Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) Reviews

We are a cloud service provider, so we offer the product as a service for our customers. We use it in-house as well. 

We offer various services like containers as a service, storage as a service, and so on.

In most cases, we used to manage our organization's applications and data manually. We are in the process of automating it and moving towards the cloud and self-service.

The license portability is good enough. The flexibility is a key feature. That's why we value it the most.

The most valuable feature of NC2 is scalability.

The most significant reason my customers like it is that they know what they will pay for the service. It's a regular payment instead of per consumption.

We are one of the most important partners for Nutanix in Spain. So we have a lot of benefits coming from this.

It simplifies our IT operations. Scalability and flexibility are very important features for us. They make our lives easier, but we are working to make them even better.

What we need now is multi-tenant features to make the clusters self-deploy and self-use on the platform instead of us having to do it manually.

I have been using it for around five to six quarters.

The customer service and support are fine. The speed of the answers could be improved, but from a technical perspective, it is good enough. 

Positive

We used VMware. In terms of cost, Nutanix is a better solution because of the platform. Our agreements with Nutanix are better than VMware, even with the Broadcom acquisition.

I would rate my experience with the deployment a seven out of ten, with ten being easy. It could be easier. 

It has helped reduce the total cost of ownership by more or less 20% or 25%.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case for Nutanix Clusters involves operating virtual platforms. We use Nutanix as our storage infrastructure and VMware ESXi for compute infrastructure. This setup is predominantly utilized within the government sector.

The solution has not significantly improved our organization. We found it disappointing due to numerous issues, such as lack of scalability, resource consumption, and unreliable support. We are in the process of transferring our nodes and clusters to more dependable solutions.

The most valuable feature of Nutanix Clusters is its storage infrastructure.

The product could be improved in scalability and support services. 

I have been using Nutanix Clusters for three years.

I rate the product stability a five out of ten. 

The solution consumes more resources than anticipated, leading to difficulties in adding new nodes and requiring faster Ethernet connectivity.

Our experience with Nutanix customer service and support has been very disappointing. Support cases took an excessive time to resolve. For instance, a case involving RDMA took five weeks to resolve.

Negative

We previously used different solutions. We switched to Nutanix Clusters to streamline our storage and compute infrastructure.

The initial setup process was complex. The deployment process, especially when implementing advanced features like RDMA, often failed and required repeated attempts with different settings.

We implemented the solution through a combination of in-house and vendor teams.

The licensing model of Nutanix is complex. Unlike VMware, where you purchase socket licenses, Nutanix requires licenses for every core, gigabyte of storage, replication, and other features. Missing any of them can result in the cluster being non-operational.

We evaluated other options, including VMware and IBM. We are considering migrating more clusters to VMware and evaluating IBM and SolarWinds for future implementations.

I advise others to consider other solutions if they need a reliable and scalable infrastructure. 

I rate Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) a three out of ten. 

We use it for server virtualization and migration from two-tier legacy architecture to hyperconverged architecture.

We are using it in our company and for our customers.

About 70% of our yearly benefits are from Nutanix. The benefits are in terms of time, money, and resources. For example, for a VMware project, if I have to put three engineers, then for a Nutanix project, I can put one engineer, and it is done very quickly.

Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) simplify our IT operations.

We use it for disaster recovery protection for our enterprise applications in AWS S3. For example, for the production-size customers, we have clusters with four or five nodes, and we can make enough architecture for the disaster recovery side with two nodes. It is only for critical virtual machines between the two sides, so we can make cost optimization by using fewer nodes in the disaster recovery and less usage of resources.

Distributed storage and software-defined storage are valuable. There is ease of use. It is very important for our customers to have one centralized management console. Scalability is also very important for our customers.

The interface organization can be better. If we can, for example, organize virtual machines by groups, folders, and sub-folders, it will be easier to administer and monitor. Their support is excellent, and it is easy to use, but it can be easier.

We have been using Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) since 2018. It has been seven years. 

Its stability is very good. I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

It is very easy to scale. We can scale out and scale up. We prefer to scale up.

Their technical support is very good. The time to respond is very good. In 99% of cases, they are able to solve the problem within one hour of raising the incident.

Positive

I have some customers who prefer the legacy architecture. For those customers, we propose VMware, but by default, my advice for my customers is to go with hyperconverged. Hyperconverged for me is Nutanix along with AHV.

I prefer Nutanix over others because of its ease of use and because it is the future. The solution is very stable, and the support quality is very good. That is why I prefer to advise hyperconverged with Nutanix.

NC2 has helped to reduce the total cost of ownership (TCO) for me and my customers. If we do a calculation for two to five years, it can optimize the cost by 20% to 30% including hardware, software, and services.

The licensing portability can be very interesting. At the moment, I am working with Nutanix Appliances with the AHV as a hypervisor. I did not have a chance to ask for portability between platforms, but it will be good if you can have portability between multiple types of platforms.

At the moment, all of my customers have NC2 on-prem. I do not have customers who are using multi-cloud and public cloud. I just had a discussion with one of my customers who is interested in multi-cloud. That will be our first experience with Nutanix for a multi-cloud deployment.

I would rate Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) a nine out of ten.

We are a solution provider and Nutanix Clusters is one of the products that we sell to our customers. We deal primarily with architectural products that include physical servers, networking, and storage. It is mostly on the hardware side.

Nutanix Clusters is for customers that want to go to the cloud, but they have applications that can't be moved. By implementing Clusters, we can move most of the applications back and forth between the cloud an on-premises.

The most valuable feature is having the full features of my Nutanix on-premises applications in the cloud. It gives more flexibility with the ability to create storage pools and share it between my physical servers and my cloud servers. Since I'm running it all on Nutanix, I don't have any data excise fees.

The biggest weakness with Clusters at this point is that the adoption rate is low because customers don't know enough about it. We are just starting to get engaged with this product.

It has to be priced aggressively because it needs to make sense for customers to migrate to it.

Nutanix Clusters was just announced last week, so I don't have much experience yet.

Although it is too early to tell for sure, if it is anything like Nutanix ALS on the hardware then it is very, very stable.

It's extremely scalable.

Nutanix tech support is one of the best in the industry.

The setup is not any more complex than a typical cloud implementation. You really need to pay attention to where you put your compute resources, how you handle high availability, and things like that.

The licensing costs depend on what you need and how it is sized. I am working on one configuration that is priced at $50,000 USD, whereas another one that I'm working on is estimated to cost $250,000 USD. It really depends on the customer's environment.

My advice for anybody who is considering Nutanix Clusters is to get a professional to help you with it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The solution provides our entire infrastructure for my 40 plus locations and 500 users.

The reliability is the solution's most valuable aspect.

I have found the stability to be very good.

The solution can scale well. 

Technical support is great.

Some of the interfaces aren't as intuitive as they should be.

The initial setup can be slightly complex. 

I've dealt with the solution for almost four years. It's been a while. 

The solution is reliable and very stable. there are no bugs or glitches. it just works. There are no crashes or freezing. 

We have over 500 users across 40 locations. Everyone from office workers to factory personnel has access. 

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand, it can do so. 

I deal with tech support quite often and they are fantastic. I am very satisfied with the level of attention I get when I need their help. 

The initial setup can be a little bit complex. 

I handle the maintenance and deployments of updates myself. You don't need a lot of people to maintain it. It's easy, however, if you run into any trouble, there's always technical support who can assist.

I can't speak to the licensing costs. I have no visibility on that at all. 

I'm a customer and an end-user. I use Nutanix on a daily basis.

In terms of the deployment version I am on, it's generally as close to up to date as I can make it.

I'd advise potential new users to do their homework and don't look back.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. Overall, I've had a great experience. 

The customer is a company in Thailand. They use Nutanix Cloud Clusters for file sharing and integrate with personal file share and knowledge management. Our customer attaches a file service with a login and connects with WiFi for cloud content, such as second documents or email access files.

Customer uses Firecaster for file sharing, integrating with personal file shares, and knowledge management. Additionally, it is integrated with the personal files and knowledge management processes.

The server with all the network connectivity is very important. The configuration of Nutanix tenant and solid service are important for the customer service configuration. It's easy to use, the UI is easy to configure, and it supports snapshots and backup integration.

It's more than expensive. Firecaster cannot limit IOP or throughput reading and writing. Quality control needs to regulate the price-quality ratio.

I've been working with Nutanix Cloud Clusters for about one to two years.

The system is high priority and easy to secure, and the configurations are easy to maintain. However, it's not easy to find professionals for technical support.

It is highly scalable, scoring ten out of ten.

Technical support is rated five out of ten. The Nutanix knowledge could be improved, and it's challenging to find professionals for support.

Neutral

I implemented Firecaster and did not face issues with previous solutions.

The initial setup is easy, scoring eight out of ten. However, some functions require high technical skill.

It is more than five on a scale of price, considering it quite expensive. It's challenging to regulate the price-quality ratio.

SAP and Proxmox were mentioned.

It's a good technology, better than the Chinese technology. However, Nutanix needs to improve customer experience and API functions for new opportunities with the Firecaster.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

We run data centers in six locations worldwide and provide our customers with testing platforms.

With Nutanix Cloud Clusters, we could provide redundancy on all levels without investing in dedicated shared storage for six locations, which was a big saving from the company's standpoint. We aim to use Kubernetes on-premises. That's our destination, and that's where we're headed.

Nutanix’s license portability is flexible. A lot of features are available on upper license levels.

NC2 has helped reduce our total cost of ownership (TCO).

Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) has simplified our IT operations by providing a unified view of all six data centers and applying some compliance policies across them. The solution has also improved our capacity planning.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the redundancy on all levels.

The most significant improvement would be to streamline the starting point so that we could kick off the deployment with one node and then scan out that deployment without a need to restructure or reformat anything. Right now, that's not possible. However, this would facilitate opening new data centers with a small upfront investment.

We have just started using Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) and switched from VMware to the Nutanix HCI infrastructure.

Nutanix Cloud Clusters is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable when you start at a certain point. If you start low, I wouldn't consider that as scalable. If I deploy the tool for a single data center with one node, and then if I need to deploy more, I cannot scale without reformatting the console. That is the downside. Again, scalability is not an issue if you start from the beginning with the redundant cluster.

I previously used VMWare. We switched to Nutanix Cloud Clusters because of the VMware positioning by Broadcom and the notification of the license tiers within VMware. We were previously looking at the HCI infrastructure because of the redundancy constraints. Achieving redundancy in VMware at the same level would require a huge investment.

The solution's initial setup is pretty simple. We were able to deploy the tool within two to three days within the data center, which is amazing.

We implemented the solution through an integrator. We have some procedures for deploying the solution. We planned the project in a way that the deployment and the migration would require customer participation as well because we'll be creating customer production workloads. However, it's not going as fast as we want it to go.

The biggest return on investment with Nutanix Cloud Clusters is the redundancy.

The solution's licensing can be very pricey.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for versioning. The clusters are on my private cloud. 

The fact that snapshot, replication, and management are tied together all is important due to the fact that if your snapshots are too big, you can have problems going ahead and replicating to the other clusters. You often need bandwidth managing to make sure that you don't flood the bandwidth of your connection between two or three places.

The most valuable features are the replication, the snapshots. They all go hand in hand with each other. The snapshot technology with replication and bandwidth management is good. 

The initial setup is simple. 

The solution is stable. 

The scalability is good.

The snapshots have room for improvement.

The pricing can be better.

They don't own the networking side of it.

Nutanix is harder to restore. The problem with Nutanix is when you want to restore data and you only want to restore selected data, much more tedious. With Scale, it's a simple GUI and takes seconds.

We've had Nutanix now for four years.

The solution is extremely stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale well if you need it to. If you have a large number of machines, Nutanix is the way to go. Nutanix will let you just keep on adding hundreds of nodes to a cluster. However, reading-wise, Nutanix is slower than, for example, Scale. 

I have a staff of two. I have three others on my staff right now that currently know the system.

Nutanix support is good. However, Scale is better. They do respond and they do things, but Scale is faster.

I have both Nutanix and Scale, which are two competitors. Scale does some things better than Nutanix. Nutanix does some things better than Scale.

The implementation is straightforward. It's not complex at all. It's all very simple. 

The deployment took us not even a day. It's very fast.

Maintenance is easy and doesn't take much time. It's pretty self-repairing.

The pricing is a bit high. It could be less expensive. It gets very expensive to use it. It's based on the CPU and everyone else basically has pricing based on the CPU and between CPU, RAM, and hard drive space. It's not amazing.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

Users are going to have to know the CLIs and they're going to have to learn the back doors to CLI for stuff and make sure that they really have someone who is doing the networking properly and double-check all your network configurations with Nutanix. They don't do any of that. Whereas Scale sells you the network switches already configured.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.