the bells and whistles and all the features and functionalities.

    What other advice do I have?

    Its operating system is a little cumbersome, but it runs pretty smoothly most of the time.

    I would rate NetApp FAS Series a seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free NetApp FAS Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: May 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free NetApp FAS Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.