HPE BladeSystem Reviews

It allows immediate access to the server management and immediate detection of the access logs.

It provides a secure access to the console and reliable administration.

Having implemented this solution, it has enabled to have remote management of the equipment problems, to identify the power for reviewing the status of errors without having to be on-site, but remotely from anywhere required.

I would prefer to have changes in the compatibility of the blade servers with the new ones designed by HPE, as the top team's version does not have it.

I have used this solution for seven years. I have used the following versions of the solution:

• HPE BladeSystem c7000 Enclosure Onboard Administrator Tray 1.7
• HPE ProLiant BL680c server blade G5 2.12 July 16, 2012
• HPE ProLiant BL680c server blade G5 2.06 May 31, 2011
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade Gen8 1.20 Feb 01, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade Gen8 1.20 Feb 01, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade Gen8 1.30 July 18, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade G7 1.20 March 14, 2011
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade G1 2.23 Nov 05, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade Gen8 1.20 Feb 01, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade Gen8 1.20 Feb 01, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade Gen8 1.30 July 18, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade G7 1.65 Nov 08, 2013
• HPE ProLiant BL460c server blade G1 2.06 May 31, 2011

We have not had any problems with the implementation.

The technical support team has very good answers to our concerns and when cases are opened, escalations are done in a timely manner.

I have not used a different solution.

The solution was implemented by the provider, as indicated it was in a simple way.

I'm the infrastructure manager; with regards to the prices, they need to adapt to the current needs of the country. Licensing has always been timely and it is a prompt solution.

• Allows immediate access for server management
• Allows immediate detection of the access logs
• Secures access to the console
• Provides reliable administration

• Enabled remote management of the equipment's problems/issues
• Helped in remotely identifying the power to review the status of errors

I would prefer to have changes in the compatibility of the blade servers along with the new ones designed by HPE. The superior equipment does not allow this at the present time.

I have used this solution for a total of eight years as the infrastructure manager. Currently, we are using the HPE BladeSystem c7000 enclosure and the BladeSystem c7000 Onboard Administrator Tray 1.7 enclosure devices.

In the past, we have used:

• Server Blade ProLiant BL680c G5 HPE 2.12, Jul 16, 2012
• Server Blade ProLiant BL680c G5 HPE 2.06, May 31, 2011
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c Gen8 HPE 1.20, Feb 01, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c Gen8 HPE 1.20, Feb 01, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c Gen8 HPE 1.30, Jul 18, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c G7 HPE 1.20, Mar 14, 2011
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c G1 HPE 2.23, Nov 05, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c Gen8 HPE 1.20, Feb 01, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c Gen8 HPE 1.20, Feb 01, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c Gen8 HPE 1.30, Jul 18, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c G7 HPE 1.65, Nov 08, 2013
• Server Blade ProLiant BL460c G1 HPE 2.06, May 31, 2011

We have not experienced any problems with the implementation of the product.

When cases were opened, we received very good responses to the issues. Escalations were also done in a timely manner.

I have not used any other solution.

The solution was implemented by the provider. It was done in a simple way.

It has not been applied from a remote site, only from the current infrastructure. You should have a personalized follow-up for the management/administration of the implemented solution.

In regards to the prices, it should adapt to the current needs of the country. Granting of the licenses has always been done in a prompt manner.

The BladeSystem with the manageability and the reliability of the BladeSystem. I used to work for HPE and with the ProLiant line so now we're pretty loyal to HPE servers, and have been for several years.

The hardware is very dependable. We don't have a lot of downtime. Whenever we do need to call support, support is always very fast and able to jump on things. That's what we like about it.

We pretty much use the blades for everything that we can. The only reason the rack mounts are still around is because we have some fax servers that need fax boards that don't fit in the blades and that's pretty much it.

We've had other vendors trying to pitch similar hardware to us but it's something we don't even consider just because of the stability and the reliability of the HPE hardware.

That's a non-issue for us. They're easy to scale especially with the blade chassis. We stack several of them into a rack, stick in more blades whenever we need to.

We don't use them very often. Usually we have a minor issue, a hard drive or something like that so we really don't use it very often but when we need to, it's always very good.

We kind of got in on the ground floor when the blades were first coming out. We decided to make the plunge just to save space and from there, we just fell in love with the blades. A lot of people have, with the space saving and they're just easier to configure than the rack mounts. You put in the blade chassis and you slide in the blades instead of having to rack 12 servers.

We looked at Cisco UCS but the manageability of it and learning a new product wasn't something we wanted to do. We also felt like these were still a superior product.

I would tell them to strongly take a look at the HPE. Go ahead and do a bake off if you want to. If they want to prove a concepts with the Dells, Dells will give them a way to you to try them out. If you rack them up side-by-side, I think all the features set and just the reliability of HPE makes them come out ahead.

The absolute number one thing that is the most valuable to me with all my HP products, BladeSystem included, is stability. They're all very stable. Secondly, HP offers excellent support.

It takes away our employees' worries about having to disconnect. We don't use HP's services, but in terms of hardware, we're happy with it.

I'd love to see more collaboration between HP, Cisco, and Microsoft. Those are the big names to us in the market. I'd like to see them work together and not compete and be nasty.

We've been HP customers for 15 years now.

Deployment has been fine for us.

We've had no issues with stability.

Scalability comes without saying. HP has scalable storage and I'd like to thank them for requisitioning 3PAR as that's actually added good technology. They worked with us to migrate from old systems.

Support is excellent and I can see a natural growth in their product. There is no decrease in quality from when we first used it 10 years ago to now. Everything is naturally growing up. Their features and return of the features and also accommodation of new accounts. That's something that they do.

HP has a heritage you know. As I say, we love their solution. We trust their capabilities to innovate.

HP appreciates discussions. Whenever we've started new projects, they bring the sales guy, engineers, and senior solutions specialist. We sit and talk and we set objectives and accordingly we define the projects to execute and monitor.

I don't think that there is anything else that's better.

It provided integrated storage, networking, servers, and management.

It is a single integrated solution that can be deployed anywhere. Best solution for our mobile tracking station.

Nothing that I can think of. We can always upgrade.

I've used it for three years.

It's easy to deploy and the HP command-line interface is, in my personal opinion, similar to Cisco.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

I haven't had to deal with HP yet.

I haven't had to deal with HP yet.

We are also using Dell servers. It is not a switch, and we switched because this is more fit for our purposes.

It was not easy as we had to get vendor for deployment because of lack of internal skills and time constraints.

Through a vendor and they are well experienced.

It's high.

I believe it's worth the price you pay.

We also evaluated options from Dell.

Get experienced vendors for deployment and you won't have issues later, that is, if you don't have the skills In-house.

For an x86 infrastructure. 

• Databases
• Virtualized environment
• Application servers
• Exchange and analytical applications

Linux and Windows are the OSs.

• Ease of use
• Reliable
• Scalable
• Simple 

This has drastically reduced our datacenter space, has good cooling and power consumption. Cabling complexity and volume have been reduced.

• Reliable backplane
• Excellent throughput
• Virtual Fabric and interconnects are easy to configure and maintain. 
• Wide choice in mixing SAN and LAN.

• Storage capacity could be enhanced.
• Higher bandwidth interconnects could be introduced.
• OA updates and upgrades have to be made simpler.

Single point of management, redundant management components, reliability, easiness of setup and installation.

Like all the blade systems, they save rack space, power and cooling requirements, cabling complexity and are adding features like the single point of management.

It's quite an old product already having it's successor HPE Synergy, which is in every aspect better than the c7000

Seldom

Firmware dependencies with older generations of HP servers.

Satisfactory.

No, it was the first blade solution.

No

Go with HPE Synergy instead

Sure, the IBM and DELL alternatives.

To go with HPE Synergy instead

The manageability of the BladeSystem is its most valuable feature for us. Within a single blade enclosure, we can manage all of our infrastructure.

It's saved space and, I suppose, cost. There's less maintenance, less wires, and smaller footprint by quite a lot. There's also virtual management as opposed to physically plugging things in.

Although we can manage from a single blade enclosure, the interface is usable for the CPU and memory aspects, the storage goes to our 3PAR, and that requires learning a different tool. We want to be able to use the same tool to provision storage from our blade management application.

Also, I'm concerned that the chassis will only last so long. New blades will comes out at some point and the chassis won't be compatible anymore. We can upgrade it, but it's easier to change the blades than it is to change the chassis.

I can't remember the exact model of the blades, but we have full-height blades and half-height blades. We've had them for four years.

We've had no deployment issues with them.

They've been stable.

We went from 60 physical servers to 10 blades. We've been able to add more blades in our recent projects as well as to upgrade them. So, no, there have been no scalability issues.

I haven't really had to use technical support.

We trust the solution. We've used HP physical servers for 10 years, and never had any issues. We looked at different storage vendors, but in terms of servers it was the reliability of the HP products that led us to these blades as well.

The initial setup was quite straightforward.

I've worked with other vendors in the past, but not in a recent project.

Plan ahead. If you zone your network for active-active, you're going to get more throughput.