IBM Power Systems Reviews

My company uses IBM Power Systems for databases with Oracle and some IBM solutions.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the hardware is really good and reliable.

Speaking about the disadvantages, the tools available to manage IBM Power Systems are not that good. My company also uses VMware, which is easy to use. In IBM Power Systems, things can get complicated when you try to manage the platform.

Price and complexity related to the management of the solution are areas of concern in the solution where improvements are required.

I have been using IBM Power Systems for fifteen years.

Even though my company does have connections with a local partner of IBM, whenever we need direct support from IBM, it can be difficult to get support because even though they say that they support technologies from other vendors, we face a lot of issues in my company when we try to deploy machine since there are a lot of issues in this software of those machines provided by other vendors.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Oracle SPARC is one of the solutions with which my company has some experience. My company switched from Oracle to IBM since we faced some problems with Oracle, from whom we had purchased eight SPARC T4-1 Servers. The problem arose when we had to create a new contact to support Oracle SPARC T4-1 Servers, and Oracle never cared to help us. Rather than resolving our issues, Oracle told my company that we could either migrate to the cloud or buy new servers from them.

The initial setup of the product is complex. In our company, we had an instructor from IBM who told us IBM prefers to make the setup phase difficult. In other platforms, the deployment phase can be completed with a few clicks, but with IBM, you need to do a lot of steps even though the end result may not be as good as you expected.

IBM Power Systems is a really expensive product.

With IBM Power Systems, you get to use IBM PowerVC, which allows you to automate the deployment process of virtual machines in the platform, especially those virtual machines that are a mix of virtual and physical machines. The definition of virtual machines may seem illogical since we also use physical machines.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.

Most of our landscape is on IBM Power Systems.

IBM Power Systems' best features are its reliability, resilience, and performance per rack unit. IBM Power Systems gives a 75% reduction compared to Intel.

One of the main challenges with IBM Power Systems is the functionality of live partnership mobility. When you're running an L4 on one physical machine, and you want to migrate to another physical machine running live, it's very cost-intensive. In addition, IBM Power Systems is less user-friendly than competitors like VMware or Hyper-V. With IBM Power, you have to go to a command line and configure things one by one. In the next release, I would like IBM Power Systems to include a visual operational management console where I can manage all my IBM Power machines end-to-end. I would also like to see hyperconverged systems with their own storage.

I've been using IBM Power Systems for a year and a half.

IBM Power is pretty stable - I would rate its stability at 4.5 out of 5.

IBM Power is scalable - the amount of memory and number of CPU codes that one system can host is twice that of an Intel machine.

IBM takes its support very seriously - whenever you contact them for support, the people who onboard will know how to resolve the issue smoothly. Also, because IBM owns all the hardware in its machines, they don't refer you anywhere else, they take care of everything themselves.

Positive

IBM Power is a bit complicated to set up compared to Intel-based hypervisors. 

Everything that is available on the cloud version is available on-prem as well. IBM Power is more expensive than other rack-mount servers, and you have to have a license for everything, including cores and memory.

I would give IBM Power a rating of nine out of ten.

We use the solution for Oracle databases mostly. We are trying to bring in some new workloads, like Open Shift and Linux. 

It's been very reliable for Oracle databases. The performance has been very good. 

The reliability and availability are both excellent.

It offers very good security.

The performance and stability are great.

Technical support is helpful.

The solution can scale well. 

They simply need to promote or provide more support to open applications like .NET.

We'd like to see the solution support skill servers. 

The pricing is high.

I've used the solution since 1990.

I'd rate the stability ten out of ten. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is very reliable and offers very good performance.

I'd rate the scalability ten out of ten. 

We do have plans to increase usage in the future. 

Technical support has been excellent so far.

Positive

The initial setup was very easy to set up. It's not a complex process. 

We have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is a little high. Some models have a good price. However, many are expensive. We do have a lot of taxes in our company, and that adds to the cost.

I would rate the solution ten out of ten. 

I'm using a variety of versions of the solution. I use Power nine, six, five, ten, et cetera.

I'd recommend the solution to others. The performance is great, and it offers excellent reliability. It is a very good platform. However, it is expensive. 

Using IBM Power Systems, one of our latest resolutions was with POWER9. In our organization, we use IBM Power Systems S922 and S924. S924 is a basic database server with 5200 storage. So, that's the server acting as a database server. S922 is for IBM Spectrum Protect and backup. In the solution, an identical product means hardware production, and DR. HA is then implemented.

IBM's pricing and distribution policies differ from those of Dell, making it challenging for partners to adjust. IBM's approach to managing its partners and securing deals is looser than Dell's. As a result, IBM's partners find it challenging to navigate their policies. Although our company also has a partnership with Dell, there is a significant difference in how the two companies manage their respective partners. Nowadays, we are convinced that when we work on a particular opportunity or a deal, IBM pushes it away from us and presents it to a different partner.

The number of times IBM refreshes its operating system appears to be very slow. This case is true when compared to other tools like VMware, Red Hat, or any other Linux products. In general, the updates or the latest versions of other products are much faster than IBM Power Systems, creating an impression in the market that AIX will perish. Even though IBM might be spending time and money on the products, when it comes to the implementation part involving products from IBM or Oracle, they usually don't have a compatible version that works well with Power Linux. Also, compatible versions are mostly available in AIX. From 2017 to 2023, there has been no significant increase in the number of updates or versions from IBM.

I have experience with IBM Power Systems for eleven to twelve years. My company has a partnership with IBM.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It was not me but one of my customers who used a different solution before choosing IBM Power Systems.

Price-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten. It's a costly solution that needs a lot of effort to convince the customer to choose it.

Our company did compare Intel with IBM during our internal evaluation process.

Speaking about the stability of the solution's system once we configure it, if the system goes down, then it takes time for us to bring it back to normalcy is minimal compared to any other enterprise product we've seen in the market. Also, the features in the solution work well. The number of crashes we experience with IBM is minimal. We anticipate that the rest of the features in the solution will work in the background.

Owing to IBM's pricing and lack of support for their partners, particularly their weak partner support policies, we often encounter difficulties, especially when dealing with larger customers. When navigating through their policies, it can feel like we hit a brick wall. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We've been very satisfied with the solution's capabilities. 

The installation is easy.

It's very stable. There is less downtime.

The product can scale. 

The compatibility with other products could be better. They have a proprietary package to install on the server. With the application or the database, you can install on top of it.

Some competitors may have more features or a certain advantage over this product.

The solution is quite expensive.

We'd like the solution to have a cloud base. Most of it is on-premises.

I've used the solution for almost ten years.

It's very stable. They have a different Hypervisor compared to an Intel-based Hypervisor, like VMware or Red Hat. The Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is like an embedded Hypervisor, so you don't have to rest up the server. If you ever install the packets or any update, it does not require you to rest up the server. It's more stable, and you don't need more downtime.

Maybe the entry level is not very scalable. However, if you are using the enterprise level, like Power E-series, the enterprise series, not the entry-level, it's very scalable. Within the core or maybe the memory, and also the IO, it's very scalable.

In Indonesia, they have local support, however, maybe for certain products, the support is just not as good as the main product, like the Power System or Storage. Maybe for another product, the support is very limited.

We worked with IBM products, among others. 

The installation is very simple. 

From the installer, you install the machine. Maybe you want to install the operating system. It's quite different from Windows or Linux since this is Unix-based.

Compared to Intel, IBM Power Systems is more expensive compared to Intel. Still, if you compare the TCO or the license that you can save using IBM Power, the pricing is almost the same with the Intel base, however, it depends on the application license or the database license. 

In general, the pricing is quite high.

I manage the product at the company. I'm a consultant. We deal mostly with enterprise-level organizations. I'm an IBM partner.

If a company wants to implement the IBM System, maybe it has to check the compatibility of the apps and the DB. Also, if they want to implement the TCO, they have to check the TCO compared to the Intel base. Sometimes, they are only checking the base hardware installation. If they implement the DB or the apps, the pricing may be reduced since the core in Power System is more powerful than the Intel base.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use it to run our current infrastructure and its core and resource planning applications.

The uptime feature is great, and their availability is very high. Since we have been using it, we have not experienced any downtime.

We have been using this solution for more than ten years and are using the Power8 version. It is deployed on-premises.

It is stable, and it has 100% uptime.

It is scalable, and we have a process on demand. Whenever we need additional resources, we pay for the activation. We have close to 10,000 users, and we do not have any plans to increase our users.

The technical support is a direct line, and they are responsive.

We found IBM to be more robust and able to meet our use cases.

The initial setup took us time because we migrated from a legacy to a power system. The migration took us about one week. The OEM IBM provided the consultant that did the installation.

The solution is quite expensive, and deploying it was also expensive. The pricing could be lower.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use it to run our important systems and applications.

I think the performance is good.

I think the cost should be cheaper.

I've been using this solution for more than five years.

We've been using it for a long time, and it's stable.

It is scalable. We have about 1000 users.

There is a yearly licensing cost, and it's an expensive solution.

I recommend IBM Power Systems to those who are interested in having the hardware. I would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We are currently using IBM Power Systems for applications and database core banking.

We found when working with IBM Power Systems that LPM is the most valuable feature.

I would like to see IBM Power Systems integrate with all cloud types.

I have been using IBM Power Systems for the past seven years.

IBM Power Systems is the most stable solution in the world.

The scalability of IBM Power Systems is good.

IBM Power Systems is very expensive. We have mid-range, entry, and enterprise. Every machine has its own licensing.

The setup of IBM Power Systems is complex. There are many steps and it takes three days to a week.

Before you purchase IBM Power Systems you should consider capacity requirements. 

I work with Dell servers in addition to IBM Power Systems.

I would rate IBM Power Systems an eight out of ten.

I use IBM Power Systems for databases.

The most valuable feature of IBM Power Systems is its performance.

IBM Power Systems could improve by having a cloud feature.

I have been using IBM Power Systems for approximately 15 years.

The stability of IBM Power Systems is good.

IBM Power Systems is scalable in my experience.

We have approximately 10,000 people using this solution in my organization. We do not plan to increase usage.

The support provided by IBM Power Systems is very good.

I have not used any other solution in the past.

The setup of IBM Power Systems is easy because I have experience with it before. The full deployment took approximately four months.

We used a partner for the implementation of the solution.

We have seven engineers that provide the maintenance and support of our IBM Power Systems.

The price of IBM Power Systems is expensive and could improve.

I have evaluated Oracle before we decided to choose IBM Power Systems.

I would advise those who want to use IBM Power Systems to always have technical support.

I rate IBM Power Systems a ten out of ten.

The use case is for hosting a lot of the bank's applications.

Some of the most valuable features are the processing power, stability, and security.

I would like to see the scaling model improved so it's not just either tiny or huge.

We have been using IBM Power Systems since 2001, so it's been 20 years.

IBM is quite stable. That's one of their most popular aspects. We just upgraded our power systems recently, so we're going to be working with them through the next five years at least.

The solution is being used quite heavily.

The scalability is a bit above average. It's not the best, but it's a good deal.

The SKU modeling part they have is not very flexible toward customers. Either you have to go very big or you have to go very small. There isn't an in-between. There's not a lot of variety in this.

I have onsite support and I talk to technical support a lot. My experience has been good.

Setup was straightforward, with the help of the professional services from IBM. Maintenance is handled by the IBM team, especially the hardware.

We used IBM partners. Usually it's IBM themselves, not the partners.

The licensing costs are okay. With IBM Power Systems, it's inclusive, so you can differentiate the price of the hardware from the software itself. The power systems are quite expensive. In the end, you equate a means of value. From a value proposition, it is either justifiable or not.

The additional costs are the maintenance and warranty professional services.

Compared to similar solutions, IBM Power Systems has a proven record. They have their own reputation. You have the availability of technical expertise in the market. They're quite compatible with most of the solutions that we work with.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

My advice for an organization that is looking to implement this solution is that they should have the adequate expertise of personnel that can run the system. They should study their TCO and ROI regarding whether it is worth investing in this, given that it's a very expensive solution. These are the two most important aspects.

I would also advise dealing with an appropriate partner or dealing with IBM directly.