DurgaPrasad MalyalaDirector at Datasoft Comnet
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Its hardware is really reliable. We also like Cisco for its support."
"In terms of the features that I have found most valuable, that is basically the hardware, which is more dynamic."
"The initial setup is straightforward and easy to do."
"It is very stable and easy to use. It integrates easily with Cisco's cloud-based UC solutions. There are tools for management that make the management a bit easier, but we don't use them. We don't use what you would term as power users."
"What I really like about the Cisco USC Server is its service profile."
"The hardware customization capabilities are great."
"The product doesn't take up too much space on the rack and I like that."
"The cost benefit of this solution is most valuable. It is quite effective for the work for which we are using it. We are mainly running video servers on these, and we are quite happy with the resilience, density storage, and streaming capacity of the system."
"Its accessibility and manageability can be improved. Currently, we have to visit the office to manage it. It should be manageable outside our network. I would like it to be on the cloud."
"I think the pricing is high. Cisco has to look for bundling this solutions with other applications."
"The warranty and support periods should be extended."
"On the contact center and video conferencing, I would definitely like to see more AI features. The AI features are key for us. You will find a lot of them in the cloud-based solution, but in the on-premises solution, they're hardly there. I would like to see the same AI features that are there in the cloud-based Cisco UC."
"I would like to see a little more integration with VMware."
"Technical support could be more responsive."
"We are quite happy with it, but its price and storage density can be better."
"Cisco is expensive, but we didn't look at the cost of the product. We were looking at reliability and support."
"This product is slightly more expensive when compared to others."
"This product is quite expensive and it would be better if it were cheaper."
"This solution is a little expensive."
UCS C-Series Rack Servers deliver unified computing in an industry-standard form factor to reduce TCO and increase agility. Each server addresses varying workload challenges through a balance of processing, memory, I/O, and internal storage resources.
The HPE Apollo high-density server family is built for the highest levels of performance and efficiency. They are rack-scale compute, storage, networking, power and cooling – massively scale-up and scale-out – solutions for your big data analytics, object storage and high-performance computing (HPC) workloads. From water-cooling that’s 1,000X more efficient than air, to “right-sized scaling” with 2X the compute density for workgroup and private cloud workloads, the HPE Apollo line is a dense, high-performance, tiered approach for organisations of all sizes.
Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is ranked 5th in Rack Servers with 7 reviews while HPE Apollo is ranked 6th in Rack Servers with 1 review. Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is rated 8.6, while HPE Apollo is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers writes "Offers dynamic hardware and saves a lot of space, power, and management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE Apollo writes "Easy to maintain, cost-effective, scalable, and resilient". Cisco UCS C-Series Rack Servers is most compared with Dell EMC PowerEdge Rack Servers, HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Lenovo ThinkSystem Rack Servers, HPE Synergy and IBM Power Systems, whereas HPE Apollo is most compared with HPE ProLiant DL Servers, Dell EMC PowerEdge Rack Servers, HPE Synergy, IBM Power Systems and HPE Moonshot.
We monitor all Rack Servers reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.