Discover the top alternatives and competitors to NetApp StorageGRID based on the interviews we conducted with its users.
The top alternative solutions include Red Hat Ceph Storage, MinIO, and Dell PowerScale (Isilon).
The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.
NetApp Alternatives Report
Learn what solutions real users are comparing with NetApp, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Red Hat Ceph Storage offers exceptional scalability and flexibility for diverse environments. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID excels in data management and integration options. Tech buyers may choose Ceph for scalability or opt for StorageGRID for its superior data management and integration features.
StorageGRID provides advanced data management with deduplication and enterprise-level features. In comparison, MinIO is easier to deploy, open-source, and suits hybrid cloud environments. StorageGRID's capabilities cater to enterprises, while MinIO's flexibility appeals to cloud-native applications and smaller-scale use cases.
NetApp StorageGRID features a higher setup cost suited for enterprises, while MinIO offers a more cost-effective setup appealing to smaller businesses. The cost difference reflects NetApp's focus on comprehensive support and MinIO's simplicity.
NetApp StorageGRID features a higher setup cost suited for enterprises, while MinIO offers a more cost-effective setup appealing to smaller businesses. The cost difference reflects NetApp's focus on comprehensive support and MinIO's simplicity.
Dell PowerScale offers extensive scalability and data protection, making it ideal for large-scale storage needs due to its seamless integration and performance. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID attracts cost-conscious businesses with efficient tiered storage and lifecycle management, suitable for flexible cloud environments.
Dell ECS excels with accessible pricing and customer support, offering seamless integration and efficient data tiering for cost optimization. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID provides robust policy-driven management and comprehensive cloud integration, appealing to enterprises needing granular control and scalability with thorough deployment documentation.
Dell ECS setup cost is moderate, requiring moderate initial investment, while NetApp StorageGRID demands a lower initial setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option initially.
Dell ECS setup cost is moderate, requiring moderate initial investment, while NetApp StorageGRID demands a lower initial setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option initially.
Pure Storage FlashBlade excels in seamless deployment and ease of use with advanced data reduction features. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID offers comprehensive data management and tiering, advantageous for large-scale, cloud-enabled storage environments. FlashBlade appeals for high performance, while StorageGRID favors complex data configurations.
NetApp StorageGRID offers scalability and cost-effectiveness, appealing to businesses seeking efficient data management and cloud integration. In comparison, VAST Data attracts those needing superior performance and advanced features, ideal for data-intensive environments where high performance and tailored customer service are essential.
NetApp StorageGRID involves higher setup costs compared to VAST Data, which offers a more economical initial investment, highlighting a significant difference in setup pricing between the two solutions.
NetApp StorageGRID involves higher setup costs compared to VAST Data, which offers a more economical initial investment, highlighting a significant difference in setup pricing between the two solutions.
Qumulo appeals to those seeking simplicity and efficient file management. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID provides advanced data protection and object storage. Tech buyers might opt for Qumulo for ease and cost-efficiency, while choosing StorageGRID for robust security and scalability.
NetApp StorageGRID offers strong data management features, making it beneficial for backup and management. In comparison, Nutanix Unified Storage provides comprehensive capabilities and integrated management solutions, offering greater value with high availability, scalability, and seamless integration with platforms like AWS and Azure.
NetApp StorageGRID typically involves higher initial setup costs, whereas Nutanix Unified Storage offers a more budget-friendly setup. This cost difference is crucial for organizations prioritizing initial investment expenses in their storage solution decisions.
NetApp StorageGRID typically involves higher initial setup costs, whereas Nutanix Unified Storage offers a more budget-friendly setup. This cost difference is crucial for organizations prioritizing initial investment expenses in their storage solution decisions.
Scality RING offers robust scalability and multi-cloud integration, appealing to adaptable storage needs. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID distinguishes itself with advanced data management, ideal for complex requirements, providing long-term value despite higher initial costs and appealing to organizations needing efficient data management.
Scality RING presents a lower initial setup cost compared to NetApp StorageGRID, highlighting a cost-effective advantage. In contrast, NetApp StorageGRID involves higher setup expenses, positioning it as a potentially premium option.
Scality RING presents a lower initial setup cost compared to NetApp StorageGRID, highlighting a cost-effective advantage. In contrast, NetApp StorageGRID involves higher setup expenses, positioning it as a potentially premium option.
Cloudian HyperStore attracts with its S3 compatibility and cost efficiency. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID offers advanced features and robust data governance, making it appealing for enterprises needing complex architecture and strong data management capabilities, despite its higher initial setup cost.
Cloudian HyperStore involves lower initial setup costs, providing an affordable entry into cloud storage, whereas NetApp StorageGRID requires a higher upfront investment, reflecting its extensive features and advanced capabilities.
Cloudian HyperStore involves lower initial setup costs, providing an affordable entry into cloud storage, whereas NetApp StorageGRID requires a higher upfront investment, reflecting its extensive features and advanced capabilities.
IBM Cloud Object Storage excels in competitive pricing and customer support, providing scalable and flexible data management. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID offers advanced lifecycle management and data policy enforcement, appealing to users valuing integration and comprehensive features over cost considerations.
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers lower setup costs compared to NetApp StorageGRID, which has a more comprehensive initial investment. This difference affects budget allocations for new storage implementations.
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers lower setup costs compared to NetApp StorageGRID, which has a more comprehensive initial investment. This difference affects budget allocations for new storage implementations.
Hitachi Content Platform excels in pricing and ease of deployment with strong data management features. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID offers extensive hybrid cloud integration and advanced data distribution, appealing to businesses seeking robust cloud solutions despite higher initial costs.
NetApp StorageGRID attracts cost-conscious buyers with its flexible pricing and thorough support, ideal for easy deployment and integration. In comparison, Quantum ActiveScale's advanced features and scalability appeal to buyers prioritizing innovation, with dedicated support ensuring seamless integration into complex environments.
Superna provides robust data protection use cases offering efficient backup and disaster recovery. Users appreciate its comprehensive cloud management and automation features. However, there is room for improving its integration with other systems and refining certain technical support aspects for enhanced user experience.
