We performed a comparison between Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward."
"The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"Overall stability is very good. It is a very stable solution."
"Offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates."
"Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform 5000 Series exhibits good performance and has good IOPS: 300 IOPS. The technical support for this product is also good."
"The performance is very good."
"The active-active option seemed to be working well and overall, it was a solid product."
"The Hitachi VSP has significantly improved data storage scalability by addressing various issues. Through their research and development efforts, they've incorporated customer feedback regarding deployment speed and performance requirements."
"There are no significant challenges in terms of scalability, and it can accommodate larger storage capacities compared to other storage solutions."
"We have many different types of replication, such as remote and drop local replication. All these features and licenses are already available. These are basic features available in the current model. Additionally, the performance has been good in our experience."
"The customer service and support are reasonably good. The environment I work in, there always remains an element of surprise, and there are restrictions. But Hitachi has good technical people."
"In terms of performance and ability, the product can stand up against its competitors since the solution offers two controller systems to users."
"Easier to manage with the clustered system and everything with the newest ONTAP 9."
"Previously we had migrated from Dell EMC and we had a lot of difficulties moving data around. Now, if we need to move it to any slower storage, we can move it with just a vault move within the cluster. Even moving data between clusters is extremely simple using SnapMirror. The mobility options for data in All Flash FAS have been awesome."
"Our architecture has historically relied on RDMs, so AFF has enabled us to easily migrate from our old EMC PowerMax to the new NetApp. It's been pretty smooth. We have a lot of SAP servers in our environment, so performance is critical for us."
"Replication would be one of the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the support. If we have any issues, we can call into NetApp and their support is really good."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"We are spending less time putting out fires, so there's a tangible benefit right there."
"The performance is the most valuable feature."
"The tool's pricing is higher than competitors."
"In the next release, I would like to see real-time analytics for further insight into consumption models."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive."
"The UI for this solution needs to be improved."
"I want to see Pure Storage not only be for fast storage, but I want to see it be for the entire data center."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified."
"In the next version I would like to see additional features like artificial intelligence and an increase in the amount of data it can store."
"The complex setup, ease of use, and snapshot operations of this product need to be improved."
"The life-cycle of the Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G Series is too short. We only had approximately four or five years out of the solution before it was rendered its end of life."
"I would like to see an audit account set up such that the user can log in, see the configuration, and see the logs, but they cannot make any changes."
"The software has always been lagging a bit compared to the newer features. It usually takes a cycle for it to catch up."
"The initial setup was difficult, as we don't have access to assistance. We had some issues around configuration. We needed to know things like what kind of rate is the best, or what kind of replication is ideal. We had to seek out answers online to get the information we needed."
"If they had a certain approach to layered storage, it would be better. For example, adaption to the browser, or having a centralized console."
"For mission critical issues the performance is low."
"I have experienced slow responses several times, if the ticket has only been opened in portal."
"I would like to see if they could move the virtual storage machines. They have integrated a DR, so you can back to your DR, but there's no automated way to failover and failback. It's all manual. I'd like to see it all automated."
"There are no RDMA capabilities in CIFS (SMB) and NFS protocols."
"They should provide easier integration with multiple systems."
"I don't like the newest GUI. It needs more options. Some features have been removed. Oversight is not as good in the new GUI compared to the previous version. Though, it might be something that we just need to get used to."
"Cleaning up false positives on alerts. We get a lot of those."
"NetApp AFF is a highly expensive solution, and its pricing should be reduced."
"NetApp could focus even more on the configuration."
More Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is ranked 10th in All-Flash Storage with 48 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 281 reviews. Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is rated 8.4, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform writes "Leverages a 3DC architecture with VSP for disaster recovery, offering a 100% data availability guarantee". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform is most compared with IBM FlashSystem, Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Huawei OceanStor Dorado and Pure Storage FlashArray, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Pure Storage FlashArray and Huawei OceanStor. See our Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs. NetApp AFF report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors and best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage 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.
