The product must provide more integration. The stock of switching products is an issue most of the time. Delivery time could take up to one month.

When it comes to Dell PowerEdge FX, the area of concern revolves around the delivery time where improvements are required.

I want the pricing of the commercial parts improve. I don't have any technical issues, but I would like to see the commercial side improve as compared to all other OEMs. 

The positioning of the power supply is not ideal. Both of them are on the same side, so you need to untie the cabling when you're installing the server. Another thing is storage separation. The storage can only be used by a particular server blade. I want the ability to use a storage unit for more than one server.

For now, there are no improvements I want in the tool from my side because My company is considered a titanium-level partner of Dell. My company is a titanium-level partner of Dell because we like not only Dell's different storage services but also Dell's other technologies that come under the portfolio of products offered under Dell EMC, which we sell. I don't have any other comments to add about the product's latest generation, especially since Dell PowerEdge offers 16th-generation servers. My company offers Dell solutions to our clients, and if there is any feedback about the tool from our clients, we will notify our vendors. So we give them that comment we have received from our clients. My company would suggest improvements to be made based on the feedback we receive from our clients about the product.

There are certain shortcomings with Dell PowerEdge FX's integration capabilities with different operating systems, where improvements are needed.

They could improve from a manufacturing perspective and not the product itself. For example, the lead time in production is not the best, and it currently takes more than eight weeks to receive goods when we place an order. It might be because of the shortage of silicon chips. It would be great for customers if they could reduce the lead time.

It does not have a graphic processing unit card, and they should add it.

In terms of what could be improved, we always find this kind of a problem when comparing the cost that's provided by Dell to that of HP. Dell's main competitor is HP servers. I don't know about the IBM's, but most of our requests are coming from Dell compared to HP. In terms of the cost, it is a little bit high, meaning, there is some difference in the cost compared to the equivalent product with HP servers.

It should have more simplified management. It is a common problem where vendors think that they have simplified a solution, but the users don't look at it in the same way. A vendor thinks that there are only ten steps for a task, but we consider them as many steps.

It should also have more support for NVMe. For high performance and speed, there should also be more network cards for the fiber channel and ethernet.

There are times when a part might break down and we need to have Dell replace it. 

I think that Dell has full documentation on their products, but it needs to be improved for this one.

Before the cloud solution and virtualization, we relied on Dell hardware from specific vendors. The lifecycle for cloud infrastructure is shorter than it used to be. We need a longer lifecycle from the IT supplier providing the computing solution.