Hitachi TrueCopy vs NetApp SnapMirror comparison

"The best features of Hitachi TrueCopy include its ability to act similarly to a snapshot from any disk, from any LUN, and for fast copy data from production to test."

"Hitachi TrueCopy is very effective for transferring big data from one storage to another storage."

"The technology enables us to have a safe backup."

"The solution is very stable."

"The performance and stability are valuable features. It seems to fulfill all the requirements."

"The most valuable feature is the data replication tool. There is also a lot of ability for data migration."

"Data protection is a valuable feature."

"NetApp SnapMirror stands out for its ease of management, efficiency, and scalability, which align well with our operational needs."

"The user interface is very easy to manage. The replication is also very easy to set up."

"NetApp SnapMirror's compatibility with NetApp products has helped my storage management efforts immensely, as it is part of ONTAP and all architectures based on ONTAP, including ONTAP 8 and 9."

"Technical support is indeed an area for improvement; Hitachi has very good hardware and the equipment is good, but the support and management monitoring are not as robust as IMC, IBM, and HP."

"Technical support is indeed an area for improvement; Hitachi has very good hardware and the equipment is good, but the support and management monitoring are not as robust as IMC, IBM, and HP."

"The solution's dashboard and reporting could be improved."

"The tool should also work on third-party solutions."

"At the moment, we are not using the synchronous mirror, but we can implement the synchronous mirror. The only thing is that it needs another license. This is the same issue we have with business continuity. It needs another license to be implemented. You need too many separate licenses for the features. They should add some of the aspects of the premium bundle into the basic bundle. Sometimes our customers choose other replication services because of the initial cost of the licenses."

"The price could be cheaper."

"The user interface could be simplified. They might want to have fewer options on it, to make it less complicated. There are a lot of options we never use ourselves. They're often very specialized and don't apply to us."

"Synchronous replication with read-write on both sides in both data centers is powerful but risky since it is greatly affected by high network latency."

"There is probably some limitations when it comes to the scalability of the solution."

"We have to do manual verifications about the subscriptions often."

"The product price is reasonable."

"The solution has monthly and yearly licensing options."

"SnapMirror is extremely expensive. We had a hard time adjusting to our budget. If rated on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most expensive, I would definitely rate it ten out of ten."

"It's part of the NetApp Firewall, so it's free."

"The pricing could be improved."

"The cost is low compared to different vendors."

"It's a highly cost-effective solution"

"The pricing can be improved."