IBM PowerVM Reviews

The clients use it as a backup system for high availability and disaster recovery.

It is a reliable system with 99.9% uptime. The live operational ability is there. 

Nothing, it’s almost perfect.

I have been working with this solution for 20 years or so. 

It's a stable product. I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

It's a scalable product. When you need additional processors or disks, you can easily add them and continue to work.

I have one customer using this solution. It's scalable, so you can easily add anything you want. This solution handles large-scale virtual machine deployments and management well.

IBM technical support is always good and quick. We can quickly get a response and solution.

I work on IBM Power Systems, PowerVM, and MIMIX which is high-availability solution. I am not working on Linux, but IBM Power Systems can run Linux.

The initial setup is easy, with a good interface, easy access, and easy configuration.

Very easy setup. In a few minutes, you have a running system. 

It's in a secure place, and users can easily access it. It's much more scalable than a physical system on users' premises because they can easily add disks, memory, and processors. 

Users can safely take the backups, and they have an available system. Users can reach it from anywhere, and it's secure and easily scalable. Administration is easy.

Users can easily add licenses and solutions, and users can select from the administration menu. 

Users can easily select the functions or solutions they want to add and start using them.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten. It looks very good now. Users can start using it in a few minutes, so it's very easy to set up and very easy to use. It's secure and scalable. It's a very good choice.

I use the product for partitioning. My clients use it on different operating systems like Linux. 

The tool's most valuable feature is administration. 

The solution's interface needs to be integrated with messaging analysis. 

I have been using the tool for many years. 

IBM PowerVM's stability is very good.

My company has around 1,000 users for the tool. 

IBM PowerVM's customer service is good. 

Positive

IBM PowerVM's deployment is easy and takes two hours to complete if you plan the numbers and partition. Sometimes, we need to make upgrades. However, it's not a big deal. The public information and the use of IBM resources are enough for us.

IBM PowerVM's pricing is cheap. 

My customers are happy to buy the product since they have a stable system. I rate the overall product a ten out of ten. 

The product is the most stable technology in the market and is one of the most appropriate solutions for our company's clients as it can be used in a simple manner.

Automatic LPM is an area that is currently not available in IBM PowerVM, and it is a feature I want to see in the product's future releases. It was very expensive when I tried to use the tool's LPM functionality.

I have experience with IBM PowerVM. I am a customer and a reseller of the tool.

The product never fails while working and is very stable in general. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution if used in a small place. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Even if the product is expensive, it works well in the long term. The tool is more or less expensive, and I would presently describe it as an optimally priced product.

The product is primarily used in our company's customers' computing environment for subnetting.

The beneficial feature of the product for system scalability revolves around the area involving IBM technology and the face that the tool offers different IBM Power Servers, overlaps, and performance.

LPM in IBM PowerVM is a good technology, but it is not a solution for all problems. I use the solution every day on virtual appliances with big clients, and it is both a task and the main setting.

LPM in IBM PowerVM streamlines IT operations, as it is part of the IT department's basic operations.

Speaking about whether the product has had an impact in areas like cost efficiency and resource optimization, I would say that the solution is expensive.

For every project in my company, we use IBM PowerVM. Generally, all the projects are more easy to handle with IBM PowerVM, including the integrations with other platforms. For me, it's very easy to use the tool as it is available and very comfortable.

I have not tried to manage multiple virtual machines with the tool.

With IBM PowerVM, I have seen a lot of success.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

As a consultant, I primarily use IBM PowerVM for solutions related to SAP and Oracle.

The valuable feature of the solution is the technical aspects, focusing on elements like processor infinity. This involves automatically assigning resources and setting priorities. For instance, specific processes can be prioritized over others, ensuring that higher-priority tasks can utilize resources from lower-priority systems in case of limited resources.

SRM for site recovery is a feature that should be included. The only missing element is the disaster recovery tooling.

I have been using the solution for the past 20 years.

The solution is stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable, and all my customers using it are enterprises.

The support is great.

Positive

The initial setup is quite straightforward, using standard deployment tools. Automation is possible. While I'm more focused on planning as an architect, the setup can typically be completed within a few hours, often ready for use by lunchtime after the deployment request is made in the morning.

The solution is expensive. You have to usually purchase the hardware and acquire licenses for a specific portion. This includes some room for inbox growth. Additionally, you need to buy all the necessary software and maintenance on top of that.

If you have enterprise requirements and seek a stable platform, IBM proves to be a suitable choice for overall enterprise solutions. Overall, I rate it a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is for coding systems and applications. IBM PowerVM has a separate market segment for systems and servers. It has Intel systems and Power Systems. Intel-based or RISC and CISC-based systems are generic. The standard system is CISC-based, so it's a Compact Instruction Set of Computers. In contrast, Power Systems, which we usually procure, is RISC-based, a Reduced Instruction Set system.

Power Systems has a separate market segment regarding systems or servers. So you have Intel systems, and you have Power Systems. Intel-based or RISC and CISC-based are very generic. The standard system you get is CISC-based systems, so it's a Compact Instruction Set of Computers, whereas Power Systems that we usually procure are RISC-based, which is a Reduced Instruction Set system.

Primarily, they differ in the way they process data. Secondly, we have a workload requiring higher clock speed, so when we buy a processor, we look at multiple things. First, we look at how much clock speed the processor gives, which means the power for a single thread of the processor to process data. So let's say you have two processors, one with one gigahertz of thread speed and a second with 40 hertz. The 40 hertz is going to work four times faster when it is processing data. So clock speed is what matters. So when we need higher clock speeds, which means we have heavily dependent or heavy threads or multiple applications with heavy threads, we go for systems with higher clock speeds, and in that case, IBM PowerVM has the highest clock speed up till now.

Secondly, when you need higher memory bandwidth, data travel from disc to memory and from memory to processor for processing. So if the road connecting your disc with your memory and your professor is more comprehensive, you can track and send multiple higher traffic. The other important factor is that in use cases where you need higher bandwidth, throughput from memory is where you should use IBM PowerVM.

And third, IBM PowerVM has a higher cache processor. So when the data is processed in a processor, it must first travel to the cache. There are multiple levels, levels 1, 2, 3, and so on. So you will need higher cache memory, which means fewer round trips from memory to processor and cache. It means faster performance. So you procure IBM PowerVM or systems alike. We deploy the solution on-premises.

The only problem with the IBM system is improving its hardware licensing model. For example, when you procure a server with 40 physical codes, you must also procure licenses to activate the codes. In Dell or any system, you procure the hardware and have the full right to use the hardware. For IBM, it's different because when you procure a 40-code processor and have 40 physical codes, you only have a license to use 20. As a result, the 20 alert codes will always be in activated mode. Hence, the hardware licensing model could be improved because the licensing model is a bit different from the standard hardware procured.

We have been using this solution for approximately two years.

IBM PowerVM Systems are one of the most stable systems for high-end data processing.

The solution is scalable. We currently have more than 1,000 people using our applications on our IBM PowerVM Systems.

IBM has a very good support structure. Once you have an IBM machine, experts from your local country or region can help you if you have any issues. So as far as IBM support is concerned, based on the contract you have of the code, their response time is phenomenal, and they usually are exceptionally equipped with what they need to do. So if the support engineer assigned to you does not understand your problem, there is a tag team member from within the region who can come in and help you out.

There are two parts to the initial setup. If you have procured IBM, you will start services with the server, which is pretty straightforward. IBM mounts the system and installs it to your satisfaction, and if you do not procure the smooth, soft services with an IBM machine, you will have to start from scratch, which will be problematic. You need to know about BIOS and other underlying technologies to do it right. I rate the initial setup ten out of ten.

The price overall of IBM PowerVM is much higher than an Intel machine. So if you can buy an Intel machine for $100,000, a machine of the exact specification, it will cost you around $300,000.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is very good, but the operation and management features could be improved to make it user-friendly.

We use IBM PowerVM primarily for creating dynamic partitions. We utilize the same physical machine for multiple partitions, dynamically moving resources between them based on performance needs. We have moved from using HISMB to Oracle RAC.

PowerVM is straightforward and reliable, especially for ARM backup and storage purposes as it allows for efficient database backups.

The most valuable feature of PowerVM is the dynamic allocation of resources. It allows us to move resources on the fly without needing to bounce applications or servers.

Currently, all the necessary features are working fine for us. However, technical support could be improved, especially when seeking solutions to issues.

I have been working with PowerVM for over 20 years.

PowerVM is very stable. I would rate its stability a ten out of ten.

The scalability of PowerVM is excellent. I would rate it above nine out of ten since you can scale on the fly.

Customer support for PowerVM systems is good, yet there is room for improvement regarding TSM support.

Positive

In addition to PowerVM, we use Veeam backup for its user-friendly features, and the ability to cover various platforms, yet Tivoli is more reliable for database backups.

The initial setup is straightforward. With the latest versions, you can create partitions with a single click, unlike older methods that were more complex.

Implementation involves IBM GPM people for new services, and they work with us during the implementation.

PowerVM is expensive but worth the investment for the reliability and performance it offers.

We integrate with various solutions like Teleo, Salesforce, and others, however, for database and major applications, we rely on IBM solutions.

PowerVM is highly recommended for its performance and reliability, especially for critical systems.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use the solution in my company or our banking sectors, so it is used for our banking customers and for their core banking systems. Most of the critical systems use IBM PowerVM.

In terms of the technology used in the product, I feel that there are some areas where improvements are required. The tool should offer better clustering options.

I have been using IBM PowerVM for fifteen years. My company operates as a systems integrator company. My company has a partnership with IBM and VMware.

My company provides technical support, so in terms of IBM PowerVM, we are technically equipped. At the same time, IBM also offers support for PowerVM. The support is easily reachable.

I have worked with VMware. I don't think there is a direct comparison between VMware and IBM. Mostly for VMware, it's Windows Linux workload on Intel. For IBM PowerVM, critical applications run on AX and IBM i. Basically, the tool is for critical applications.

VMware offers better clustering options compared to IBM PowerVM.

The product's deployment phase is straightforward since my company has been doing that for the longest time.

For a simple environment, the solution can be deployed in one to two days, but for a complex environment, it takes one to two weeks.

I cannot say there's an impact in terms of cost efficiency since it is more on the reliability side. On the cost side, the tool offers more through lesser downtime or lesser need for maintenance, and that has probably impacted the cost of the tool for the customers.

The tool is competitively priced, especially right now. It is not only the IBM PowerVM you purchase but also the hardware since, in terms of compatibility, they are built for each other.

In terms of reliability, IBM PowerVM is one of the best tools. The tool offers a reliable virtualization technology.

The most beneficial part of the product for system scalability revolves around the area of LPARs and IBM PowerHA.

Most of the time, our customers don't use the tool's live partition mobility to streamline operations because the system rarely goes down. If our customers need to move to another tool, they can just switch to a disaster recovery site.

I have faced no challenges in managing multiple virtual machines with IBM PowerVM. Most of our customers have, like, less than ten virtual machines or LPARs, so managing them is fairly simple.

So far, there has been no focus on the AI part in areas like software or the database. The AI part is new in the Philippines, so we don't have any use cases related to it at the moment.

I recommend IBM PowerVM to others, especially for critical applications. I would not recommend the tool to startup companies or those who can just move to the cloud.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use it to create logical partitions. 

The tool's performance is top-notch. 

The solution is quite pricey. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

It is hardware-level virtualization. It does not consume anything from the computer resources. It is pretty good and is light. It is not like VMware or Veeam. It doesn't require a lot of resources.

You can increase resources with it automatically. You can start with a very small capacity of the computer itself. You can have shared resources between multiple applications of the same virtual machines. It is like a shared pool between resources. It is not complicated like others on the market. First of all, consolidation, and second, it is efficient in resource utilization. It is a very elastic solution.

IBM PowerVM does not support Microsoft. This is the only constraint. The IBM PowerVM supports the AIX system, which is a Unix system for IBM Unix, but it does not support Microsoft Windows.

I have been working with IBM PowerVM for the past twenty-two years.

It is a very stable system. It is, against ransomware, and I can say virus-free. IBM PowerVMI is very tough to penetrate with any virus, and data can be encrypted. There is a lot of added value, especially with the new IBM Power Systems, which is coming with very high, very good features like AI. It does not require any maintenance. We have not faced any issues because it runs on the hardware level, so if the hardware will fail, the IBM PowerVM will fail. Otherwise, it is a machine up and running.

IBM PowerVM is definitely scalable.

Technical support is very good with IBM PowerVM.

The initial setup of IBM PowerVM is not complex.

It requires some skill, of course, because you need somebody who knows IBM systems. However, it is not complex.

IBM PowerVM costs more than other products but the customer does not need to pay additional money for the licenses. In VMware, you need to license everything. With IBM PowerVM it is unlimited and all-inclusive in the price you pay.

I would rate IBM PowerVM a ten out of ten.

The solution is comprised of robust technology and is RISC architecture. The hardware is excellent. We never have any issues with it.

The stability is excellent. It's 99% stable. It offers amazing uptime.

The solution is very secure. It does a good job of protecting against cybersecurity threats. We feel safe in this environment.

IBM, as a principle itself, is available here in Pakistan, which is quite helpful. Technical support is great. The parts availability and their engineers, and even their support level at the backend, including a proper research team that can cater to any sort of the issues, are all available here.

They do have the high availability models, they have the HACMP, and they have the GPFS, and they have the Live Partition Mobility. The technology is advancing fast. 

If one can afford commercial offering with respect to the licensing cost and things, their research is going in the right direction in order to hopefully make it more affordable down the line. 

Whenever you go to the virtualization, you may experience performance issues. They need to better cater to virtualization with respect to performance. I'm not saying I'm facing any performance issue, however. It's more of a theoretical concern, as people say you have to compromise with respect to the performance whenever you move to virtualization.

The licensing could be better. The pricing and the licensing fees are very high with respect to the number of core licenses. So price factor on the Intel-based architecture is much less compared to IBM, for example. 

We have not confirmed their roadmap with respect to the cloud. Since IBM has acquired Red Hat, they may promote Red Hat for the cloud version. We don't know whether they are introducing AIX for their cloud platform as well or not. That we would love. Otherwise, we need to move to the Linux environment. In any case, they need to be more transparent with their plans for the cloud.

I've been dealing with the solution for a very long time. It's been more than a decade at this point.

The stability really is quite good. We never seem to have any issues whatsoever. The uptime is excellent. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Technical support has been excellent. I would rate them at a ten out of ten. They are extremely helpful and responsive, and they have a presence in our company, which makes it easy to not only get help but to get replacement parts as needed. They are excellent and we are extremely satisfied with the level of service they offer to customers. 

They have a very good Call Home feature. It's more proactive support. Sometimes if a system has some issue and they know beforehand, they will inform you that your system might face issues. They really try to be more proactive in their approach to support rather than the typical reactive support you might get.

When there wasn't any virtualization, there were a number of boxes that were pretty much the same at IBM. As the technology grew, with machines offering 24 GB memory or 64 GB, or 512GB, the processor limitation became smaller. Virtualization came in around 2005 and onwards, and things were now become less complex now in terms of setup. 

In terms of the number of boxes, they have reduced everything to only one or two boxes. You only have to cater to the maintenance of one box, or you have to manage many SLA contracts. And with respect to the data center, the power consumption is much less. 

Basically, previously, everything was much more complex. However, there has been a paradigm shift within the technology, and the complexity level is not as high as it once was.

The pricing is too high. there are other options on the market that are priced at less of a cost. IBM needs to begin to compete with them a bit more.

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with IBM.

We are using the latest version of the solution, although I cannot speak to the exact version number.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten due to its very proactive support and robust hardware. They are excellent and we are very happy with them overall.

I'd likely recommend the solution, however, it depends. If I've been using IBM for a long time and needed to move to, for example, Linux, it would be a difficult task. There are certain skillsets needed. You'd need some sort of support model. IBM, however, supports SAP HANA very well. You just need to be clear on future plans. That said, I give full marks to IBM as it really is a great system. So long as you don't need the cloud just yet, it's great.