Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) Reviews

We run data centers in six locations worldwide and provide our customers with testing platforms.

With Nutanix Cloud Clusters, we could provide redundancy on all levels without investing in dedicated shared storage for six locations, which was a big saving from the company's standpoint. We aim to use Kubernetes on-premises. That's our destination, and that's where we're headed.

Nutanix’s license portability is flexible. A lot of features are available on upper license levels.

NC2 has helped reduce our total cost of ownership (TCO).

Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) has simplified our IT operations by providing a unified view of all six data centers and applying some compliance policies across them. The solution has also improved our capacity planning.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the redundancy on all levels.

The most significant improvement would be to streamline the starting point so that we could kick off the deployment with one node and then scan out that deployment without a need to restructure or reformat anything. Right now, that's not possible. However, this would facilitate opening new data centers with a small upfront investment.

We have just started using Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) and switched from VMware to the Nutanix HCI infrastructure.

Nutanix Cloud Clusters is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable when you start at a certain point. If you start low, I wouldn't consider that as scalable. If I deploy the tool for a single data center with one node, and then if I need to deploy more, I cannot scale without reformatting the console. That is the downside. Again, scalability is not an issue if you start from the beginning with the redundant cluster.

I previously used VMWare. We switched to Nutanix Cloud Clusters because of the VMware positioning by Broadcom and the notification of the license tiers within VMware. We were previously looking at the HCI infrastructure because of the redundancy constraints. Achieving redundancy in VMware at the same level would require a huge investment.

The solution's initial setup is pretty simple. We were able to deploy the tool within two to three days within the data center, which is amazing.

We implemented the solution through an integrator. We have some procedures for deploying the solution. We planned the project in a way that the deployment and the migration would require customer participation as well because we'll be creating customer production workloads. However, it's not going as fast as we want it to go.

The biggest return on investment with Nutanix Cloud Clusters is the redundancy.

The solution's licensing can be very pricey.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The customer is a company in Thailand. They use Nutanix Cloud Clusters for file sharing and integrate with personal file share and knowledge management. Our customer attaches a file service with a login and connects with WiFi for cloud content, such as second documents or email access files.

Customer uses Firecaster for file sharing, integrating with personal file shares, and knowledge management. Additionally, it is integrated with the personal files and knowledge management processes.

The server with all the network connectivity is very important. The configuration of Nutanix tenant and solid service are important for the customer service configuration. It's easy to use, the UI is easy to configure, and it supports snapshots and backup integration.

It's more than expensive. Firecaster cannot limit IOP or throughput reading and writing. Quality control needs to regulate the price-quality ratio.

I've been working with Nutanix Cloud Clusters for about one to two years.

The system is high priority and easy to secure, and the configurations are easy to maintain. However, it's not easy to find professionals for technical support.

It is highly scalable, scoring ten out of ten.

Technical support is rated five out of ten. The Nutanix knowledge could be improved, and it's challenging to find professionals for support.

Neutral

I implemented Firecaster and did not face issues with previous solutions.

The initial setup is easy, scoring eight out of ten. However, some functions require high technical skill.

It is more than five on a scale of price, considering it quite expensive. It's challenging to regulate the price-quality ratio.

SAP and Proxmox were mentioned.

It's a good technology, better than the Chinese technology. However, Nutanix needs to improve customer experience and API functions for new opportunities with the Firecaster.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for versioning. The clusters are on my private cloud. 

The fact that snapshot, replication, and management are tied together all is important due to the fact that if your snapshots are too big, you can have problems going ahead and replicating to the other clusters. You often need bandwidth managing to make sure that you don't flood the bandwidth of your connection between two or three places.

The most valuable features are the replication, the snapshots. They all go hand in hand with each other. The snapshot technology with replication and bandwidth management is good. 

The initial setup is simple. 

The solution is stable. 

The scalability is good.

The snapshots have room for improvement.

The pricing can be better.

They don't own the networking side of it.

Nutanix is harder to restore. The problem with Nutanix is when you want to restore data and you only want to restore selected data, much more tedious. With Scale, it's a simple GUI and takes seconds.

We've had Nutanix now for four years.

The solution is extremely stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale well if you need it to. If you have a large number of machines, Nutanix is the way to go. Nutanix will let you just keep on adding hundreds of nodes to a cluster. However, reading-wise, Nutanix is slower than, for example, Scale. 

I have a staff of two. I have three others on my staff right now that currently know the system.

Nutanix support is good. However, Scale is better. They do respond and they do things, but Scale is faster.

I have both Nutanix and Scale, which are two competitors. Scale does some things better than Nutanix. Nutanix does some things better than Scale.

The implementation is straightforward. It's not complex at all. It's all very simple. 

The deployment took us not even a day. It's very fast.

Maintenance is easy and doesn't take much time. It's pretty self-repairing.

The pricing is a bit high. It could be less expensive. It gets very expensive to use it. It's based on the CPU and everyone else basically has pricing based on the CPU and between CPU, RAM, and hard drive space. It's not amazing.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

Users are going to have to know the CLIs and they're going to have to learn the back doors to CLI for stuff and make sure that they really have someone who is doing the networking properly and double-check all your network configurations with Nutanix. They don't do any of that. Whereas Scale sells you the network switches already configured.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We are a solution provider and Nutanix Clusters is one of the products that we sell to our customers. We deal primarily with architectural products that include physical servers, networking, and storage. It is mostly on the hardware side.

Nutanix Clusters is for customers that want to go to the cloud, but they have applications that can't be moved. By implementing Clusters, we can move most of the applications back and forth between the cloud an on-premises.

The most valuable feature is having the full features of my Nutanix on-premises applications in the cloud. It gives more flexibility with the ability to create storage pools and share it between my physical servers and my cloud servers. Since I'm running it all on Nutanix, I don't have any data excise fees.

The biggest weakness with Clusters at this point is that the adoption rate is low because customers don't know enough about it. We are just starting to get engaged with this product.

It has to be priced aggressively because it needs to make sense for customers to migrate to it.

Nutanix Clusters was just announced last week, so I don't have much experience yet.

Although it is too early to tell for sure, if it is anything like Nutanix ALS on the hardware then it is very, very stable.

It's extremely scalable.

Nutanix tech support is one of the best in the industry.

The setup is not any more complex than a typical cloud implementation. You really need to pay attention to where you put your compute resources, how you handle high availability, and things like that.

The licensing costs depend on what you need and how it is sized. I am working on one configuration that is priced at $50,000 USD, whereas another one that I'm working on is estimated to cost $250,000 USD. It really depends on the customer's environment.

My advice for anybody who is considering Nutanix Clusters is to get a professional to help you with it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The solution provides our entire infrastructure for my 40 plus locations and 500 users.

The reliability is the solution's most valuable aspect.

I have found the stability to be very good.

The solution can scale well. 

Technical support is great.

Some of the interfaces aren't as intuitive as they should be.

The initial setup can be slightly complex. 

I've dealt with the solution for almost four years. It's been a while. 

The solution is reliable and very stable. there are no bugs or glitches. it just works. There are no crashes or freezing. 

We have over 500 users across 40 locations. Everyone from office workers to factory personnel has access. 

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand, it can do so. 

I deal with tech support quite often and they are fantastic. I am very satisfied with the level of attention I get when I need their help. 

The initial setup can be a little bit complex. 

I handle the maintenance and deployments of updates myself. You don't need a lot of people to maintain it. It's easy, however, if you run into any trouble, there's always technical support who can assist.

I can't speak to the licensing costs. I have no visibility on that at all. 

I'm a customer and an end-user. I use Nutanix on a daily basis.

In terms of the deployment version I am on, it's generally as close to up to date as I can make it.

I'd advise potential new users to do their homework and don't look back.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. Overall, I've had a great experience. 

Nutanix Clusters are used for redundancy and to protect our core machines from failures.

The most valuable feature of Nutanix Clusters is to protect the data.

I have been using Nutanix Clusters for approximately six years.

The stability of Nutanix Clusters is good.

Nutanix Clusters is scalable.

We have one customer using this solution.

The technical support for Nutanix Clusters could be better.

The initial setup of Nutanix Clusters is of a medium level of difficulty. It took us approximately two days to deploy.

We have two engineers that are supporting Nutanix Clusters.

I rate Nutanix Clusters an eight out of ten.

The most valuable features of Nutanix Clusters are Prism Central, Micro-segmentation, and cluster scaling automation.

There are still some things that could be improved about the product.

I have many customers who have been using Nutanix Clusters for more than ten years.

We have a mix of versions that are used, some are old and some are new versions.

Nutanix Clusters is a very stable solution.

It is a scalable product.

In my opinion, our customers will see a positive return on their investment.

I am collaborating closely with Nutanix partners in India.

I would rate Nutanix Clusters a nine out of ten.

We rely on Nutanix Cloud Clusters for web access, all infrastructure emails and security, as well as all applications and Microsoft databases.

The overall infrastructure is the most valuable part of Nutanix Cloud Clusters.

While a minimum of three blocks and four nodes is necessary to mitigate risk, the associated cost is substantial. I would like to see a reduction in this cost.

The reporting has room for improvement. 

The automated playbook claims to be improved with AI, but I do not see any improvement.

I have been using Nutanix Cloud Clusters for four and a half years.

The stability of Nutanix Cloud Clusters is a ten out of ten.

The scalability of Nutanix Cloud Clusters is a ten out of ten.

The technical support is excellent.

Positive

The initial setup is complex. We hired a skilled consultant to handle the deployment, as the workflow was extensive and required expertise.

We used a consultant for the implementation.

The price is high.

I would rate Nutanix Cloud Clusters ten out of ten.