I did evaluate other options like Dell. I chose HPE since I think it's much easier to use.

We're in the early stages of replacing some of our legacy hardware. Currently, we're primarily HPE, and we do have some Lenovo racks, and they're pretty old. Some of them are approaching six years.

I haven't directly dealt with HPE, but I've heard that HPE has been really good. People didn't have any complaints, but my boss's boss likes Lenovo for some reason. We're doing a general cost analysis and shopping around to see what it is like out there and what other people have experienced. We are looking at solid state because we are currently on mechanical hard drives. 

Ideally, we'd like to keep everything in the same family just to limit complexity and have the same manufacturer. Having two or three manufacturers means extra things to have to look after. We are moving to the cloud as well. We're just trying to make our server room less complex.

We did look at a few others in the past, we haven't in a long time. Obviously we are an HPE shop. We did look at the Dell blades, the IBM blades, even Cisco's UCS system as well for a while, so we did actually do the proper comparisons across everything.

We chose HPE as everyone already knew the systems, knew how they worked. Ultimately, going through the other systems, HPE was the easiest one to go in and just start setting up and configuring right away out of the gate.

We are currently comparing the solution to Lenovo.

We currently use both HPE BladeSystem and EMC from Dell. Personally, I prefer HPE because I have more experience with it. 

We are currently evaluating and researching other options because we are looking for simplicity. We plan to replace our HPE BladeSystem with converged or hyper-converged infrastructure.

We were based on different hardware vendors. We selected HPE due to the cost of the hardware; also for the scalability of the materials, and the different models that could be inserted or interchanged in a chassis; also the easiness of the deployment. That's how we selected HPE BladeSystem. We also considered Dell, Cisco, IBM, and Oracle.

I know they looked at Cisco a little bit but I haven't myself.

I have evaluated Dell and IBM products as part of an overall review of possible solutions for the customer.

We will be evaluating other solutions since we discovered that they are not going to be making the BladeSystem anymore.

We are constantly evaluating HPE BladeSystem vs Cisco UCS and  HPE Synergy vs HPE BladeSystem .

I did a trade study on this, I think HP has a big offering in terms of the number of blades that they offer and the amount of blades they can fit in a chassis, so I think they're actually ahead of the game compared to IBM and Sun/Oracle, and some of the other ones I've seen with Dell. I would say HPE is probably at the top of that game.

We've been an HPE shop for a while. We know the service that HPE offers, so there really wasn't a need to explore another company in regards to blade systems. We are happy with HPE, and for now we're going to stick with them.

We compared HPE blade servers with Cisco blade servers. Cisco is good, but expensive. I don’t have experience with them, but one of my friends has it. Later, they decided to go with HPE. 

From our perspective in IT, you should look for the solution which fits your needs. It doesn't matter who the vendor is; but if you go with HPE, they have a lot of good experience in data centers. 

We decided to go with HPE blades and enclosures. They are very powerful and they fit our needs. HPE fits our needs, especially because they also have the back-end storage, like 3PAR. 

I recommend having a full stack with a single vendor, so you only have to deal with one company for support.

Now our company is thinking about buying new servers. It's called HPE Apollo, I think. It's in progress. It's very good. I hope we will get more experience with HPE, especially from a training perspective.

We went with HPE because of the performance. We set it against Dell, and evaluated its performance, because we also buy their hardware products. But, to be honest, we found Dell's far slower. We just said, there's no way we're going to go for that.

In general, when selecting a vendor to work with, cost and performance are the most important criteria.

We looked at also using the Cisco UCS platform. The UCS I felt was more complicated than what we needed. Perhaps another customer might choose it over HPs, but the features that UCS had didn't appeal or apply to us. If you're standing up dozens and dozens of chassis on a daily or weekly basis, then maybe those copy/paste features in the Cisco systems would benefit. But for us, I like the simplicity of the HP BladeSystem. I liked it; all of our staff are already familiar with HPE hardware, so they knew they could take it apart and do whatever maintenance they needed to do. With the Cisco, it was learning curve that we didn't want to have to ramp through. We still use it because Cisco requires you to use their play systems for the phone products.

We have only used HPE infrastructure. Previous to blades, we were using Standalone Rack form factor servers like the DL380 model.

If I were brand agnostic, I would probably select CISCO UCS, but this didn't exist when we decided to use HPE blades.

Now, with Synergy Composable Systems, HPE probably takes a leap forward in technology and puts itself at the forefront. Please keep in mind that technology.

We looked at Dell and Cisco, and we actually just re-evaluated them again last year. We decided to stick with the HP because we were happy with the product. I guess because I was the decision maker, and I've been happy with HP. Unless there was a real business reason to switch, and there wasn't, so we stuck with HP.

We casually looked at Cisco UCS (we’ve currently got a running installation, both fairly young machines right now), which completely loses to HP on ease-of-blade configurability. We’ve also got some Hitachi blades that are even worse.

The hardware is perfectly good hardware, unlike Cisco where I don’t like some of the design, and Hitachi’s blades just aren’t economical for our growth and configurability uses. You only have to configure the amount of blades that you need with HP.

Dell, Cisco, ans briefly Hitachi. HP came out on top primarily for its knowledge in our organization. On the server front, everything is similar, and there was no real need to jump ship.

If your company scale is small to mid-enterprise, you could consider the QNAP TDS Series. This can act both as a physical host and hypervisor. There is no need to buy additional VM licenses if you want to create a VM environment.

Or, 

If your company scale need below 16 servers, you should consider the siblings, the c3000 model, it has 8 bays rather than 16 bays, so it won't overkill your budget.

We considered Cisco but it's not really a good idea for us because we have worked with HPE for a long time. Hardware is one thing but support, and the people behind the support, is another thing. We are happy with HPE.

We didn't evaluate others, as we were forced to buy this solution by governmental policies. We are part of the Ministry of Health.

We've certainly looked at other providers in the past. We know Dell's out there. We know IBM's out there.

We were Compaq users before HPE really got into the server space. That acquisition was 10 or so years ago. Due to our relationship with Compaq, we inherited HP as our primary provider of server hardware in the X86 space.

We looked at a ton of other options, some within HP, and some from Cisco. The HP Blades made the most sense for what we were getting.

We considered IBM. We made a choice for HPE, and it has been working well for us.

We also looked at Dell solutions.

When selecting a vendor, reputation and pricing are most important.

We evaluated Dell before choosing HPE HPE BladeSystem. They were very similar solutions. However, after the negotiation by our commercial team, they choose BladeSystem based on price.

We did not look at anyone else. We did not use any other HPE products, as such. We have bought into the Cisco solutions, as well. That keeps expanding.

We were moving from ProLiant, and we have a vendor who has a big HPE shop, and I think they sell more than anybody else in Nevada, and we've been very happy with them. They said, "Well, this is what you need." And we said, "Okay." The price was fair, and we thought, "Okay, we're going to do it." One of the troubles with our systems is we have to plan so far in advance on what we want to get that we kind of target something. We might look around a little bit right at the last minute, but in this case, the name HPE, the support we get from our people and HPE, and the price just made it that we had to go that way.

We’ve been with HP forever, so I don’t think so.

We previously used IBM Servers and we may revisit this if Lenovo fixes the issues with the IBM servers. We also haved used Cisco UCS servers where the deal suited. I still believe HP is still ahead of both Cisco and IBM.

We evaluated IBM BladeCenter and HPE BladeCenter M1000 Series.

We chose this solution quite a long time ago. I don’t remember what else we considered. We chose HPE because we were already an HPE customer.

Yes, IBM Blade Center with HS22 blades and DS series storage. We preferred HP due to a combination of facts involving better prices, better support and better interoperability with other systems.

We evaluated other solutions such as Oracle's Sun Blade and Dell's PowerEdge blades.

Initially, we were using Compaq equipment. Then Compaq and HP merged. We did do trials with IBM, but we found it to be a bit of a step back in that the kit just wasn't quite as high tech. It just seemed at the time it was a massive step back in the way we were working. HP seemed like it was a step ahead.

We've got Dell blades. I'm a little bit more biased because I've used them and I'm more familiar with them. I still prefer the HPE blades. We chose HPE over Dell because the interface manager seemed more intuitive with HPE. Dell didn't seem to put it together as well.

It was a decision between the internally-developed product or HP. There was a synergy with other products already using HP, so we went with HP.

We looked at Cisco UCS but the manageability of it and learning a new product wasn't something we wanted to do. We also felt like these were still a superior product.

We also evaluated options from Dell.

Sure, the IBM and DELL alternatives.

I've worked with other vendors in the past, but not in a recent project.

We evaluated the IBM Blades System.

We were looking at VCE Vblock, HPE, Oracle and IBM. We went with HPE because the HPE platform is about 60%, IBM is about 10%, and Oracle is about 30%.

We're an HP shop with hardware and software, so we stick with them for all our IT.

We also considered Dell. We had a big conversation over what to do and ultimately decided to get something that could cover a huge service area. The best thing for us, we determined, was to go with HP servers. They fit our needs the best.

We did not evaluate other options for the blade system. However we did evaluate other options/vendors for the storage system.

We evaluated other products such as Dell and Cisco Blade Servers.

We didn’t really look at other vendors. We did briefly look at Dell, and some others, but HPE being HPE, it was a “no choice” scenario. It is a really, really good solution.

We evaluate all the responses to our requirements. After the selection is made for two to three products. Then commercials are checked and the best price solution is selected.

We considered the typical ones, the big three: IBM, HPE, and Dell.

We also use Cisco UCS and IBM Flex servers.

We evaluated Cisco UCS.

No.

You have to look at the newer options now, especially Synergy. Keep in mind that existing servers cannot be used in the new model since it’s a completely new type of product redesigned from the bottom up with new case and everything. If you are adding servers to an existing Blade System, go for that solution since it is cheaper and still allows you to utilize your assuages.

SimpliVity and Dell.

I evaluated Supermicro twins.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

We did not really consider any other options.

None.

We looked at Dell and Quanta. HPE has very good technical support and that makes a difference; at least compared with Quanta for instance.

We also use Cisco UCS and IBM Flex servers.