IBM System Storage DS5000 Series Reviews

It's a storage box with multiple loft space. It is connected with the fiber optic solution. We have fiber optic switches and they are directly connected with that.

We also do the flash copy using that storage. For example, I will read the data backup of our current system and store it on the back. There's one wall of volume over there, which will boot when we are taking a backup and then it shut down automatically. After that, we can make a copy on a tape. 

The DS 5000 series never has any problems. It's extremely reliable. One time I saw that there was one issue and I didn't remove it. There was an amber light that popped up. I just played with the issue and just fixed it and it was easy. Since then we really don't have any issues.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The product is very costly. Very few can afford it. 

The renewal or maintenance of the solution is also expensive. Once things come down, users tend to look to other options.

The solution needs better alerts. If there is a problem, there needs to be a good alert system in place.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years now.

The stability is excellent. It's reliable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We basically just install it and we can forget we even have it.

The scalability is great. It's not a problem to scale if you need to.

Everything is on the local machine. We wanted to fix that due to the fact that every time we needed the space we had to change a whole box, which was too costly. However, if we need space, we can just install the drives. We are using five hard drives with 12 drives still empty. We can use those at any time to increase the space.

I've never had the chance to talk to technical support. We have absolutely no problems with the solution, and due to the fact it hasn't given us any issues, we've never had to contact them. Therefore, I can't speak to their level of service or their responsiveness.

We didn't previously use a different solution. We've only had IBM from the very beginning.

The installation is pretty straightforward. It's not too complex so long as you are comfortable with IBM. For us, it's not the device that's difficult. It's more about the setup we have.

The pricing is very costly. It's roughly $6,000-$7,000. The solution is not cheap. 

We aren't partners with IBM. We don't have a business relationship. We're just customers.

I'd advise others that there are a lot of solutions available on the market. IBM is not their only option.

Overall, it's a great, robust solution. I'd rate it, on a scale from one to ten, at an eight.

We use it for block storage.

The stability and performance of the drive are the most valuable.

IBM is not always as agile as other competitors when it is about cloud integration and user interfaces. They're not renewing themselves very often. They have been slow to evolve from the old GUI. The user interface should be improved, especially regarding performance analysis, which has always been a little bit weak as compared to other solutions.

As a global solution, it lacks the feature for containing integration object storage. Even though they have now started to offer this feature, it is quite young and not as developed as some other vendors. There are also no mass possibilities at all. 

They have a lot of competition in the mid-range segment. They need to have a NAS gateway or something like that. It doesn't specifically need to be integrated into the controllers that are keys to the gateway.

We have it in the company for a long time, but I have been working on it for like one year.

It is a very stable solution.

We are using it for our Oracle database as well as for MySQL database, so it is being used for a really high-end environment. We have maybe 2,000 people who are using this system through the database.

I am always happy with their technical support.

We're a team of five, but we're not only handling this product. We are also working on Hitachi, IBM, and NetApp products.

Its price is fair. IBM is quite fair in price when you compare it with others. 

We also use Hitachi internally, and Hitachi is always a little bit more expensive. NetApp is also a bit more expensive. So, IBM has good positioning in terms of price.

It is very strong in block storage for the database environment. It has very good quality because the compression, deduplication, and encryption are directly done by the disks, so there is no penalty on the processes of all controllers.

If you need a platform that is oriented towards block storage and has features like multi-protocol, cloud integration, and so on, I don't think this is the best solution. It doesn't have direct NAS protocols or things like this.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten, specifically for the needs of block storage. Its performance is very good, which is the biggest asset of this solution. However, it doesn't provide enough services, which probably solutions like NetApp or Dell are providing.

My company uses the product for virtualization, SAP, and VDI.

The management features provided by the product are very simple and easy, making them the most valuable feature of the solution.

The price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. From an improvement perspective, the price of the product needs to change.

I have experience with IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for fifteen years. My company has a partnership and is a major vendor for companies like IBM and VMware.

It is a very stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

I deal with more than a hundred customers of my company who use IBM System Storage DS5000 Series.

In relation to the technical support of the product, I would say that all the vendors of IBM face challenges because of the issues with the supply chain, because of which, at times, the spare parts take too long time to be delivered.

The product's initial setup phase is very straightforward, considering I am a system integrator by profession.

During the product's installation phase, I try to find the IP addresses, and during the initial configuration for the partition, I create volumes and assign those volumes to servers.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Two people are required to implement a single product.

The basic functionalities of the product are provided within the normal license, but users can opt for some optional features from IBM's licensing model.

I work as a system integrator in an organization where we use SAP. My company takes care of the implementation part of SAP infrastructure for our customers.

I would recommend to those planning to use IBM System Storage DS5000 Series that they also need to consider the other products in the market before making a decision.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

We use it for applications, databases, media, files, etc. 

The product should improve its support. 

I am working with the tool since 2000. 

The solution is stable. 

The tool is scalable. My company has 50 customers for the solution. 

The solution has good support. 

The tool's setup is simple. The migration from a non-IBM product to an IBM product is easy and saves headaches for the customer. 

I would rate the tool a nine out of ten. We prefer IBM because of its good features. It can visualize a non-IBM solution which is one of its unique features. 

Our use case is primarily for clients with mainframes, such as big banks or ministries involved in core banking or AI-based storage solutions. It complements those with mainframes and is ideal for large enterprises.

The most valuable aspects of the DS5000 Series are its high availability, stability, cost-effectiveness, and the unique IBM FlashCore modules, which other competitors lack. These FlashCore modules enable local operations on the drive itself without a performance overhead, a significant advantage.

Regarding improvements, there's a common perception, primarily during pre-sales, that IBM storage solutions are expensive, though studies often prove otherwise. As for additional functionality, supporting two to three sites for applications might be a potential enhancement.

I've been working with IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for about five years now.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate its stability at nine.

For scalability, I'd rate it at nine as it is typically recommended for enterprise-level companies due to its capabilities.

The only minor issue might be related to time zone differences, causing delays in responses.

Positive

Setting up the DS5000 Series is straightforward as long as the right implementation engineer is handling the process, ensuring a smooth implementation without issues.

Comparing the DS5000 Series with other vendors, I can't provide a direct comparison, but IBM's distinguishing factor lies in its Spectrum management software, providing unique functionalities that set it apart.

Overall, I'd rate the IBM System Storage DS5000 Series at nine out of ten, acknowledging that the differentiation in the market is not solely hardware-based but heavily reliant on software features. IBM's software updates often unlock new capabilities, making it a forward-thinking and flexible choice for clients.

We primarily use this solution for virtual desktop (VDI).

The most valuable feature is compression.

It would be nice if duplication was possible at the hardware level. As it is now, duplication is a software feature, whereas compression is a hardware feature.

We have been using the IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for approximately five years.

This is a stable product and we use it extensively. The is little or no maintenance required.

This solution is scalable and we have at least 1,000 users. In the future, we will likely add another system.

We were only in contact with technical support once. We thought that we had a problem but they solved our issue very quickly.

Last year, we purchased the newer 8000 series model from IBM.

We are also using the Dell 4000 series. It was the Dell 4020 that we initially started with.

In total, we are using one system from Dell and three systems from IBM. All of them are operational.

We prefer IBM to Dell because of the ratio of price to performance. Essentially, IBM has more aggressive pricing. 

The initial setup is easy.

The last deployment we did was by our in-house team.

This product is priced well. The ratio between cost and productivity is very high and we're happy with it.

In summary, this is a good product. They have also added some extra security features, and we like them very much. As an example, we didn't ask for it, but they implemented a helpful feature to fight against ransomware. This adding of features is quite nice.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for our data center infrastructure and all the servers. We use it with IBM and other vendors, including VMware. Especially VMware clusters and IBM Power machines.

I like that it's stable, and I am satisfied with it. We have had some issues, but that is normal in IT. IBM System Storage DS5000 works fine most of the time.

IBM System Storage DS5000 is expensive when compared to other vendors.

I have used IBM System Storage DS5000 Series for over ten years.

IBM System Storage DS5000 is a stable solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give stability a nine.

IBM System Storage DS5000 is a scalable solution. You can buy additional hardware and plug it into the existing system to extend it.

Compared to other vendors, I think it's expensive.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give IBM System Storage DS5000 a ten.

Regarding the use cases, we have a database with not more than sixty servers on it.

Our current system is outdated, almost full, and has limitations with storage. Therefore, replacing the current system with a new one is the only solution. The solution's scalability can also be improved.

I didn't make the comparison between the solution and other brands because I'm just preparing the document considering our requirements.

I have been using the IBM PowerStorage DS5000 Series for a month.

The solution is stable. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is not flexible enough. I cannot move the machine as I want. So that is not scalable. Also, there is a limitation of the storage on the device. So I cannot upgrade it.

Approximately 200 users within our organization are using this solution on a daily basis.

I have used Dell SAN storage.

The initial setup is straightforward. The solution was deployed on the cloud.

It's an expensive solution.

I suggest looking for the latest version of this solution.

The solution is reliable. It only has a limitation with the storage. When we reach the maximum storage, we need to replace the system. We cannot take a standard one.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.