We use it to manage storage for our customers.
Our customers use it for mission-critical applications, such as backup circuits.
We use it to manage storage for our customers.
Our customers use it for mission-critical applications, such as backup circuits.
We use ONTAP as a managed storage for customers. It helps our customers with all its 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 fabric pools in the newer version is cool, though we don't use it yet. It provides tiering to cloud and fabric pools.
It is very stable and never crashes. During maintenance, it's easy to do. If you lose connectivity, it has one-sided redundant connectivity on the back-end for shelves, which is good.
It doesn't scale horizontally since there are a limited number of shelves. Other NetApp solutions are way better at scaling. This needs improvement since the future is in scaling horizontally, similar to what SolidFire does.
NetApp's technical support is always perfect. They go above and beyond when trying to help.
We generally upgrade when a solution is end of life or moving out of support.
With older versions, it was a little complex at some point, but this was back in the day. It's still a bit challenging, but when you have the right versions, it's straightforward.
We're trying to automate the deployment process, and as far as I know, you cannot do that with ONTAP systems today. This may not be true with the newest 9.4 or 9.5 systems.
What makes it complicated, there is no API available to automate a task. Now, they have released a lot of Ansible playbooks to automate a deployment, which might have significantly improved it, but I have not had a chance to try them.
We did the deployment ourselves.
I would recommend ONTAP, because I like the platform. With the most recent stuff, like the fabric pools which blow my mind, it is a really good solution.
There is something interesting stuff coming out in the future, like NVMe over Fabric, which has a different rate over Fiber Channel.
We use it for cloud. We have a big VMware environment with CIFS, NFS, and other applications. Most of the data is on NetApp.
It has the ability to bring up disaster recovery quickly.
The toughest thing that we have right now is a cabling issue. There are so many that you need to connect.
I would like to see more S3 integration with other vendors, objects, or instruments. We are a big Dell EMC shop and would like to have this integration.
It is very stable. Given you have so many nodes in a cluster, the volumes, connections, and lifts can be moved anywhere within the cluster.
It is better than some of the other solutions that we have used. It is easy to expand nodes.
We are a premiere customer. When we call, we get someone on right away.
We have grown with NetApp. As they grow, we grow.
The initial setup was straightforward, but there is some complexity.
We used professional services from NetApp for the deployment. Our experience with them was good.
We save a lot because of the deduplication and compression.
We have a mixture of NetApp and Dell EMC.
NetApp does NAS well and better than other vendors.
We are saving more disk space which saves us more money.
Aggregate data, compaction, and deduplication for ONTAP are its most valuable features, so we can save space.
It is stable.
We haven't had any issues with the technical support. When we've used the technical support, they have been helpful.
Previously, we have 7-Mode technology. Now, we have cDOT. We changed because now we can move volumes without any interruptions.
The initial setup was straightforward.
We deployed the solution ourselves.
They could reduce the price.
We looked at NetApp and Dell EMC. We chose NetApp because it was cheaper, more scalable and ordered.
It is a robust product. If you buy it, you will have no issues.
We use it as a file-based storage. We store a lot of unstructured and application data. Mostly data which needs to be shared across multiple mount points.
It gives us a location to store data across multiple mount points. It gives us functionality to provide Snapshots and backup outside of traditional backup solutions.
The stability is great.
Being able to scale out at cost-effective capabilities doesn't compare to some of our other storage solutions, but it is coming along. NetApp ONTAP could improve its scalability.
The technical support is good.
We did not have another solution previously.
We had specific use cases for file-based storage, and that's what drove us to NetApp.
The initial setup was straightforward.
We used Datalink for the integration. They've been good.
Recently, we have seen ROI.
NetApp and Dell EMC were on our shortlist. We mostly chose NetApp because of its functionality.
One of the classic use cases is the high availability for both block and file. However, many different technologies within NetApp are of interest to our customers.
NetApp has a variety of different features and technologies on offer.
The initial setup is pretty straightforward.
It's a stable product.
The solution can scale well.
The integration with other products, both security and third-party products such as Lenovo and others doing OEM solutions, that would be ideal. We'd like to have these with ONTAP on top. We'd like integrations with different types of backup solutions and so on.
The price could be lower.
We have a good sense of feature sets in the pipeline for the product and therefore are largely satisfied with both its capabilities and the roadmap.
I've been using the solution for five years or so.
The stability is great. I'd rate it ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.
The product scales very well. I'd rate it nine or ten out of ten. It expands easily.
The solution works well for large or mid-size companies.
Within our company, none of us is using NetApp storage as we are providing our customers with solutions.
From our portfolio, we're selling a lot of Dell EMC and NetApp. We're selling Huawei, and we're selling other storage space as well, such as some IBM. With that said, if you compare Dell EMC and NetApp, it's mostly based on the integration, technologies, and flexibility where we see NetApp being a better fit for many of our customers, yet not for all.
We have been working with NetApp a lot. Doing implementations is not a problem for us.
95% of the time, clients can handle the initial setup. However, we primarily work with enterprise accounts, and those, even with a simple setup, can often lead to complex requirements.
The pricing is okay. I'd rate it three out of five in terms of affordability. It is not a cheap solution. However, it is quite stable and offers good value.
We did evaluate this solution against other options.
I'm actually a partner of Lenovo and NetApp. We're integrators. We set the solution up for our clients.
I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.
Based on my 20 years within the IT industry, NetApp is the best system out there. It is just not the cheapest. That said, looking at what it can do with Lenovo and other vendors make it a good option.
ONTAP is currently being used for data backups, migration of data, and volume management.
The most valuable feature is the ability restore and backup our virtualized servers on demand.
Its usability, scalability, and dependability are very good.
We are always looking for more security enhancements and ways to continue to provide security encryption, whether it's data in rest or security in transit. We would also like to have more enhanced encryption beyond the regular TLS and 256-bit.
The stability is great.
The scalability is good. We were able to deploy multiple infrastructures underneath the cloud environment by utilizing ONTAP. It scales well with our environment.
We were previously using Dell EMC for our backup solution. After we created a virtualized environment and used the ONTAP appliance, we were able to provide a seamless process for backups and recoveries.
We chose this solution primarily because our customers were gearing towards NetApp.
The initial setup was straightforward. We started off with a small environment, which was used as a test environment initially. Therefore, we were able to deploy it into a much larger environment once we understood what we were doing.
We used an integrator for the deployment who was good. We used a provider through ClearChart, who partnered up with NetApp, and provided engineers who assisted with the integration of ONTAP.
Ultimately, we chose NetApp because we were able to identify its strengths over other competitors.
Stay open to different technologies, as it's an emerging market. I do recommend the ONTAP product. I often offer colleagues a chance to come in and utilize our test environment to explore the different options around.
The product is good and sound. Our customers have been extremely satisfied with how we are using the product.
We use it for the security business. We use it mostly for capacity-oriented purposes, rather than performance-oriented.
It's a major product for us. We are dealing with security stuff so the encryption features in NetApp really help, as well as the deduplication. We are able to minimize the storage hardware. The compression and deduplication have helped reduce our overall cost of storage.
The valuable features include replication, Snapmirror. That's really useful for us. Also, FlexGroup is useful as it is capacity-oriented, so we can keep extending the space.
I'm waiting for end-to-end NVMe.
It's been running for years and years and we haven't seen any issues.
Scalability is good. The NAS can expand to 24 nodes for the FAS series, and for SAN it can expand to 12 nodes.
We have had to use tech support and the response has been good.
We switched from our old solution because of the features. We went with NetApp because of the redundancy, availability, scalability, and cost.
The initial setup was easy. It took just a few commands.
We used a reseller. Our experience with them was good.
We did a PoC with a few other products.
ONTAP has been in use for over 25 years, that's one of the major advantages when compared to start-ups and other companies. It's also global, NetApp has support all over and, in case of an emergency, their response is good. When there is an issue, many people jump onto the call to try to resolve it.
NVMe over Fabrics is margin-technology at the moment, but the future will be NVMe. All storage, end-to-end, will be NVMe protocol. The speed of NVMe is good. The current existing technology is SCSI-based, one command per Cube, but with NVMe you can run 65,536 commands in each Cube, meaning 65,536 Cubes. That is really fast. In terms of NVMe over Fabrics with existing Fibre Channel infrastructure, if the hardware supports it, it should be good. As the protocol improves, there should be end-to-end support for the NVMe protocol.
We don't use this product for machine-learning, or AI, real-time analytics or other groundbreaking types of applications.
The primary use case is as an application file server.
It is able to restore back several points during the day if there is a production issue.
I would like to see Synchronize Snap mode in the next release.
Stability is good. We haven't had a severe outage in years.
Scalability is very good, especially how it has matured over the past few years in cluster mode. We can now add nodes without disruptions.
Technical support has generally improved, especially the tickets for Cloud IQ where you are able to go through and it intelligently tells you how it has changed over time. That's pretty nice.
Performance: We outgrew the box. Or, the support was ending. It was one of those two scenarios.
The initial setup was straightforward. It came in a box ready to go.
We used a reseller for the deployment, Applied Computer Solutions out of LA, who was very good. We've been using them since 1997.
The data compression and deduplication have kept us from buying more disks these past three years.
Try it out, get your hands on it, and see what it does.
Every year, I am impressed with the product. It has gotten better over the years with cluster mode, but it is not 100 percent perfect. There are certain technical limitations with being able to use it for SAN, but it's improving.