Hitachi NAS Platform Reviews

I am working for a reseller and this is one of the solutions that I have experience in dealing with. This is a NAS gateway solution that provides access to storage that is externally attached.

The pricing of this solution is good, which is an advantage that positions this product well.

I do not like Hitachi NAS because it's an old-school NAS solution, compared to the other, newer-type solutions such as Isilon from Dell or Qumulo. It is an old-school gateway NAS solution, so for me, it is not good.

I have been familiar with Hitachi NAS for about two years.

I have experience with several NAS solutions including those by HP, Dell, NetApp, and Hitachi.

This solution is priced well and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

It is not possible to improve upon this solution. Rather, they should just create a new product to completely replace this one.

Overall, this is a good product for what it is, but it is old-school. I would completely renew the product. It works nicely, but I would not recommend it for the same reason that people don't buy old-fashioned clothes.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

I don't work directly with the product. I am selling it. 

Hitachi is reliable with high availability and solid performance. It performs well regardless of the workload.

Hitachi could be more flexible and have a simpler management interface. 

I have been selling Hitachi since 2015.

Hitachi has a strong engineering culture, so it's always dependable. 

Hitachi is more scalable than competing solutions. One of its strongest features is virtualization. The platform can add stable storage from third-party products.

The companies I work with tell me they've had good experiences with Hitachi support and that the support engineers are always available. 

Hitachi has a strong engineering orientation, so the products are easier to deploy than competing solutions. Hitachi has an engineering culture focused on best practices and compliance. Deployment shouldn't be an issue. 

• Performance
• Replication
• You can use any type of storage as a backend
• Mixed NFS/CIFS file services

• Higher performance
• File-server consolidation
• Ability to create a mixed NFS/CIFS (Samba style) file services solution

• Better QA
• Reporting
• Better quota management
• Ability to backup with all snapshots included.
• Ability to snapshot a file system in the DR site while replicating with JetMirror
• Better documentation
• Better community

I've used it for two to three years.

It had some ridiculous bugs during deployment.

We have had two stability issues:

• We had a bad software version that used to randomly crash both nodes in a cluster
• File system corruption after activating in DR site

No issues yet.

It's at a fair level but has bad documentation.

It's fair.

I previously used Netapp's solution, but this was for a different customer.

It’s relatively easy to setup and install.

We used a mix of a vendor team along with an in-house team. The vendor team was good.

We got the equipment via a large storage accusation for almost free so no ROI was needed.

No, not for this particular customer.

Some bugs cause issues but I love the ASIC architecture behind it. I actually uncovered some hidden ASICs in the hardware. Version 8 features didn’t include in-line de-duplication (it uses an ASIC) which was later uncovered in version 10 or so. It’s nice to find out about added functionality with version upgrades at no extra cost with as little to no performance degradation using this ASIC.