Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) Reviews

We primarily use the product for sports betting. It was for nonregulated applications.

I was able to lower the number of people I needed to do the same level of work as on VMware. Where I needed a team of six on VMware, with Nutanix, I only required a team of two.

The most valuable feature is the portability of data. I can get my data in and out. I have the ability to expand from my already on-premise environment to off-premise as well. Being able to stay in that hybrid mode is great.

I found the impact on business workloads to be positive. It's saved me money. Nutanix is much more reliable overall compared to non-Nutanix platforms. 

It's helped eliminate cloud waste in my company. While I cannot completely quantify it, it allowed me to bring all of my data together. It's made it easier for me to be successful. 

I've had a very positive experience managing my company's applications and data across on-premise and public clouds. Native applications cost much more in development time and require more effort. More people are coming out of the pure native cloud since the costs are just astronomical.

I'd like more flexible options to get in and out of migration modes.

While we've been using all Nutanix products for over ten years, we started to use this particular product last year.

I've never had a single stability problem with any Nutanix platform. It's one of the reasons I chose it. 

I've had no scalability problems yet. We'll see if, as I continue to scale, it becomes a problem.

The application is growing by leaps and bounds every day. It's got petabytes worth of data now across 30 states. We're continuing to move forward and I'm still scaling. I work at an enterprise with 10,000 or more users. 

Nutanix support is good. I only really had one problem that was really difficult for them. That said, they kept at it until it was resolved. I've been very pleased with their support overall.

Positive

I previously used four different solutions and have since consolidated my management journey. 

I did not handle the initial setup directly. My understanding is that the process was straightforward. 

Nutanix is a lot more straightforward than anything else we install. That's why we like it. My team got aggravated with Dell and VMware solutions, and Nutanix was pretty much plug-and-play in comparison.

There have been reliability and productivity increases and cost improvements. I've witnessed cost savings of $400,000 to $500,000.

My total cost of ownership has probably gone down 20%. This solution allowed me to take that 20% of savings and reinvest as I move forward. While I don't really save anything in the short term, I am saving expenses in the future. 

There are positives and negatives to licensing. It all makes sense now, but it took a while. When the licenses first changed, it was a bit confusing. 

I did evaluate other options before choosing Nutanix. For example, I looked at VMware options. I didn't like them. Especially since the Broadcom acquisition, I wanted to diversify away from VMware.

The solution is pretty seamless. It's a no-brainer to choose this product.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case for Nutanix Clusters involves operating virtual platforms. We use Nutanix as our storage infrastructure and VMware ESXi for compute infrastructure. This setup is predominantly utilized within the government sector.

The solution has not significantly improved our organization. We found it disappointing due to numerous issues, such as lack of scalability, resource consumption, and unreliable support. We are in the process of transferring our nodes and clusters to more dependable solutions.

The most valuable feature of Nutanix Clusters is its storage infrastructure.

The product could be improved in scalability and support services. 

I have been using Nutanix Clusters for three years.

I rate the product stability a five out of ten. 

The solution consumes more resources than anticipated, leading to difficulties in adding new nodes and requiring faster Ethernet connectivity.

Our experience with Nutanix customer service and support has been very disappointing. Support cases took an excessive time to resolve. For instance, a case involving RDMA took five weeks to resolve.

Negative

We previously used different solutions. We switched to Nutanix Clusters to streamline our storage and compute infrastructure.

The initial setup process was complex. The deployment process, especially when implementing advanced features like RDMA, often failed and required repeated attempts with different settings.

We implemented the solution through a combination of in-house and vendor teams.

The licensing model of Nutanix is complex. Unlike VMware, where you purchase socket licenses, Nutanix requires licenses for every core, gigabyte of storage, replication, and other features. Missing any of them can result in the cluster being non-operational.

We evaluated other options, including VMware and IBM. We are considering migrating more clusters to VMware and evaluating IBM and SolarWinds for future implementations.

I advise others to consider other solutions if they need a reliable and scalable infrastructure. 

I rate Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) a three out of ten. 

We run data centers in six locations worldwide and provide our customers with testing platforms.

With Nutanix Cloud Clusters, we could provide redundancy on all levels without investing in dedicated shared storage for six locations, which was a big saving from the company's standpoint. We aim to use Kubernetes on-premises. That's our destination, and that's where we're headed.

Nutanix’s license portability is flexible. A lot of features are available on upper license levels.

NC2 has helped reduce our total cost of ownership (TCO).

Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) has simplified our IT operations by providing a unified view of all six data centers and applying some compliance policies across them. The solution has also improved our capacity planning.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the redundancy on all levels.

The most significant improvement would be to streamline the starting point so that we could kick off the deployment with one node and then scan out that deployment without a need to restructure or reformat anything. Right now, that's not possible. However, this would facilitate opening new data centers with a small upfront investment.

We have just started using Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) and switched from VMware to the Nutanix HCI infrastructure.

Nutanix Cloud Clusters is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable when you start at a certain point. If you start low, I wouldn't consider that as scalable. If I deploy the tool for a single data center with one node, and then if I need to deploy more, I cannot scale without reformatting the console. That is the downside. Again, scalability is not an issue if you start from the beginning with the redundant cluster.

I previously used VMWare. We switched to Nutanix Cloud Clusters because of the VMware positioning by Broadcom and the notification of the license tiers within VMware. We were previously looking at the HCI infrastructure because of the redundancy constraints. Achieving redundancy in VMware at the same level would require a huge investment.

The solution's initial setup is pretty simple. We were able to deploy the tool within two to three days within the data center, which is amazing.

We implemented the solution through an integrator. We have some procedures for deploying the solution. We planned the project in a way that the deployment and the migration would require customer participation as well because we'll be creating customer production workloads. However, it's not going as fast as we want it to go.

The biggest return on investment with Nutanix Cloud Clusters is the redundancy.

The solution's licensing can be very pricey.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We have some workloads that we want to get from on-premises to the cloud, and we're doing some test cases on the migrations of our virtual machines to NC2. That's part of the plan (especially for the G4 nodes, which are out of support).

We're looking into the pros and cons of replacing the actual hardware versus moving it to a Nutanix cloud.

Having a single pane of glass where you can have both your on-prem and anything else that you spin up within AWS is useful. The integration within Prism Central is great.

We're looking at it for our application team so that they can have choices and allow them to use cloud clusters. 

We've had some challenges with the implementation. We had to go through all the necessary setups, and we had some challenges in terms of integrating our current environment into the Nutanix cloud. 

We also worked with some NC2 experts, and we've gotten over most of the challenges. Now, we are able to set up the cluster on AWS accurately. The next step is to get fully integrated with Prism Central so that we can continue with the POC test.

We're in the POC stage. Currently, I've used the solution for less than six months during the trial period.

We've tried to run it on a weekend, and it didn't go down. 

We have experienced an issue with hibernating the app tool cluster. There may be a problem that's being worked through at Nutanix. After having an issue with hibernating, we've had to terminate a cluster during the POC. Other than that, everything went smoothly when we did the POC. 

As far as scalability is concerned, you could easily scale up or horizontally. You can easily add nodes or recreate some other clusters as needed. It takes about 60 to 90 minutes to create a cluster. 

We haven't really dealt with technical support. We're getting all the help we need in terms of standing up the clusters and dealing with internal security hurdles. Right now, we're trying to integrate with Prism Central and open some firewall support. We are as well working with an https://www.peerspot.com/produ... technical expert for those purposes. 

We previously used a different process altogether. 

It's too early to measure any ROI as we are in POC mode. 

The solution has been more costly at this point. We do not see any cost savings. 

We did evaluate other options, including NC2 on Azure. We wanted more maturity, and AWS has always been our primary cloud vendor. We are looking to have workloads on Azure and Google one day too. 

We're still in the POC stage. Our biggest hurdle is the cloud. It seems to cost more to run clusters in the AWS cloud. We do have some discounts on a corporate level; however, apples to apples, it seems to be better just to replace the actual hardware on-prem versus migrating workloads off of NC2. We're still looking at cost benefits. We want to give our clients both options and have the flexibility to run on a hybrid approach.

As we are at the POC stage, so we haven't yet eliminated cloud waste just yet. That would be one of the test cases we are looking into.

In terms of managing applications and data, we're still testing it. We're still looking at how it performs on-prem versus the cloud. We're looking into scalability as well as that would be a benefit of moving to the cloud.

If someone is interested in migrating workloads directly onto the cloud and running them natively instead of using NC2, they really have to look into the design of the application. Some workloads need to have some services on AWS as well. When that's the case, it is best to use NC2 features. 

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten. There are a few improvements to work on. For example, cluster hibernation needs work. However, the solution is very user-friendly, and it's simply to spin up clusters. 

The customer is a company in Thailand. They use Nutanix Cloud Clusters for file sharing and integrate with personal file share and knowledge management. Our customer attaches a file service with a login and connects with WiFi for cloud content, such as second documents or email access files.

Customer uses Firecaster for file sharing, integrating with personal file shares, and knowledge management. Additionally, it is integrated with the personal files and knowledge management processes.

The server with all the network connectivity is very important. The configuration of Nutanix tenant and solid service are important for the customer service configuration. It's easy to use, the UI is easy to configure, and it supports snapshots and backup integration.

It's more than expensive. Firecaster cannot limit IOP or throughput reading and writing. Quality control needs to regulate the price-quality ratio.

I've been working with Nutanix Cloud Clusters for about one to two years.

The system is high priority and easy to secure, and the configurations are easy to maintain. However, it's not easy to find professionals for technical support.

It is highly scalable, scoring ten out of ten.

Technical support is rated five out of ten. The Nutanix knowledge could be improved, and it's challenging to find professionals for support.

Neutral

I implemented Firecaster and did not face issues with previous solutions.

The initial setup is easy, scoring eight out of ten. However, some functions require high technical skill.

It is more than five on a scale of price, considering it quite expensive. It's challenging to regulate the price-quality ratio.

SAP and Proxmox were mentioned.

It's a good technology, better than the Chinese technology. However, Nutanix needs to improve customer experience and API functions for new opportunities with the Firecaster.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for versioning. The clusters are on my private cloud. 

The fact that snapshot, replication, and management are tied together all is important due to the fact that if your snapshots are too big, you can have problems going ahead and replicating to the other clusters. You often need bandwidth managing to make sure that you don't flood the bandwidth of your connection between two or three places.

The most valuable features are the replication, the snapshots. They all go hand in hand with each other. The snapshot technology with replication and bandwidth management is good. 

The initial setup is simple. 

The solution is stable. 

The scalability is good.

The snapshots have room for improvement.

The pricing can be better.

They don't own the networking side of it.

Nutanix is harder to restore. The problem with Nutanix is when you want to restore data and you only want to restore selected data, much more tedious. With Scale, it's a simple GUI and takes seconds.

We've had Nutanix now for four years.

The solution is extremely stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale well if you need it to. If you have a large number of machines, Nutanix is the way to go. Nutanix will let you just keep on adding hundreds of nodes to a cluster. However, reading-wise, Nutanix is slower than, for example, Scale. 

I have a staff of two. I have three others on my staff right now that currently know the system.

Nutanix support is good. However, Scale is better. They do respond and they do things, but Scale is faster.

I have both Nutanix and Scale, which are two competitors. Scale does some things better than Nutanix. Nutanix does some things better than Scale.

The implementation is straightforward. It's not complex at all. It's all very simple. 

The deployment took us not even a day. It's very fast.

Maintenance is easy and doesn't take much time. It's pretty self-repairing.

The pricing is a bit high. It could be less expensive. It gets very expensive to use it. It's based on the CPU and everyone else basically has pricing based on the CPU and between CPU, RAM, and hard drive space. It's not amazing.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

Users are going to have to know the CLIs and they're going to have to learn the back doors to CLI for stuff and make sure that they really have someone who is doing the networking properly and double-check all your network configurations with Nutanix. They don't do any of that. Whereas Scale sells you the network switches already configured.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The solution provides our entire infrastructure for my 40 plus locations and 500 users.

The reliability is the solution's most valuable aspect.

I have found the stability to be very good.

The solution can scale well. 

Technical support is great.

Some of the interfaces aren't as intuitive as they should be.

The initial setup can be slightly complex. 

I've dealt with the solution for almost four years. It's been a while. 

The solution is reliable and very stable. there are no bugs or glitches. it just works. There are no crashes or freezing. 

We have over 500 users across 40 locations. Everyone from office workers to factory personnel has access. 

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand, it can do so. 

I deal with tech support quite often and they are fantastic. I am very satisfied with the level of attention I get when I need their help. 

The initial setup can be a little bit complex. 

I handle the maintenance and deployments of updates myself. You don't need a lot of people to maintain it. It's easy, however, if you run into any trouble, there's always technical support who can assist.

I can't speak to the licensing costs. I have no visibility on that at all. 

I'm a customer and an end-user. I use Nutanix on a daily basis.

In terms of the deployment version I am on, it's generally as close to up to date as I can make it.

I'd advise potential new users to do their homework and don't look back.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. Overall, I've had a great experience. 

We are a solution provider and Nutanix Clusters is one of the products that we sell to our customers. We deal primarily with architectural products that include physical servers, networking, and storage. It is mostly on the hardware side.

Nutanix Clusters is for customers that want to go to the cloud, but they have applications that can't be moved. By implementing Clusters, we can move most of the applications back and forth between the cloud an on-premises.

The most valuable feature is having the full features of my Nutanix on-premises applications in the cloud. It gives more flexibility with the ability to create storage pools and share it between my physical servers and my cloud servers. Since I'm running it all on Nutanix, I don't have any data excise fees.

The biggest weakness with Clusters at this point is that the adoption rate is low because customers don't know enough about it. We are just starting to get engaged with this product.

It has to be priced aggressively because it needs to make sense for customers to migrate to it.

Nutanix Clusters was just announced last week, so I don't have much experience yet.

Although it is too early to tell for sure, if it is anything like Nutanix ALS on the hardware then it is very, very stable.

It's extremely scalable.

Nutanix tech support is one of the best in the industry.

The setup is not any more complex than a typical cloud implementation. You really need to pay attention to where you put your compute resources, how you handle high availability, and things like that.

The licensing costs depend on what you need and how it is sized. I am working on one configuration that is priced at $50,000 USD, whereas another one that I'm working on is estimated to cost $250,000 USD. It really depends on the customer's environment.

My advice for anybody who is considering Nutanix Clusters is to get a professional to help you with it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.