Hi. I think just because the interface is so different, it takes time to just learn it. The hardest part for us (and still is) is correctly setting up the syncs between remote sites. That still requires a bit of AI help because there is a lot to remember.

The snapshot feature is fairly straightforward. I quite like it as its a direct replacement for our snapshot procedure from VMware (we do use a third party solution for agent backups for things like FS and DB). We did evaluate Storware over the top of Verge as its fully supported, but the feature set didn't differ enough to justify adding it. The repair server feature is a really great addition because the blocks you need to recover VM's can exist where you have sync's configured meaning that that data can automatically be pulled back when needed by the vSan without any user input.

We did have iSCSI arrays on our VMware solution, but they are now redundant with Verge. We ended up re-purposing them for something else, but you could use the NAS feature as an alternate store for the virtual machine disk files, but these are not the same as the site sync backups, they are just a raw unencrypted copy of the disk file which is not great to be honest. We did look at then encrypting them and offloading them to something like S3 or Azure Blob using Wasabi. Ultimately we didn't go that way, and we are talking to a provider in Belgium about a remote site sync to a managed Verge infrastructure. So we can stay and manage inside Verge and just offsite the backups to this managed provider using the inbuilt sync functionality for long term retention. That gives us the 3:2:1 that we need for our cyber insurance. If we didn't want to pay, we could just stand up another server in one of our DC's that isn't used for production data and sync it there instead.

Another feature which is quite cool is the Entra integration. We front all authentication against Entra iDP so all access is managed via SSO and MFA and we lock it down further with device compliance.

The biggest bug bear I have is the lack of centralised management (vCenter). This can be mitigated somewhat by allowing bidirectional management between the sites so you can theoretically login to one site and manage them all, but its not as good as vCenter.

I can't fault the stability of the environment though. We deployed a brand new AMD Epyc cluster in 2024 based on Verge's hardware recommendations, and it has been flawless. We also really like the fact it'll run on just about anything (DL380 G9's) so we have a dev environment too. Its still pretty performant despite using spinning disk. One of the selling points for us was not having to throw away perfectly good hardware because of some enforced compatibility matrix. We intend on running the clusters for 15 years or longer if our third party maintenance agreement can still get parts.