Regarding scalability, I think there is no problem. While there is always room for improvement in any product, to my knowledge, NetApp is a visionary company that enhances product features consistently. They actively respond to new requirements and technology changes requested by customers, improving scalability, management ease, features, and introducing progressive software releases, patches, and upgrades. Scalability does depend on model selection, with entry-level systems being cheaper but able to scale to a certain level, while greater scalability requires higher-end models. For example, NetApp E-Series includes the E600 and EF600 for enterprise-class storage. The FAS series includes models such as 1K, C190, C30, and C70, demonstrating how NetApp evolves based on customer demands and responds proactively to future requirements in storage technology. From my perspective, I believe any improvement could involve adding another model between the existing entry-level and high-end options in NetApp E-Series since there are presently only two models. This simplicity in offering may help customers, but an in-between model would provide options for those needing mid-range solutions, making NetApp competitive in that space. The FAS and AFF series certainly have more model options based on customer needs and costs, whereas NetApp E-Series needs to expand beyond two choices. Regarding error handling in NetApp E-Series, because it is a cost-effective but not an intelligent storage solution, the error handling is not sufficient. The system is reliable, but its management is basic as it runs on firmware. In contrast, the FAS series includes numerous tools and software for error handling, providing better troubleshooting support. Therefore, while NetApp E-Series offers reliability due to its cost-effectiveness, there is a trade-off in terms of error management capabilities.
IT-Techniker at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Reseller
Top 20
Sep 23, 2025
As an AZ3 technician with experience in that direction, when I call them, I do not call the first-level support as it is something I do not need. I call them because I am not able to resolve that mistake or when the behavior of the machine is not normal. If you need an auto support message from the customer machine, you can get them from the first level, but most of the time, they do not know what an auto support message is, and everything stops there. You have a few of them when you call, and when we are replacing something in NetApp E-Series. StorageGRID is different, but with NetApp E-Series, you need to grab information from the node that is actually down; in most cases, the node is not in loader. It is entirely gone. You can try to reseat it, maybe boot it up, but in most cases, when it is down, it stays down. You call support for that, and that is when you lose two or three hours.
The solution must provide more training courses. I have a team of nine people. Three or four of them are administrators. They need to learn the solution. It would be helpful if NetApp provided a free certificate course for administrators.
Though the performance is there, if NetApp wants to be competitive with the others, it must improve their business continuity ability. Right now, we see that, for NetApp AFF, we can do a network installation with SaaS, but we don't have that kind of functionality with the E-Series verification. E-Series also needs to have a little bit more automation.
NetApp should add more production lines to the E series so we can make flexible solutions more easily. Though it's cheaper than the FAS series, when we buy something, we need good choices to accommodate different customers' needs. Error handling is something the E series should have in the event of any component failure. For example, if a disk, controller, HCI card, or its I/O is faulty, the error handling in E Series is not as good as it should be. The firmware should be capable of intelligent error handling.
NetApp E-Series offers a flexible, high-performance storage solution ideal for handling intensive data requirements. Designed to optimize capacity and improve data availability, it supports diverse sector needs.NetApp E-Series is a purpose-built system engineered to deliver fast, consistent performance. It is best utilized in environments requiring high-performance workloads where speed and efficiency are crucial. Users appreciate its reliability and scalability, which contribute to effective...
Regarding scalability, I think there is no problem. While there is always room for improvement in any product, to my knowledge, NetApp is a visionary company that enhances product features consistently. They actively respond to new requirements and technology changes requested by customers, improving scalability, management ease, features, and introducing progressive software releases, patches, and upgrades. Scalability does depend on model selection, with entry-level systems being cheaper but able to scale to a certain level, while greater scalability requires higher-end models. For example, NetApp E-Series includes the E600 and EF600 for enterprise-class storage. The FAS series includes models such as 1K, C190, C30, and C70, demonstrating how NetApp evolves based on customer demands and responds proactively to future requirements in storage technology. From my perspective, I believe any improvement could involve adding another model between the existing entry-level and high-end options in NetApp E-Series since there are presently only two models. This simplicity in offering may help customers, but an in-between model would provide options for those needing mid-range solutions, making NetApp competitive in that space. The FAS and AFF series certainly have more model options based on customer needs and costs, whereas NetApp E-Series needs to expand beyond two choices. Regarding error handling in NetApp E-Series, because it is a cost-effective but not an intelligent storage solution, the error handling is not sufficient. The system is reliable, but its management is basic as it runs on firmware. In contrast, the FAS series includes numerous tools and software for error handling, providing better troubleshooting support. Therefore, while NetApp E-Series offers reliability due to its cost-effectiveness, there is a trade-off in terms of error management capabilities.
As an AZ3 technician with experience in that direction, when I call them, I do not call the first-level support as it is something I do not need. I call them because I am not able to resolve that mistake or when the behavior of the machine is not normal. If you need an auto support message from the customer machine, you can get them from the first level, but most of the time, they do not know what an auto support message is, and everything stops there. You have a few of them when you call, and when we are replacing something in NetApp E-Series. StorageGRID is different, but with NetApp E-Series, you need to grab information from the node that is actually down; in most cases, the node is not in loader. It is entirely gone. You can try to reseat it, maybe boot it up, but in most cases, when it is down, it stays down. You call support for that, and that is when you lose two or three hours.
The toolkits were much easier compared to EMC.
The solution must provide more training courses. I have a team of nine people. Three or four of them are administrators. They need to learn the solution. It would be helpful if NetApp provided a free certificate course for administrators.
Though the performance is there, if NetApp wants to be competitive with the others, it must improve their business continuity ability. Right now, we see that, for NetApp AFF, we can do a network installation with SaaS, but we don't have that kind of functionality with the E-Series verification. E-Series also needs to have a little bit more automation.
NetApp should add more production lines to the E series so we can make flexible solutions more easily. Though it's cheaper than the FAS series, when we buy something, we need good choices to accommodate different customers' needs. Error handling is something the E series should have in the event of any component failure. For example, if a disk, controller, HCI card, or its I/O is faulty, the error handling in E Series is not as good as it should be. The firmware should be capable of intelligent error handling.