NetApp FAS Series Reviews

We are mainly using this solution for file sharing, virtualization, and database storage.

The most valuable features are the NAS features and NetApp's excellent support.

It's user-friendly, and I am happy with the dashboard, customization, and security.

For the most part, we don't have any problems. There is no NetApp infrastructure set up here in Greece. We don't have a representative with a technical department and someone who will help you in order to understand the product better.

I have been using this solution for seven years.

It's very stable.

It's scalable. You can scale as much as you can have.

We have approximately 500 end-users in our organization.

We have contacted technical support either by phone or via email, and sometimes they have contacted me first because they have noticed something in their systems.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We used an integrator to help us with the deployment.

I don't recall the price, but in general, pricing can always be better.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) an eight out of ten.

You can use different protocols at the same time. Monitoring is also very easy in NetApp FAS Series. There is a free tool for monitoring. 

Its licensing cost can be improved.

It is very stable. We have a lot of customers in Turkey, and we haven't got any major issues or complaints from our customers.

It is easily scalable. You can easily scale up and use old and new products together. NetApp products are very scalable.

Their technical support is very good. They work very tightly with us.

The initial setup is very easy. It can be set up in five to ten minutes. We have a lot of technical knowledge of this product.

It is expensive.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate NetApp FAS Series a ten out of ten.

We use the solution for data storage. We are customers of NetApp and I'm the assistant director of our company. 

One of the valuable features of the solution is data consolidation and visualization - and snapshots of course. The solution is easy to manage. 

We'd like to move to a solution that does more beyond just data, like starting to get more to servers and network specialization and data visualization and things like that. Server network and management specialization or consolidation. And also, trying to see a bit more single plane of glass in terms of managing, so that it gives you more insight in terms of what's happening. 

Ideally the solution should have one console, the ability to use a single plane of glass across the enterprise. Because we have one VRR, one size duplication so just to have one console where you can manage everything else in harmony would be a good additional feature. 

I've been using this solution for 15 years. 

This is a stable solution. 

The solution is scalable at the data level because it uses aggregates so you can easily increase data. But of course it's dependent on your provision for growth reports. I don't know how many use the solution but our company has around 600-700 employees and we have two people dealing with maintenance on the product. It doesn't require more than that. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. If you're good, you can get it up and running within a week. 

I think the pricing of this solution could be lower because really it's just storage consolidation these days. I think this technology has matured so much. It's time to make it slightly more competitive, it's on the high side for now.

Obviously anyone looking at this solution must have primarily a data storage use case. If they have a strong case for data storage, it's a good solution. From there it's just a matter of managing work flows between SAN and NAS which requires planning. You can then manage your capacities very well if you know your data requirements. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We used NetApp FAS for both block and file sharing but we have now switched to another product by HP.

The most important features are SnapVault, Snapshots, and SnapMirror.

Netapp closed their local offices in our country leading to no technical and sales support representation.

We've had issues with scalability because the product that we were using went end-of-life many years ago, and we were not able to expand because there were no spares available.

The initial setup is straightforward and the deployment took just a few days.

We had in-house experience for implementation and deployment.

Before choosing this product originally, we evaluated others and were ultimately impressed by the Snapshots, ShapVault, and SnapRestore features. These were what we really wanted, and at the time, we could not find another product that had similar capabilities.

We had been using NetApp for quite some time, but the equipment was quite old and we wanted a new system. Between NetApp and HP, we chose HP because the NetApp support is not very good. They used to have partners in the country, but they have left.

My advice for anyone who is considering NetApp FAS is that it is a good product and our only real complaint is the lack of technical support. If they live in a country where technical support is available then I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We have deployed a four-node cluster to host multiple services like NFS, CIFS, FCP, and iSCSI with SnapMirror enabled across the cluster.

NetApp FAS has provided an HA environment that has improved the up time of our entire infrastructure.

The most valuable feature for us is the combining of HA and SnapMirror.

I would like to see an improvement in the licensing on Data Mirroring (SnapMirror) features.

Currently, the newest release is not HCI friendly.

More than five years.

In my nineteen years of being a storage administrator, I have never seen NetApp storage cause significant downtime that was connected to hardware failure.

One of the big features of NetApp FAS is the clustering of storage, which allows you to scale up the whole cluster using different models. This is broad and each HA is expandable.

Their team is one of the best support services that I have encountered.

Previously we used the IBM N Series storage system. We switched because of its limited features.

The initial hardware setup is pretty straightforward because once you set up one node in the cluster, the whole system can be joined seamlessly. The setup for the NetApp hardware is a very short command menu that is user-friendly.

Our policy for the initial setup is to get service with the vendor. This provides a warranty just in case we encounter issues. NetApp support is highly knowledgeable about their product and they are trained to do the initial setup perfectly as planned.

Licensing is still proprietary which is one of the advantage of some Netapp devices to some of the storage systems.

We evaluated the HP and Dell storage solutions before choosing this product.

We use this solution as general unified SAN storage for different workloads.

This solution provides us with easy management and great vendor support.

The most valuable feature is that this acts as unified storage, both SAN and NAS, for all types of workloads.

Dedicated storage efficiency accelerators could improve the overall performance of the system.

Used SnapMirror for replication and DR. It's a good case for a storage-based DR. Good results on RPO and RTO.

• Efficient usage
• Good pricing
• Good solution architects and deployment guys are available
• Licensing is easy.

• Lesser resources needed for snapshot and recovery
• Easy to manage
• Recovery process is easy
• Integration with other tools is available.

• Integration with most of the third-party BR tools
• A clear roadmap for next releases should be available.

We use it for storage and it has performed fine, but now we need to upgrade.

We like its resilience. It's reliable storage.

I would like to see less latency and higher IOPS.

Stability is very good.

I'm satisfied with the scalability.

We did our research and, at the time, NetApp was what we chose. Our most important criterion when selecting a vendor is reliability. The price is, obviously, always an issue but reliability and the quality of the product are most important.

The initial setup was very, very straightforward.

If you need reliability, definitely go for NetApp.

I rate it at seven out of 10 because it has been very reliable but not very good when it comes to IOPS and latency.