IBM FlashSystem Reviews

The cost was low when we purchased it.

It has not improved how we function.

ACLs should be more compatible with other NAS-based platforms. Some of the platform limitations need to be addressed.

I have used this product for two years.

We have had to bounce services several times over the past two years.

Technical support is horrible. IBM doesn't have much expertise with the product.

We were using EMC VNX.

The initial setup was fairly simple.

We migrated from EMC VNX.

We performed a new enterprise storage refresh and kicked out EMC.

We moved from EMC VMAX to Pure Storage All-Flash, and then got this product to replace EMC VNX.

DON'T use it unless you have a new and small NAS environment.

It has helped us to achieve a good response time for users.

The latency and speed of the array and also its ease of management were beneficial features.

The most valuable features were the performance of the array, i.e., very low latency and high IOPS. Plus, the management interface is very easy to use.

The several major crashes resulted in the entire weekends being lost in rebuilding the array and then for restoring the data. This was caused each time by a memory card failure and the array's inability to use a spare card. The array level RAID does not seem available.

It was great with TMS, however it has been terrible ever since IBM took over.

On one occasion our support renewal had not been processed, which we found out when we tried to get support during an array failure.

Previously, it was a great experience with RamSan-400.

The setup is very easy.

We implemented it in-house. It is very straightforward.

Since the takeover by IBM, the prices are much higher.

For resilience, you need to buy two of these devices per site as RAID only applies within in each memory card, i.e., the whole array is not resilient if a card fails. Failover would only be possible for a standby device.

We are providing services to the other department, so FlashSystem is running several applications across multiple servers. In the future, we plan to increase our usage capacity to around 60 terabytes. 

IBM's response is very good.

The GUI for monitoring performance metrics could provide better visibility. For example, it doesn't let me segregate the IOPS per volume.

We've been using FlashSystem for about six months to a year.

FlashSystem is very stable.

You can go for the full controller, so you can say FlashSystem is scalable.

We haven't had any problems with IBM support. However, they don't cover everything in a single contract. They have different types of contracts. For example, you need separate contracts for software services and hardware services. Dell EMC's pricing model for support is much better. There's only one all-inclusive contract.

Installing FlashSystem is very easy. It takes less than half an hour, and I can handle it all myself. Three people on our team manage it. 

FlashSystem comes with all the licenses when you purchase it.

I rate FlashSystem nine out of 10. I would recommend it to others.

My primary use case of this solution is an ERP application on finance.

The product has no queuing and high ops, speed, and performance.

The price is very costly, which could be improved. In the next release, I would like to see some integration with VMware so that storage can be managed directly from a single pane.

I have been using IBM Flashsystem for between six months to a year. 

This solution is stable and high-performing, causing no hassles or problems.

This product has good scalability, allowing us to scale up as much as we need.

The initial setup was straightforward with a smooth installation.

The product is available on a perpetual license based on the capacity used and the features required.

If you have the funds and you require speed, this product is the answer. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

I am an IBM reseller and I sell this solution to our clients. I have a lot of knowledge of this solution.

Our clients use this solution for database performance.

The most valuable feature is reliability.

Cloud file sharing is an area that needs improvement.

I have been selling this solution since it was released.

We sell the whole model, the entire line.

IBM FlashSytem is very stable.

This solution is very scalable. We have no issues with the scalability of the IBM FlashSystem.

Technical support is complicated.

The technical support can be improved. it should be more automated.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It is well documented.

You purchase it as a bundle and the price is comparable.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

We are solution providers. We deploy solutions around VMware. Typically we deploy data protection, and disaster recovery of workloads in the cloud, and on-premises.

If I need to know about a platform or the base platform on which I'm working, I try to read up on their model. We are also storage integrators and solution providers.

The primary use case is for storage, enterprise workloads, and databases.

The V5000, and the V7000, both are equally good.

Over the years, it has become increasingly user-friendly.

There is always room for improvement, but IBM is less interested in on-premise storage or on-premises solutions going forward. 

They're highly focused on the cloud. I don't see IBM being a very major player, the way that they used to be because they are moving away from this and are trying to move all their customers to the cloud.

Nothing really comes to mind for needing improvement. Some years ago, there would have been an answer to what could be better about this product, but nowadays, virtually all of the companies are meeting all of the features.

More and more, we would like to see how it's easier for the solutions to be bought by the customer more on a pay-per-use basis. That is certainly an improvement.

The customer's expectations are what they get on the cloud, they're expecting even in the on-premises deployments, going forward. 

They want to pay-per-use and not own and get stuck with what they're buying. 

They want flexibility.

IBM does that in a few products, but then more and more you see the business model changing towards that. We'd like to see that in all IBM products.

We have been a services and deployment company for more than 30 years.

We've worked across the board with the various solutions across various vendors.

It's very, very stable, and we have never had issues.

It's extremely scalable. There are no limitations, because of the profile of the customers they work with. 

Most of their boxes are highly scalable to meet that requirement and the scaling is pretty straightforward. 

There's no rip and replace. It's a very scalable tool.

Previously, I had experience with Hitachi SAN.

The suitability of either solution depends on the use case. If you talk about modular storage virtually from any company, they will have solutions which more or less do the same thing. 

There will be a competing model at each bracket of requirements. When you talk about storage hardware, you can't really say which is better, or which is worse. 

You can talk about reliability and support, or you can talk about how good it is in a particular geography. But, this is not like Mercedes Benz is a good car and the Fiat is not, it doesn't work like that.

We find the initial setup to be fairly straightforward because we understand the technology.

We do this as service delivery, so we understand that we have trained ourselves in it.

It can take half a day to get the initial things up and running.

In today's world, nothing is reasonable because the customer's budgets are thinking on a daily basis. 

They've been much more aggressive in the last five or six years than they were before that.

They are more realistic.

My basic advice is to work with partners who really understand what they're talking about. Anybody who sells one of these boxes doesn't necessarily have the capability to supply or support them. Be very clear that you're dealing with organizations that have the experience to actually deploy and support you. 

That would be what is critical. Because it's not something that we just rack it up and switch it on and it works. There are many things involved. 

Also, initially, before purchasing, the sizing is very critical. There has to be enough time spent on performance metrics, analyzing the workload requirements, and things like that.

Before the purchase and after the purchase and the deployment, there needs to be quite a bit of involvement. This is why I would advise the customer to work with partners of IBM or Hitachi. 

Whoever you're talking about, and who has experience. Not somebody who just comes and says, "I'll do anything, and for the price, I'll give you the best deal." 

The best deal is not always the best deal. 

Once you buy it and it doesn't work for you, ultimately you are paying more.

I would rate IBM XIV and eight out of ten.

For me, it's the redundancy that the machine provides as that's the most value that I get from this product.

One of the benefits is that when it's doing data extents, it moves them faster than what I was being able to move previously, i.e., by using a flash system.

There is a need for more help with the commands because, from version to version, they change; so what I used to use back in the different version, I can't use now. Thus, it would be helpful if they improve that aspect.

For me, it's stable.

The product is scalable.

I don't use the technical support as much because it's quite stable and scalable.

We weren't using any other solution. Our storage architect is the one who decided for us to have it.

The setup was straightforward, it is pretty easy and I can do it with my eyes closed, if I wanted to.

Reliability is the most important aspect while selecting a vendor.

I would recommend to use it.

The ease-of-use and ease-of-setup are the most valuable features. You can get one up and running in a couple hours. I do it quite frequently for customers. The simplicity of it is the big benefit for me, compared to some others that I've used.

A lot of features are beneficial. It's a robust solution from my standpoint. We've got it running on several different configurations. You've got tiering and a lot of nice features to have in today's world. You can put flash in them. It is a good system to use.

As far as for what we use it for, they have got it spot on for our market. I'm sure others might have some additions, but our market is more in the SNB space. It is everything we've ever needed.

With the latest releases of software, it's pretty robust. They've pretty well nailed it. I don't see any further weaknesses with the interfaces or anything.

I have not had any real issues. I think it is very stable. We have not had any outages or any unexpected issues. I would say it’s very stable.

It is definitely very easy to scale. It's like everybody says, "plug and play". It just works.

Technical support is very good.

We had a few customer requests for it. I attended conferences and they showed me that they have really put a lot of time and effort into this. It's a good solution. It was worth our time to push it for our customers.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We did not look at other vendors. We are a business partner for IBM on the storage side. Primarily, they're the only game we mess around with.

Definitely give it your time. Give it your time, get some IBM folks to show you some benefits and maybe do a demo. It's a great solution.