NetApp ONTAP Reviews

ONTAP is currently being used for data backups, migration of data, and volume management.

The most valuable feature is the ability restore and backup our virtualized servers on demand.

Its usability, scalability, and dependability are very good.

We are always looking for more security enhancements and ways to continue to provide security encryption, whether it's data in rest or security in transit. We would also like to have more enhanced encryption beyond the regular TLS and 256-bit. 

The stability is great.

The scalability is good. We were able to deploy multiple infrastructures underneath the cloud environment by utilizing ONTAP. It scales well with our environment.

We were previously using Dell EMC for our backup solution. After we created a virtualized environment and used the ONTAP appliance, we were able to provide a seamless process for backups and recoveries.

We chose this solution primarily because our customers were gearing towards NetApp.

The initial setup was straightforward. We started off with a small environment, which was used as a test environment initially. Therefore, we were able to deploy it into a much larger environment once we understood what we were doing.

We used an integrator for the deployment who was good. We used a provider through ClearChart, who partnered up with NetApp, and provided engineers who assisted with the integration of ONTAP. 

Ultimately, we chose NetApp because we were able to identify its strengths over other competitors.

Stay open to different technologies, as it's an emerging market. I do recommend the ONTAP product. I often offer colleagues a chance to come in and utilize our test environment to explore the different options around.

The product is good and sound. Our customers have been extremely satisfied with how we are using the product.

We use it for the security business. We use it mostly for capacity-oriented purposes, rather than performance-oriented.

It's a major product for us. We are dealing with security stuff so the encryption features in NetApp really help, as well as the deduplication. We are able to minimize the storage hardware. The compression and deduplication have helped reduce our overall cost of storage.

The valuable features include replication, Snapmirror. That's really useful for us. Also, FlexGroup is useful as it is capacity-oriented, so we can keep extending the space.

I'm waiting for end-to-end NVMe.

It's been running for years and years and we haven't seen any issues.

Scalability is good. The NAS can expand to 24 nodes for the FAS series, and for SAN it can expand to 12 nodes.

We have had to use tech support and the response has been good.

We switched from our old solution because of the features. We went with NetApp because of the redundancy, availability, scalability, and cost.

The initial setup was easy. It took just a few commands.

We used a reseller. Our experience with them was good.

We did a PoC with a few other products.

ONTAP has been in use for over 25 years, that's one of the major advantages when compared to start-ups and other companies. It's also global, NetApp has support all over and, in case of an emergency, their response is good. When there is an issue, many people jump onto the call to try to resolve it.

NVMe over Fabrics is margin-technology at the moment, but the future will be NVMe. All storage, end-to-end, will be NVMe protocol. The speed of NVMe is good. The current existing technology is SCSI-based, one command per Cube, but with NVMe you can run 65,536 commands in each Cube, meaning 65,536 Cubes. That is really fast. In terms of NVMe over Fabrics with existing Fibre Channel infrastructure, if the hardware supports it, it should be good. As the protocol improves, there should be end-to-end support for the NVMe protocol.

We don't use this product for machine-learning, or AI, real-time analytics or other groundbreaking types of applications.

The primary use case is as an application file server.

It is able to restore back several points during the day if there is a production issue.

• Flexible consumption
• Being able to scale as we need to
• Data production
• SnapMirror

I would like to see Synchronize Snap mode in the next release.

Stability is good. We haven't had a severe outage in years.

Scalability is very good, especially how it has matured over the past few years in cluster mode. We can now add nodes without disruptions.

Technical support has generally improved, especially the tickets for Cloud IQ where you are able to go through and it intelligently tells you how it has changed over time. That's pretty nice.

Performance: We outgrew the box. Or, the support was ending. It was one of those two scenarios.

The initial setup was straightforward. It came in a box ready to go.

We used a reseller for the deployment, Applied Computer Solutions out of LA, who was very good. We've been using them since 1997.

The data compression and deduplication have kept us from buying more disks these past three years.

Try it out, get your hands on it, and see what it does.

Every year, I am impressed with the product. It has gotten better over the years with cluster mode, but it is not 100 percent perfect. There are certain technical limitations with being able to use it for SAN, but it's improving.

We basically use NetApp Storage as mass storage within our offering. We also use it for backup storage, storage for emails, and sometimes for archiving. Mostly it is actually general-purpose file storage. 

The solution has very good Snapshot features. Everybody goes to NetApp for Snapshot. Their Snapshots are very good. We use it for local backups. We also have a DR set up. We use Snapshot or SnapMirror for the DR applications. We also use Snapshot for backup purposes as well. Snapshot is the one thing I would say is actually the most useful feature for us.

NetApp is very stable.

They have all the latest features. 

Their support is good. 

The performance of the hardware is good. 

We're actually looking at a software-defined version of NetApp. They already have a software-defined product called ONTAP Select. NetApp's ONTAP version for the cloud is called the Cloud Volumes ONTAP. We are looking for the Cloud Volumes ONTAP, an on-premises option. Right now, the only option we have is the cloud and that's only available with AWS and Google. We already had some discussions with NetApp about it. It usually takes two or three months and a lot of money on a software-defined solution. If we gain access to it, we can run it on a virtual machine and it will still give all the features without having to buy their hardware.

The pricing could be lower.

The setup can be a bit complex, depending on the environment.

We have been using the product for a long time. I would say we've used it in total for 10 or so years, however, in different offerings. The names have changed and the company also changed quite a bit.

I've been working with the solution for ten years, and I've rarely had any issues. I consider the product to be extremely stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's good.

The solution can scale very, very easily.

Technical support is good. I don't have any issues with them. Most of my interactions are very, very good except for maybe one or two cases over the course of ten or so years. Mostly I find it very useful. They are very responsive and knowledgeable. 

The setup up is a bit complex within our environment. We actually tweak it to our requirements. The integration for backup purposes, for example, we use NetBackup. However, then the solution that we have is a bit complex for backups, especially if we want to actually do a Snapshot version only. We actually take full backups every day. Our solution is actually a bit tweaked for our real requirement. I would say it is actually not very complex. That said, it is not very easy either. It is somewhere in between. There is some level of complexity in our solution.

To apply and maintain the product you need a team, definitely. To deploy it, it depends on how you set up your environment. In our environment, one person can deploy it because we have most of the tasks automated. For us, it is not very difficult to deploy. however, then you also need the dependency. For example, to build a network, you are required to connect the device to the network, and then to set up the backup. You need a team as it requires some integration with the network, with the backup, and whatnot. There are many, many things to do.

In our environment, we only need two people. That is due to the level of automation we have. To operate it, you also need a team. How big the team is depending on the service level. You may have to have people in shifts. In our team, we have many people. It's a global offering at this stage. So we have a presence everywhere. That requires a huge team. There are maybe 10 plus members supporting it around the clock.

The cost is quite high. They need to work on making it a bit more affordable. We buy the equipment as a one-time purchase and then also purchase five years of support. It's a CapEx model.

We are service providers. We are offering something called a virtual private cloud. Our offering mainly the virtual private cloud. It is a cloud offering by DXC.

The product is basically a multi-tenant cloud. The cloud is hosted on our premises. We have data centers across the globe. Around 24 data centers in different regions. It's a global offering. We automated it and we have it set up for provisioning or portal enabled. It is not as good as Amazon or AWS, however, it is still a lot of cloud.

You can request a portal, however, then you cannot scale to that scale that Amazon currently is. That said, there are some customization possibilities. It is slightly cheaper than the hyperscaler cloud and that is why most customers prefer it. They find it really useful and cheaper than a public cloud offering, and it still has the same performance level.

I would recommend the product. I don't see any reason why you would have to look for a different vendor. The one thing that they can improve is the cost. That's pretty high. That is the only concern. Otherwise, they are very, very good in all other areas. Their hardware, software, their support, etc., are all good.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. We've been very happy with the product overall.

We use Data ONTAP to provide CIFS and NFS shares, as well as direct attached data stores for VMware.

Four years ago, upgrading a NetApp controller was a command line process which was very arduous. Today, because NetApp listened to their customers and improved their GUI, we can perform a firmware upgrade within minutes.

The most valuable features would be:

• CIFS environment sharing.
• The availability of NetApp to tie into the UCS FlexPod environment.
• Integrated monitoring with OnCommand.

I would like to see some sort of a free version of OnCommand: A stripped down version of OnCommand Unified Manager offering a bit better usage for enterprise users. We have found that it's very hard to get it without buying it outright. I wish they had a better marketing with the product. It's probably my biggest gripe with them. You really need OnCommand to do a lot of cool stuff with NetApp, and they make it hard to get.

It's not an all inclusive model. You have the option to purchase modules to make the entire ecosystem coherent. I would like the option to pay one price and get everything all inclusive, like OnCommand.

If you don't have a TAM or SAM, it can be difficult to get P1 cases.

We serve out data from a multitude of different properties through FlexPod environments, as well as a centralized data serving location in the Las Vegas area. We have had minimal downtime over the past five to ten years that we have been using the product.

Scalability has been less of an issue. 

Unfortunately, NetApp does forklift upgrades. This is probably the biggest negative that I have with NetApp as a whole. We found to upgrade a FlexPod environment, if we wanted to upgrade the UCS on the Cisco side, due to the interoperability matrix, sometimes we'll have to upgrade controller units. Basically, if we upgrade one part of our infrastructure, we have to upgrade another part. 

This affects our scalability. Instead of being able to simply add a couple of shelves, that controller may only be able to hold four shelves. However, we already have four shelves, so now we have to buy a new controller unit. Whereas, some of other companies, you can just add another controller unit and an HA pair, then you are off to the races with more shelves.

The technical support is good. We had a TAM for a long time. Now, we have a SAM, and working through them we found that our cases get risen in priority level whenever we need it. We haven't had to fight for quite some time to get P1. It is easy to escalate.

We were previously using DAS-JBODs, but this was in 2007. We pretty much followed everybody else when the industry went to NetApp. We have been using NetApp ever since it was 7-Mode.

The initial setup was straightforward after we used EVOLTECH as a third-party. We actually took the process over after watching them do it a couple times. It was that easy.

Upgrades are great. One of the best things about NetApp is that their products are so easy to upgrade now. That did not use to be the case.

We used EVOLTECH for the deployment. We were happy with them. They did the job that we asked them to do.

We have seen ROI.

We were considering Pure Storage and Dell EMC. NetApp won out with a far superior price point.

ONTAP has a lot of stuff that most people don't utilize it for. For example, the entire Snap Management package is an underutilized piece of software in our industry. 

Get it and use a lot of the features, then have your mind blown. The moment you start using it is when the magic happens. If you don't use it, then you don't know how awesome it is.

We use it with the All Flash FAS solution.

There are a lot of the reasons that we chose this solution. We are going the direction of automation in the cloud. It has flexibility and supportability around NetApp solutions and products.

For the All Flash FAS, it has lessened our performance issues. Our support for that is a lot easier for our patients to access.

The most valuable feature is the NVMe AFF.

The config could be a little easier. It's not entirely difficult, but it could be a somewhat easier. I have seen other vendors make it easier. 

We have other flash arrays which seem solid, but we trust NetApp to deliver us the best product.

One of the big benefits was the scalability. We wanted to grow as is. 

We have a lot of problems with this right now, so this product seems to help.

We have always had great technical support from NetApp on all their solutions. That's why I trust them against all our other vendors.

The initial setup is straightforward. Most of the information can be found outside of the config guide, either way the information is available.

We used a reseller for deployment, PEAK Resources. We have been using them for 15 years. They're awesome.

We chose NetApp for a lot of support reasons.

Other vendors did not seem to not be on the forefront with their solutions. Their roadmaps for the future were unclear, where NetApp's roadmap is solid. It seemed very specific for our needs.

We also looked at IBM, Pure Storage, Nutanix, and Pivot3. None of them met the mark. They were all short for a lot of reasons, but mainly it was the roadmaps. They were unclear and general, so we decided to go with NetApp.

Don't buy IBM.

NetApp solutions get rid of a lot of time spent on the operational side. This solution makes things easier for us on the operations side. 

NetApp seems to be very cognizant of what we need and where the future of technology is going with health care, in general.

We use it for storing unstructured data.

It is able to store a lot of data, and we can manage it with fewer people.

• Snapshot
• Availability
• Performance

Generally, their products are good when they come out of the gate. However, what would be good is when we uncover new issues, if those could be addressed quickly. 

We would like to see SnapMirror encryption in the next release and have better access to feature development.

It is generally very stable.

Technical support has gone down in my perspective. When getting to the root cause of issues, they need to respond faster. Also, they need to respond quicker to bug fixes.

There have been some changes internally at NetApp. Currently, we are moving to a different level of support which will hopefully fix our issues with it.

We use NetApp products. If we switch products, it is because the product does not perform or is not keeping up with its competitors in terms of cost.

We did the deployment ourselves. Deployments are easy, but NetApp could make it easier.

Return on investment has been good.

There are specific workloads where some vendors provide better value, but in general, NetApp has done a far better on price than other vendors.

We have used Hitachi and Dell EMC, but we use NetApp the most.

It is a good, market-leading product.

We use it for on-premise storage.

For our organization, in terms of resiliency, it has gotten better over the years. It has also become more reliable.

• Availability
• Resiliency
• Recoverablity

I would like to see more evolution towards the cloud.

The stability is excellent.

The scalability is very good. It enables us to use different product lines within the same operating system.

Technical support is good to very good.

We actually haven't switched. We've been using it for about 15 years. We've been with it for a long time.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We do all our deployments in-house.

We're always looking at different vendors, and we want to see fit-for-purpose. We want to make sure that we're using the right technology for the right job.

It has a good, safe implementation.

I gave this product an eight, because there is always room for improvement and to make things better.