Hitachi Content Platform (HCP) vs. Petabox

• [Hitachi Content Platform (HCP) is] well suited for needs requiring a highly secure, multi-tenant on-premise object store.
• Exceeds expectations with respect to object level attributes and permissions
• Has excellent S3/HS3 REST API feature set
• Situations which require versioning and proven Immutability (certified by Governments)

- Expensive to use for general file storage publishing where meta data, compliance, retention, versioning are unnecessary.

Incentivized

• HCP/HDI interface works like charm. it's easy to deploy and scale.
• Hitachi customer support is at par with expectations
• More cost effective than EMC/NetApp solutions.

Incentivized

• Cost structure is by capacity and is expensive
• Some access settings are mutually exclusive for performance (REST vs. CIFS)
• QoS by Tenant requires use of external ADC (Hitachi suggested and sold us Pulse Secure) and their support on this product offering is not up to their normally high standard

Incentivized

My company has close ties with Hitachi. NetApp chargeback was more per Gig and for cost saving purposes, we had to choose HCP.

Incentivized

• Best on premise solution of its' kind that encapsulates all our needs
• ROI has been positive but it does raise questions at renewal time in terms of cost/GB vs other 2nd tier storage types

Incentivized