HPE Ethernet Switches Reviews

We primarily use the solution for data communication, the data center, and wireless. All of our switches are HP.

The switches offer simple management. I can control what I need using CLI. CLI commands are very simple and are somewhat similar to Cisco CLI. We can manage them, we can update them freely, and the warranty is unlimited. This is the solution's most valuable feature.

The solution uses a single interface and that interface contains everything.

The stability is very good on this solution. There have been no bugs, glitches or crashes.

Scalability on the solution is easy. It's not too difficult. Right now, we have about 150 users on the solution.

We've contacted technical support many times. They are quick to respond. We're satisfied with them.

I have used Cisco switches before. Cisco updates are more difficult on switches. Also, the initial setup is more difficult.

The initial setup is easy. Deployment only takes a few minutes.

I handled the installation myself.

The pricing is a bit lower than Cisco switches.

We use the 2500 PoE switches.

I have a lot of experience with HP switches. They're very reliable and are implemented easily. The features that they offer are more than enough for our hospital. There are other features on solutions like Cisco and Juniper, but for what we need, this solution is perfect.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for the customer's assurances in medium-size businesses.

The deployment model that we are using is on-premises, but it is going more and more in the cloud direction.

The most valuable feature is the IRF. It is very good, it has a multi-connection that you can do with multiple aggregation protocols to different chassis and this is a very valuable feature.

It's easy to stack more switches together if you need more ports.

Technical support needs improvement.

Customer awareness, as in the availability of the products, needs to be improved through marketing or other information.

Currently, we haven't seen any new switches and we don't know if there will be others.

In the next release, I would like to see them include more features like the Aruba solution, to have more possibilities concerning the software design.

This solution is very stable. It's a very good solution.

This is a scalable solution. With the IRF you can stack the switches willfully together locally or geographically. You can have the same switch even if you have a switch ten kilometers away from your location.

Technical support needs improvement.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy.

The time it takes to deploy depends on if the customer. An SD solution that will use management to configure the switches automatically will take minutes. If you have to configure a stand-alone switch it can take half an hour.

For ten customers there may be one person to deploy the switch and maintain it. You would rarely have to replace a switch.

There is no license for this solution.

We need a license for having a management solution, but the switch does not need a license. There are free software updates and there is a lifetime warranty for a few of the switch series.

If a customer has an issue with a switch and has to return to HPE, they can have it replaced within thirty days.

To our customers, we offer a contract service to have an exchange within the next day.

I would suggest not to invest in this switch. Aruba, which is also HPE, has a great switch. Aruba is taking over these types of switches because of the DLAN and WLAN. 

I agree that HPE provides good products but I would go with Aruba OS.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use HPE Ethernet Switches for access control or access switches.

HPE Ethernet Switches have helped us build ACLs and VLANs.

They are effective. 

We have some fairly simple requirements, we can do the things that we need to do, it gets the job done. The interfaces are more user-friendly than they were ten years ago. 

It is simple to operate, and they have the feature sets that we require.

It's fairly lightweight, they don't require a lot of maintenance.

In general, the web GUI, or web interface, requires improvement.

Interface, and the ability to do things that are only possible through the command line, which seems pointless because there is no reason to have a command line for many of the functions.

The ability to stack, as well as a unified operating system, would be extremely beneficial. It isn't there. They are budget switches.

I have been using HPE Ethernet Switches for 15 years.

We use several versions of this solution, ranging from the most recent to some that are over ten years old. We have a full spectrum of switches.

We have no issues with the stability of HPE Ethernet Switches. It is stable and it works.

Scalability is determined by a pricing decision. HPEs are not at all a Juniper or anything like that, but for a budget shop like ours, they are adequate.

Our company has 250 users who use this product extensively.

I have never contacted technical support.

Previously, we had not used another solution. We started with HPE Ethernet switches.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward.

It took a couple of hours to get it set up and configured.

I am responsible for the maintenance of the product.

We did not use a consultant or integrator to assist us with the configuration, we did it ourselves.

There are no licensing fees, the price of the product is all that is required.

It is what it is and can be used by anyone; no expertise or prior knowledge is required.

I would rate HPE Ethernet Switches a seven out of ten.

We primarily use this solution for video surveillance.

The best part about this solution is the price.

This solution is easy to use.

The technical support for this solution has improved from what it was.

We have had some rare occasions with glitches, so the stability can be improved.

This solution is stable, but on the rare occasion, we have had glitches like dropped packets.

We do not tolerate serious issues in the backbone or infrastructure. We do not go for something cheap and hoping that it will work, especially when it comes to networking.

I cannot comment on the scalability because it is not something that we consider. When we decide on a solution, we go for it completely, from the beginning to the end. We start with the complete solution on day one, as opposed to starting small and then looking to scale it later on.

The number of users for each of our switches depends on the circumstances. In some sites, we have ten or twenty users. In other sites, depending on how big it is, like an industrial facility or a hotel, we do not know. Many of our solutions are used in retail or hospitality environments.

We do not speak with HPE technical support because everything has to go through the distributor.

Most of the time, we use solutions from Cisco. They are well supported in Egypt. However, new regulations in Egypt require that if we are buying a product from abroad then we have to be a partner, and have a letter from the vendor to indicate this. Is has to do with the ability to provide local support.

Because we are not a partner with Cisco, we need to purchase equipment from the local partner. This means that we have to work with their fees and time schedule. Paying in advance is not a problem, but you have to wait for an unspecified period of time to receive your equipment. They won't give you an estimate as to the duration.

We switched to HPE simply because they are easier to get than Cisco or Sophos.

Our deployment took a couple of days.

We have not had to maintain our switches, except for one time when we had a bad experience. It was a long time ago, and we had HPE switches from a system integrator. One had a problem and it was under warranty, but instead of replacing the switch, they started swapping pieces one at a time. This switch was in a very crucial data center and it was very difficult to get there.

Ultimately, we lost the customer and the system integrator lost their reputation. I think that HPE lost a lot because it was much easier to replace the entire unit instead of replacing one piece at a time. They ended up replacing entire modules. Since that time, we don't rely on local partners. We talk to HPE directly or we collect the whole unit and send it to HPE.

Our in-house team handled the implementation.

Licensing fees are on a yearly basis.

These switches are not as stable as those from Cisco.

We were looking at some switches from Alcatel-Lucent, but they are not popular in Egypt.

This is a solution that I recommend.

My advice to anybody researching this type of solution is to not go for the cheap solution. Go for the right one. You get what you pay for.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The company wanted to extend our network and also wants to have the SAN storage, so we deployed it on other switches to create a new network segment and also connect the SAN switches on it.

The solution works well and offers good performance. The client is satisfied. 

We found the installation process to be simple. 

The solution is stable.

It can scale. 

Technical support is fine.

I cannot say what areas need improvement. 

We would always be happier if the price were reduced. 

I've used the solution for less than one year. 

The solution is stable. It offers good performance. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's scalable. 

We only have two clients on the solution at this time. 

Technical support has been fine. They are okay. I find them to be responsive. If we need help with something, we can get assistance. 

I'm working a lot with Aruba Switches right now. 

The product is straightforward to set up. It's simple. We did not find it to be complex. One switch might take a day to deploy and two or three days to finalize the operations and make it stable. It takes about that long to make sure everything is working well. 

I'm not sure of the exact cost of the solution. Of course, it could always be less expensive. 

I'd recommend the solution to certain clients. It's a fine product.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten. 

I would say, to start with, the most valuable feature is that HP is not too different from existing systems. You don’t have to change too much the mode of operation that the ops teams are used to, and the command interfaces are workable.

We’re still in the implementation phase.

We’ve been getting fixes for things that were missing initially, but v6 support is there and has everything we need.

Because this is a modular device, we feel we can use scale in the future. The IRF is also important to us.

Overall good. We’re running into some issues when looking at beta code, something HP isn't focused on. The support people don’t want to talk too much about that.

We’re basically trying to look at an openstack infrastructure solution. We’re using it on a voice-over-infrastructure, supporting IMS. We’re using a Cisco solution right now.

I would say it’s no more complex than anything else, so we’re learning that people are protecting systems a bit differently.

We looked at -

• Cisco
• Juniper
• Alcatel Lucent
• HP
• Aresta
• Erickson

We chose HP because they met most of the criteria that we were looking at, and they were able to come up with some solutions that were a little outside of the box when things didn’t quite fit. They were more proactive on the sales/engineering side and with pre-solution support.

You should look for high performance, low maintenance, open flow, and XLAN when choosing a solution. Compatibility with other products is also very important. Some routing protocols were required.

Overall, the solution is a little more complicated than we initially wanted, but it’s pretty good. It’s going to be a learning and teaching experience for service providers. Solutions are there, but they’re not always the same methodologies for the same businesses.

We use the switches to connect end users to the devices. 

We get a lifetime warranty for the solution so whenever the switches get faulty, you can get a replacement. 

The tool should be more stable. 

I have been working with the product for more than ten years. 

The product is scalable. 

I never contact the support since I resolve issues by myself. 

The product is easy to set up. I configure the tool in 5 minutes. 

The tool's pricing is very cheap. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

The primary use case of this solution is for the office network connection.

What I like the most is the management system integrated with the HP system. Our server is HPE and we have the management system to supervise. Now it is our system, but at the same time, it is the HPE because it is integrated into our system.

I am now using a new model because we had a problem with the speed, but the problem was with the network infrastructure, not with the HPE. We did not have the fiber backbone in our company.

We need more support to fix simple issues. For example, to find a problem in the LAN or why the systems speed is slow.

When we have a lot of clients on the system, we lose signal and have to restart our antenna. 

It would be better to be able to provide my number and have the information needed in regards to the equipment when a change is proposed.

You will need the assistance of a technician because the implementation is not that easy.

If you change your old equipment then it will be replaced but you have the same issues in five years' time because HPE does not have the equipment to solve my issues.

In the next release, I would like to see technical support for simple issues and to simplify the implementation.

I have been using this solution for six years.

This solution is stable. 

The switches have been installed for a minimum of five years, and have never been switched off. The problem is the cable or the rack gripped the cable, not the switch.

The switches are old, but there are components available that are not too expensive.

We have fifty users. This includes a technical and IT office with three people, a mechanical office with ten engineers, and an electronic office with three engineers.

This solution is scalable.

In our company, we want to change to a Fiber backbone and the switches we have are too old and only have STF ports with a maximum speed of one gigabit. The network needs ten gigabits to scale one gigabit for the client.

The technical is okay for our system. With the issue we have now, we contacted web support. We were satisfied with the support that we received. 

We had a problem with the shipment being lost, and they had to ship another one, but that was a problem with the shipper and not HPE.

The support not only solves my problems but they try to solve future problems that may occur.

Previously we used Cisco Atlantis. We switched to HPE because we had a good impression of this solution and good experience with the switches. Our network system was also older, with older equipment.

I find the setup in Cisco to be more difficult than HPE, but I know HPE better than Cisco.

If you use the web interface, the GUI interface, you need to have a basic knowledge to manage the network, it's easy. If you use the command line interface it's not as easy.

The time it takes to deploy really depends on the complexity of the network. If, for example, you have one HPE switch without a VLAN system, it's not easy. A network deployment can take a week with ten switches and to set up every port.

To implement this solution to make a separate VLAN for the CMC or to deploy the VPN connection we used an external technician. The technician, in this case, was HPE certified.

There were three options, but we prefer HPE, it was our first choice.

My advice would be to draw the network system before calling a technician. It's necessary to do a good job.

The price is not the only thing to consider when making your decision.

The switches are guaranteed for life, it's a great solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.