We compared NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, the NetApp FAS Series is praised for its advanced data management and storage capabilities, seamless integration, exceptional customer service, positive ROI, but may need enhancements in performance and user interface. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is lauded for its scalability, efficient storage management, exceptional customer service, positive ROI, but could benefit from improvements in interface, performance speed, scalability, compatibility, and technical support.
Features: NetApp FAS Series stands out for its efficient data management and storage, seamless integration with third-party software, advanced data protection and backup capabilities, as well as its high performance and reliability. In contrast, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is praised for its exceptional data scalability, efficient storage management, and reliable performance.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for NetApp FAS Series is considered reasonable and affordable according to user feedback. Users appreciate the transparency and ease of understanding in terms of pricing, setup, and licensing. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) also offers a straightforward setup cost without any hidden charges or complexities. The pricing of Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is seen as competitive in the market, and the licensing process is described as seamless and efficient., The NetApp FAS Series product has been highly praised for its cost-effectiveness, efficiency, performance, reliability, and seamless integration capabilities. Users have experienced increased productivity and reduced downtime. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) has been commended for its performance, scalability, efficiency, and ability to handle large data workloads. Users have also reported cost savings and improved productivity. Overall, both products have delivered significant value and proved to be worthwhile investments.
Room for Improvement: The differences between NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) products lie in various areas. NetApp FAS Series would benefit from improvements in performance, networking capabilities, and user interface. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) requires enhancements in its interface, performance speed, scalability, compatibility with other systems, and technical support.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews comparing NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) suggest that users reported varying timeframes for establishing the tech solutions. Some users mentioned spending three months on deployment for NetApp FAS Series, while others reported a week for setup for Dell PowerScale. It is important to consider these differences when evaluating the overall duration of implementation., The customer service for NetApp FAS Series is highly praised for its reliability, responsiveness, and efficiency. Users appreciate the prompt resolution of queries and professionalism exhibited by the support staff. On the other hand, Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is commended for its exceptional customer service, particularly in terms of promptness, effectiveness, and willingness to address issues. Users are impressed with the level of expertise and professionalism demonstrated by Dell's support team.
The summary above is based on 44 interviews we conducted recently with NetApp FAS Series and Dell PowerScale (Isilon) users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It has allowed us to have more consistent quality controls. It has also allowed us to expand the number of servers in clients processing and accessing data, allowing us to get a lot bigger projects out the door."
"The most valuable feature we started using, beyond the initial scope for the solution, is the multi-protocol system that allows you to access the same set of files using different network protocols like NFS or SMB. PowerScale’s Unified Permission Model ensures that data security and access permissions are honoured regardless of whether the client is a Windows desktop or a Linux server"
"Our main goal is to do disaster recovery with whatever solution we use and Isilon makes it pretty simple to replicate those workloads over to our secondary data center."
"Dell PowerScale includes a wealth of features that are important from a security and recovery perspective."
"Dell PowerScale's performance is good."
"The recent introduction of inline deduplication and compression has drastically improved our efficiency ratios to make it an economical product. This solution has also had a positive impact on our employees' productivity because it reduces the amount of admin that our staff needs to handle."
"The most valuable features of the solution are flexibility and ease of implementation."
"Ability to scale the number of nodes without having to build additional clusters."
"The most valuable feature of the NetApp FAS Series is the snapshot and the FlexClone for Oracle and Microsoft SQL environments. Additionally, the integration can be done with most all on-premise and cloud providers."
"For us, the greatest aspect of the solution is the fact that it just runs. It is amazingly resilient. That's very important to us, because we are basically, with some exceptions, have a 24/7 operation."
"Can use both SAN and NAS at the same time."
"The most valuable feature is SnapMirror."
"The initial setup was so straightforward. It was well-documented."
"The storage efficiency provided a maximum savings in our storage utilization."
"The replication feature is noteworthy because it's faster than most and it uses little bandwidth. Then there's the friendly interface that the equipment offers. With this interface, it is very easy to manage."
"Flexible and reliable storage solution with multiple features such as cloning, replication, and deduplication. Data migration can be done without any performance implications on the production systems."
"If they integrated some functions, as they have on Data Domain with a cyber recovery vault, it would be ideal."
"The management and monitoring tools comprise a disparate suite of products and the roadmap is very unclear. We've got four different products that look after the Isilon, management-wise, and it's a bit of a mess."
"It would be good to have synchronized mirroring between two clusters without using a third-party program."
"That said, for the other security features, it would be helpful if Tenable - and I know it's outside the scope of this question itself - had Isilon-specific plugins."
"The replication could lend itself to some improvement around encryption in transit and managing the racing of large volumes of data. The process of file over and file back can be tedious. Hopefully, you never end up going into a DR. If you do go into a DR, you know the data is there on the remote site. However, in terms of the process of setting up the replicates and filing them back, that is just very tedious and could definitely do with some improvement."
"The solution can be a bit complex for those not well versed in the technology."
"Dell PowerScale's deployment is not easy."
"Because of the magic that it does 'under the hood,' it is very difficult to find out within the system where all your storage is going. That's a little bit of a ding that we have on it. It does so much magic in order to protect itself from drive failures or multiple drive failures, that it automatically handles the provisioning and storage of your data. But by doing that, finding out why a file of a certain size, or a directory of a certain size, is using more storage than is being reported in InsightIQ, is very difficult to discern."
"No other area for improvement comes to mind other than its price. Making the price more attractive will help this solution have a bigger market share."
"We are not able to connect to the support of NetApp from Sudan. We have to go through many agents for support, which makes it difficult."
"There are some technical limitations, but it would be great to have in-line deduplication and in-line compression for the FAS series as well."
"The AutoSupport could be improved to be more proactive in certain cases."
"When getting new hardware, always tell the account manager that you are also considering other brands. They will be forced to adjust the price lower."
"We have some experience with older equipment end-of-life. For example, when warranty support stops or updates stop – it can be frustrating. Not all clients can buy a new filer every year or two, and NetApp ending support a bit quickly can be a concern."
"I’ve found that I use command line more often than I thought needed. Some things should be done in the GUI, and command-line switches can be overwhelming and take up a lot of time."
"Cost is always a factor. Some people choose EMC or Dell because they perceive NetApp as being more expensive."
Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is ranked 1st in NAS with 46 reviews while NetApp FAS Series is ranked 2nd in NAS with 98 reviews. Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is rated 9.0, while NetApp FAS Series is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Dell PowerScale (Isilon) writes "We can easily deploy, manage, and maintain systems without needing a huge amount of expertise to facilitate them". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp FAS Series writes "Offers good performance and ". Dell PowerScale (Isilon) is most compared with Dell ECS, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Qumulo, HPE StoreEasy and Red Hat Ceph Storage, whereas NetApp FAS Series is most compared with NetApp AFF, HPE StorageWorks MSA, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), IBM FlashSystem and HPE StoreEasy. See our Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs. NetApp FAS Series report.
See our list of best NAS vendors.
We monitor all NAS reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Isilon is Scale-out storage, while NetApp is Active-Standby storage.
Regarding the performance issue based on the field engineer’s experience, Isilon is better than NetApp in case of a huge amount of io, while NetApp is better than Isilon in case of a medium amount of IO.
I think you need rewiew more than only performance or capacity, I have installed both machines, Netapp FASS have many options Hibrid or only objects, in Netapp Objects is StorageGrid where can obtain 720 TB in SG5760 but you can select SG6060 or SG5712 and Isilon is similar you have many options where could be ALL FLASH or SATA but Isilon is only NAS, and Isilon have many reference too, 8 reference F810 have 924 TB and up 250.000 I/Ops.
Actually I recommend one arquitecture where no focus only in one purpose, Scale up or Scale out all vendors have different alternatives and deppend the machine offer more I/O or Capacity, Midrange and High end, I don´t like Isilon because is only for NAS I dont like Hibrid or Unified Machines as FAS or VNX, I need to know which is the prupose for have a NAS because actually I can have a Storage for all protocols no only to CIFS and NFS and with prices cheaper than NAS, in conclusion I don´t like one Storage for NAS other for SAN other for Virtualization... Is better only one Storage where I can do it all, It reduce TCO.