HPE Ethernet Switches Reviews

We use HPE Ethernet switches for our networking setup. Most of our infrastructure is configured with them. Recently, there have been discussions about changing them, but we've been using them extensively.

Switching to HPE Ethernet Switches greatly improved our network. We used to have both Cisco and HPE Ethernet Switches. Our network performance has increased by 300 percent. 

Sometimes, we encounter the need for new technologies, especially when we require higher bandwidth. If we can't find what we need with HPE Ethernet Switches, we explore options from other vendors like Cisco.

The tool is scalable. 

The solution's technical support is good. 

We're not currently using Cisco. We used a mix of HPE Ethernet Switches and Cisco in the past but ultimately opted for HPE.

The solution's deployment is easier than Cisco's. Cisco deployment can be challenging primarily due to its complex configuration process. Accessing certain features may not be straightforward, which adds to the difficulty. In contrast, HPE Ethernet Switches are easier to navigate and configure. The tool's deployment time depends on the switches. Smaller ones, like the 24-volt or basic ones, may take less time. However, our experienced team typically takes around an hour or less to install and configure them.

Its maintenance depends on the size of our infrastructure. For our setup, which is quite large, we usually have around three to four people to maintain it.

The reliability of HPE Ethernet Switches, in terms of uptime and performance, is good. We have no concerns in this regard. I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. You need to choose the right switching system for your network. The tool offers a wide range of modules, so it is important to select the ones that best serve their specific needs. For instance, if they require high bandwidth, they should opt for those designed for that purpose. Similarly, they should choose the appropriate switching system for a standard network.

HPE Ethernet Switches are used for internet networking and the hotel industry.

We are not using any specific features. We use HPE Ethernet Switches to provide solutions for the hotel, their guests, and IPTV.

The solution's throughput should be increased because we often get stuck when it comes to IPTV streaming.

I have been using HPE Ethernet Switches for more than five years.

HPE Ethernet Switches are not as stable as Cisco. I rate HPE Ethernet Switches a six out of ten for stability.

Around 250 users are extensively using HPE Ethernet Switches. We do not have plans to increase the solution's usage.

I rate HPE Ethernet Switches a six out of ten for scalability.

Before HPE Ethernet Switches, we used Juniper switches. We mainly switched from Juniper to HPE because of the local support HPE Ethernet Switches provide.

Cisco Meraki has an easy initial setup. Aruba and HPE have a pretty configuration setup.

The solution was implemented through our in-house engineers. It takes around 45 minutes to an hour to deploy the solution.

Our engineers use the same deployment process as with other products. We cannot get support from local HPE because they don't have local engineers. So most of the time, we get support from other countries or someone who specializes in those areas.

We will see a return on investment with HPE Ethernet Switches within one year.

We have to pay for a yearly license for HPE Ethernet Switches. The solution's pricing is lower than Cisco's. The solution does not include any extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

I am using the latest version of HPE Ethernet Switches.

One or two engineers are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance, but it depends on the customer site.

HPE Ethernet Switches are more suited for enterprise-level customers. However, Cisco is the best solution for data center-level customers.

Overall, I rate HPE Ethernet Switches a seven out of ten.

HPE Ethernet Switches are used for networking.

HPE Ethernet Switches are easy to configure.

The technical support does not match up to the standard of Cisco.

I have been using HPE Ethernet Switches for one year.

HPE Ethernet Switches are stable.

HPE Ethernet Switches are scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The license cost is yearly.

I give HPE Ethernet Switches an eight out of ten.

I recommend HPE Ethernet Switches for users. It is not as expensive as Cisco Switches.

The use case of this solution depends on our client's environment. Some use HPE Ethernet Switches right out of the box, while some of them use models where the interface can only be opened by Internet Explorer.

The primary use cases would be office interconnection and industrial interconnection. The switches are best suited for our small or medium-sized clients. 

For me, as an administrator, I value that there is a clear place to find a MAC table with HPE Ethernet Switches. 

HPE Ethernet Switches are quite robust. I have not seen them damaged to the level that they are not operable anymore.

The solution has a simple and understandable user interface providing everything I need.

In the past, I have encountered configuration problems with the Spanning Tree Protocol. The switches were only handling a single loop. There were quite a few looped switches that could not handle the board blocking, creating the need to manually fight each loop. I have not had the same problems with the newer models of HPE Ethernet Switches.

HPE Ethernet Switches tend to hang from time to time, but all switches do that.

The next release would benefit from adding central management that could be deployable on-premise and allow you to see the layout of topology.  

I have been working with HPE Ethernet Switches for about one year.

The solution is stable. HFE does not fail any more or less often than other switches.

HPE Ethernet Switches, especially the 1820s, are best suited to small or medium-sized organizations, however each case is model dependent. The switches we use, are used in large companies, but they are fractured into smaller layers of three subnets. 

The solution is scalable, you can add a switch when you need to, and you can reconfigure it.

I have not had the need to contact customer service and support. Any past issues, we were able to resolve by go through some of our forums.

Since our company provides services, we work with the switches that the clients have. Most of the switches we work with are HPE's, Cisco, and UniFi.

I found that when using Aruba or UniFi, you have to search for the MAC table from CLI. This is difficult because when someone calls using a MAC, I will not get the IP address and I need to guess where the user is.

UniFi requires less intervention in configuration, requiring some tune-up support. HPE needs to be configured manually.

The initial setup of HPE Ethernet Switches is straightforward. The time it takes to deploy depends on the overall network configuration, including the number of LAN, number of up links and down links for that switch.

If you only need to connect the switch to the up link and give out for a test for the end devices, it would take a maximum of thirty minutes after installing the switch to its correct place.

In a case where there is a lot of VLAN with some trunking, deployment could take a couple of hours.

I would rate the initial setup of HPE Ethernet Switches a five out of five. They require little to no maintenance and are reliable enough.

As a technician, I am not certain of pricing, but I believe HPE is less expensive than Aruba and UniFi and that is why certain clients have chosen them as their solution.

I would recommend to anyone looking into implementing HPE Ethernet Switches to go for it if the price makes sense for their organization.

Overall, I would rate HPE Ethernet Switches an eight out of 10.

The product can be used for integrated security in IT networks for small businesses with about 100 customers in one location. I can stack three of four switches in these cases.

The most valuable product is the unmanaged HP switch.

The price could be more competitive, and the product needs to improve its stability. Also, the solution would be easier to set up if its GUI could improve or if it had a wizard. Similarly, it would be easier to set up if the user manual could be more straightforward.

I've used the product for three to four years.

I rate the product's stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product's scalability an eight out of ten. Twenty-five to 30 users use the product.

The initial setup is somewhat straightforward. It is straightforward for unmanaged switches but managed switches might need technical support. It takes half an hour to one hour to deploy. When deploying the switches, we must set the steps to make VLANs.

We have a yearly license. The solution could be cheaper.

We use Fortinet and Cisco for larger businesses because we may lack information about the scalability of Aruba's and HP's higher-level products.

I rate HPE Ethernet Switches an eight out of ten. I recommend users start with unmanaged switches and take managed switches later.

I use HPE Ethernet Switches to connect virtual PBX or IP PBX to the voice infrastructure. There are some exceptions to what I will configure, which is to have the same connection for connecting the phone to the switch, and from the phone to the PC, using only one cable.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability.

The security of the solution always has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for ten years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

From the perspective of an integrator, HP's technical support is good.

The complexity of the deployment depends on the configuration required. One is to use the solution for a small company that has fifty employees, and we will put fifty phones, and another situation is when we install the solution for a company with more than two thousand employees.

The deployment for a large organization takes around four months.

The deployment is not difficult. For large customers, they use two different switches; HPE 2680 for the office and HPE 5406ZL for the distribution and core. These switches are capable of both layer two and layer three functions.

The implementation is completed with our help as the integrator.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

I recommend HPE Ethernet Switches to others.

The solution offers a basic design. There's nothing advanced that we have done. Now, we are planning to upgrade with the central features from the S side, the S feature.

It's pretty easy to set up and implement. 

It's stable. We never have any issues. 

We have no issues with scaling. 

Their support plan needs to be better. We have a basic plan, so support is always delayed for us. We'd like it if they were more responsive, no matter the plan. 

We'd like better support for situations where we need troubleshooting.

We find that a solution like Juniper offers more features. HPE should compare themselves and see if they can also add such features to their offering. 

I've only been at the organization for six months, and have used this product for that period. The company has used this switch for maybe six years. 

The solution is stable, and the performance is good. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's easy to scale the product. 

We're using the solution in a hospital, and there is a 1,000-plus line.

Technical support isn't as responsive as they need to be. Responses are always delayed. 

Neutral

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

We have only two staff to deploy and maintain the solution and we have an outsourced company for the support contract.

The pricing is okay. However, there are cheaper options (like Huawei). I'd rate the affordability a four out of five. 

We have recently compared the solution with Huawei and Juniper. We looked at options to see which would be best for a proposal. We may change, or we may stick with HPE. Right now, Huawei is cheaper than HPE. 

We are customers. We have a support contract through partners.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

The product is good for hospitals and the healthcare industry since it's quite stable. I would easily recommend this product for healthcare-related scenarios.

We use the solution for Layer 2 switching and we are using it for the searching, VLAN features, and some DDoS prevention and protection.

The Layer 2 switching capabilities are very useful. 

It has an easy initial setup.

The solution offers lifetime warranties. 

It has good stability.

it's been issue-free, and we haven't needed any support.

It can scale. 

We haven't had any issues as of yet.

The quality could be better. For example, I much prefer Cisco. However, they are both almost at the same level. 

The pricing could be lowered. 

I've been using the solution for four years. 

It's a stable solution. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. If it is configured correctly, I will rate the stability nine out of ten. 

They have 24 or 48 ports. It can scale. You choose according to your needs. We have 100 users. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

We've never faced any issues, and our team is very knowledgeable. So far, we have not needed support or assistance. 

We use a variety of products, including Cisco, HPE, Aruba, Ruckus, Cambium, and D-Link. 

For switching and networking, it is okay to set up. We didn't run into any issues. 

The deployment is quick and only takes half an hour. We used the console and the GUI during the process. 

I have one or two resources available to handle any maintenance tasks. 

We handled the setup ourselves via the GUI. 

The solution is a bit expensive.

I tend to prefer Cisco over HPE. We buy HPE mostly for its warranty. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.