It's been a while since I used NetApp though. NetApp and 3PAR's management toolkits crap all over HP MSA/EVA or the various IBM SAN consoles for usability.
Yeah... welll.... I believe even Cisco's CLI, Dell Equallogic's management console, and even Nexenta craps on what HP provides with MSA/EVA.
I also hate the UIs of small business storage vendors, and I am thinking of a storage vendor targeting mid-sized companies in particular, where the management UI has pretty limited functionality, you don't get CLI access ("It's for your own protection, honest! [Or to secure our intellectual property!]"), AND you are limited to same basic Share/Volume setup/removal and told to "Call support" to request that they SSH in using remote support tunnel to perform any more advanced operations or configuration changes, such as setting up or turning off the replication between multiple systems, OR recover/remount the cluster filesystems after a backend Ethernet failure, or change your frontend IP addresses.
Of course, this Support requires continuous subscription payments, just to be able to make changes to your own configuration, and somewhat exorbitant costs just for software updates as well ------ this turns out to be important, because if something breaks during a software update, no mechanism is available to revert, and you have to call support.
In general: I hate the mentality of a number of vendors that they can push out a product that is not easy to administer, at low prices that will encourage management to buy: use a generic Linux system, but keep Shell/Root access to themselves (no CLI for the end user, just a menu), and require/insist engineers wait on their product support teams as a crutch for the product.
The same applies just as well to products that aren't well documented, or that require voluminous documentation to understand their UI sufficiently to perform basic operations.