Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Buurst SoftNAS vs NetApp Private Storage comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Scalability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
8.0
NetApp Private Storage offers exceptional scalability and flexibility, supporting many users efficiently but may incur additional scaling costs.
 

Valuable Features

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
8.3
NetApp Private Storage excels in security, disaster recovery, cloud connectivity, speed, flexible configuration, and integration with SAN switches.
 

Room For Improvement

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
5.0
NetApp Private Storage needs integration improvements, simplified GUI, enhanced features, better support, and consistent cloud experience for users.
 

Stability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
8.4
NetApp Private Storage offers excellent stability and reliability, though caution is needed near storage capacity to prevent data loss.
 

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
6.6
NetApp Private Storage support is generally effective but can be challenged by inefficient initial assistance and limited local resources.
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
No sentiment score available
Enterprise buyers find NetApp Private Storage reliable but costly, with room for pricing optimization and regional cost variations.
 

Categories and Ranking

Buurst SoftNAS
Ranking in NAS
20th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NetApp Private Storage
Ranking in NAS
15th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the NAS category, the mindshare of Buurst SoftNAS is 0.3%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Private Storage is 1.4%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NAS
 

Featured Reviews

Use Buurst SoftNAS?
Share your opinion
Pramod-Talekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Well-suited for virtualized environments and highly stable solution
We are in a VMware Intra environment, so we are utilizing NetApp Storage for our virtualization infrastructure NetApp offers multiple features that we utilize for our projects. At the moment, we are extensively using SnapMirror Flex. There is room for improvement in the support. It has been a…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NAS solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Real Estate/Law Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about NetApp Private Storage?
NetApp is faster than other storage brands.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp Private Storage?
The product is costly. Also, we need to pay for features like SnapMirror, etc. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten.
What needs improvement with NetApp Private Storage?
NetApp is a great storage device, but sometimes support is not accessible. Also, the current version has removed most of the dashboard features. We have to use the CLI for some tasks. Additionally,...
 

Also Known As

SoftNAS Cloud Enterprise
NPS
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Netflix, Boeing, Nike, Coca Cola, Hearst, Ndemand, Carbon Media Group, Atypon, The Street, MagHub, CenturyLink, InfoSys
ASE IT, Concerto Cloud
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, IBM and others in NAS. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.