HPE BladeSystem Reviews

Years ago, before BladeSystem, we had an EDM platform. We were working with IBM. We had IBM platforms. They consume much more energy. They are so big, so they take up a lot of space in the data center. At the time, when we migrated to BladeSystem, we reduced the amount of energy, amount of space, and we got more capacity. It's been very useful to us in that sense.

The solution has good scalability.

We can consolidate our learning infrastructure into just one chassis. You can have infrastructure scalability and capacity with memory. It is a great way to pull up together everything inside multiple platforms and in just one chassis.

Overall, its a very good product.

They are not selling BladeSystem anymore. The end of the sale of this platform was this year, 2020. Right now, if you try to buy a BladeSystem, you have to buy Synergy. I did try to buy some BladeSystem Generation 10 solutions in the USA. HP told me that they can sell this for the regular channel of HP still.

Right now, the Synergy platform has a management console that has a lot of options or features that help the administration of the platform. IN addition to that, this console cooling could integrate with the monitoring platform, so we could monitor integrity.

That said, this solution is discontinued, so any new features would only be useful on Synergy.

I've been using the solution over the last year.

The solution is very, very stable. We haven't had any issues with it. It's quite reliable.

The scalability is excellent, and it even takes up less space than, for example, IBM, and uses less energy.

I'm not sure, overall, how many users actually use the product in our organization.

The technical support is pretty good. I would rate it eight out of ten.

I'm using the technical support from Synergy. At the end of the day, it's the same tech support. They're great. That said, sometimes it takes so long, as they often need to recheck many things. Still, they solve the problem if there is one.

We used to use IBM. It was pretty bulky and took up a lot of space. It's hard to compare IBM to HP as IBM doesn't really show any good options.

The initial setup is not complex. It is straightforward.

I set up the solution myself. I didn't need the assistance of a consultant or integrator.

We're just a customer.

We use the solution on Citrix platforms.

The BladeSystem compared with older solutions about energy and processor, offers more capacity and you can gain or minimize the amount of energy that you consume, which is super-helpful.

Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

One of the big problems that BladeSystem could look at is that systems like Microsoft Windows 2019, Linux, or Red Hat 8 demand a lot of RAM memory. There's no adaptable support. The more gigabytes or more processors that the actual operating system has, the better. With Synergy, and the power of Dell, hopefully, there will be support and adaption to the new necessities.

We use HPE BladeSystem as an internal cloud.

HPE BladeSystem makes it much easier since it's been there. We can set up the hardware once and just provision what we need from that.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of management with the hardware.

We are very pleased with using this solution.

We are very happy with what we have, but HPE is not going to continue with BladeSystem. It will be discontinued so we will have to change to another product shortly.

I have been using HPE BladeSystem for approximately seven years.

We use the BL460 series and the version is C7000. We have a mix of Gen9 and Gen10 servers.

Stability-wise, it's been very good for us. 

We have had very few issues with it, hardware-wise, and even very few software issues with it. 

Overall, the HPE BladeSystem has been very stable for us.

For our purposes, it has worked exactly the way we expected it to. 

It has been very scalable for us. We have been able to add additional servers, add additional C7000 chassis, and it just continues to work. It has been very scalable and worked very well.

We have two C7000s, and a total of 17 blade servers. Most of the servers have the attached storage blade for increased storage, besides what's in the blade itself. 

Our initial implementation included a couple of NAS units, but they were very slow, which is why we went with the storage blade units. That gave us better performance.

We have upgraded to some newer NAS units from HPE, and they've worked very well for us, which is why we are starting to slowly shift in that direction. That may change now since we're going to have to go with a new platform the next time we do an upgrade.

I have contacted technical support once or twice, and it was very good. 

We were very pleased with the support that we received.

We went from individual servers, or individual racking at servers, to the blade system.

The initial setup was different than anything we had done before. It was a little bit complex to get initially set up. But, once it was set up, the ongoing management has been fairly easy.

If I had to do it again, it would be very easy to do, now that we're familiar with it.

We rolled it out over time. We modified our implementation a little bit as we went along, as we discovered different features and different capabilities.

I maintain the solution. It only requires one person.

I am not familiar with the pricing.

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

We have had good luck with them, and good success with them. 

We haven't had any issues that are major issues. We have been very pleased with it.

I would rate HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten.

We use BladeSystem is something that we use simply as hardware that is very reliable.  

The most valuable thing about BladeSystem is just like the purpose of the product: it is reliable hardware.  

What we want to improve would be to add more management capability for BladeSystem to be integrated with a cloud platform in a hybrid model.  

Another point to improve. There are sometimes problems with laptops having issues in connecting with virtual connections to the database. The virtual connections can be improved.  

We have been using HPE BladeSystem for a long time. We have always worked with HP it has been between five to ten years working with their products.  

BladeSystem is a very stable solution.  

As it is the hardware that all the applications are running on, it is not like software. You know what you are using and the capacity, it is not like scaling the number of users. The capability of the hardware can be upgraded and more blades can be added. So it is scalable. We are definitely going to continue to use this product and we will scale it as needed.  

The technical support is very good. Generally, we use a subcontractor to do a lot of the things that we require. If they need to, they can contact HPE and work with them. There do not seem to be any issues working this way.  

I have used a lot of products so, I would have to make a long list of products here. It is probably good enough to know that from all of them, we have chosen to work with HPE. We feel it is the best fit and the most reliable product that we can use and it is a reasonable price.  

The installation is very straight forward. We set up the hardware and there is nothing unique or complicated.  

The amount of time the deployment takes depends on the number of servers that need to be deployed. For the typical deployment, we have an HPE engineer on site. For each server it is very quick, let's say one week. The complexity is not very high.  

Ordinarily, we work with a general contractor such as an integrator of a consultant, but that is assuming we have a new deployment.  

It is not expensive, really, in this class of server products, but as a customer, we always hope that the pricing could be lower.  

I would recommend this product for other users who wants to start using it. On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate HPE BladeSystem as an eight-out-of-ten.  

The product can be improved and earn a higher rating by improving virtual connection integration, maybe lowering the cost (without degrading the quality of the product), and having a dedicated contact with HP for some critical issues if they arise.  

We are using HPE for the virtualization. All machines are virtualized, and we are using them in the clusters. They are highly available and set up on the default ones as well. For the DMZ, we use regular rack servers. Those are separate clusters.

The solution is very easy to use.

We find the product to be very stable.

The scalability is great.

Technical support is okay.

These particular blades are no longer being produced. If they produced more or offered support for them I would be interested in getting more.

It would be ideal if they had been offered at a lower price point. If they bring them back, I'd buy them at a lower price point. 

The support you get is dependant on the region. Some regions are better than others.

I have been here, in this company, for more than four years. We have been using the product since I have been here, so it's likely been more than five years that the company itself has used the product.

The stability of the product is very reliable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale well. It's not a problem if a company wants to expand it.

We have thousands of people that use it.

I've been in touch with technical support in the past. The level of service you receive depends on the region. We have two data centers, one in Frankfurt and one in Paris. When we were assigned to the Frankfurt team, they are okay, however, the local French team left us a bit unsatisfied.

Mainly we are using blade servers from different vendors. We have Cisco UCS, HPE blade servers, and Lenovo blade servers on the global team.

In previous companies, I used HPE and the Cisco blade servers as well - the Cisco UCS servers. In one other company, I used Dell servers as well.

It's my understanding that the initial setup is very straightforward and simple. However, I was not directly involved with the initial setup. It was two or three years ago.

I'm not sure exactly how long the deployment process takes.

We have five or six people on staff that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. They are all engineers and one is a team leader.

The price of the product was a bit on the high side. 

You do have to pay for the hardware and a yearly licensing fee.

I'm a customer and an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very happy with its capabilities.

I would recommend it to others.

We primarily use the solution for our SQL Server VMware virtualization. We put this on our on SQL Servers and VMware virtualization systems on this product. 

The solution uses a smaller space in our data centers. It uses less feeder and network cable, which reduces costs. Troubleshooting is also easier than other options.

The solution saves us space and resources (like cables).

It's very easy to troubleshoot if we have issues.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The response time in terms of getting technical support assistance could be improved.

It's a bit expensive. They should work on bringing down the pricing if they can.

We have one older model, we've used for maybe six or seven years. We also have a new one, which is Synergy, we've used for two years.

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It's free of quirks and it doesn't crash or freeze.

The scalability is good. If a company needs to expand it out, they should be able to do so.

Our company has over 5,000 users on this solution.

We will continue to use the solution into the future.

The technical support is okay, I'd rate it seven out of ten overall. Their response times could be faster.

We didn't switch from a different solution. We had older models which we updated. We've always used HPE.

The initial implementation is not complex. It's a pretty straightforward process.

We deployed the solution over 100 servers, and it didn't take too long to deploy.

We have about ten to 20 people managing the solution.

We had a vendor assist us with the implementation.

I don't know the exact cost of licensing, however, it's my understanding that the solution is relatively expensive.

We're simply a customer. We don't have a business relationship with HPE.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using or if it's the latest.

I'd recommend the solution to other companies.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at an eight. If the pricing was better and they offered better support, I would rate the solution higher.

In my company, they tried to convert to hyper-converter due to the fact that the on-premise server is still a low demand. Some workloads we have moved to public CoW. We tried to reduce our footprint, our data center, to use only hyper-converged. It's good for that purpose.

The solution is very easy to use. It's not overly complex. I'd describe it as a user-friendly product.

The solution is stable. The performance is good.

The solution can scale to a certain extent.

It's an old-fashioned technology now. 

I'm not sure precisely what should be improved. I can't recall any missing features.

If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company.

I have ten years of experience with this solution. It's been about a decade. I've used it for quite a while.

The solution is very stable. We find it to be quite reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. Its performance is very good.

While the solution is pretty scalable, every company has its own context. Therefore, the scaling process might be different. In my future plans, for example, it's hard to reduce my footprint, as the workload has moved to CoW. Something that's based on-premise has limited parameters. That's why I'm trying to use the totally hyper-converged system. 

I don't really have any direct experience with support from HPE, however, when they had the reports about the system, I would say the review was that they were okay. There have been no complaints. We're satisfied with the level of service, from what I can tell. I have heard nothing negative about the level of service.

I'm not an operations person. I can't speak to how easy or difficult it is to implement the solution. It's not an aspect I worried about or specifically had to deal with.

As I wasn't a part of the implementation process, I cannot speak to if there was any assistance with the process. 

We are simply a customer and an end-user. We don't have a professional relationship with HPE.

I'd rate the solution, on a scale from one to ten, at a nine. We've mostly been quite pleased with the product and its capabilities. 

I would recommend the solution to other users, companies, and organizations. 

We use it for direct authentication of the network storage of our files. We also use it for running some application systems, such as the student information management system and the accounting system.

We have DL360 and DL380. For storage, we have HP 2000.

They are very fast and very reliable. They are working under very tough conditions.

We had a few hard drives that crashed, and we couldn't find them locally. We've tried internationally, but we are still struggling to get its spare parts. This is the main challenge that we have faced with this solution. Fortunately, the other drives are still working. There should be easy availability of spare parts. I should be able to request a quotation online from HPE for things that I am not able to get locally. Currently, I can order online, but when I type the serial number, most of the time, it is rejected. I don't know why it is happening. It could be because the company that sold us the system didn't buy it through the normal HPE channel. HPE should assist us as users to get the spare parts.

Its security needs to be beefed up. I would like some security features. It was also challenging for us to set it up because we didn't get enough training from them.

I have been using this solution since 2013.

It is a very reliable solution. I've worked with other servers, and I find HPE BladeSystem very reliable.

We haven't tried to expand the solution. We have around 3,000 students and 255 staff members who use this solution.

Normally, we just look for some technicians around Botswana, and they come and assist us.

The setup was a little bit challenging because we didn't get enough training from HPE for setting up the cluster servers.

Its pricing was good. We selected this solution because it was within our budget. We paid just once when we bought it. We never bought any license. 

I would recommend this solution based on the robustness of the machines. It is the best system in terms of the value for your money.

I would rate HPE BladeSystem an eight out of ten.

We are primarily using the solution for a hypervisor.

The solution is very easy to use. It's user-friendly and simple to navigate.

The space conservation it provides is excellent. It helps compact the server.

The product is quite stable. Its performance is reliable.

The solution can scale. A company can expand it if it wants to.

The solution could use better management capabilities. The interface in terms of management could be much more intuitive.

I've been using the solution for two years at this point.

The solution is very stable. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can definitely scale. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so with ease.

We have about 2,000 end-users currently.

We do plan to continue to use the solution.

While HPE Synergy has quite good technical support, on other HPE products, it's not quite as good.

That said, on Blades, we've never really used the technical support.

We previously just used normal HPE servers. Other than that, we've never used another solution. We've never used a Blade system.

We did not handle the installation ourselves. I can't speak to how easy or difficult it was to execute.

We have about 20 people that can handle any maintenance.

We hired a contractor that implemented the solution for us. We did not handle the process ourselves.

We paid for the hardware itself. I can't speak to the actual costs. It's not an aspect I directly deal with.

We're a customer, however, indirectly with HPE. We purchased the solution through a reseller. We don't deal with HPE directly.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. I don't have the version number on hand.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten overall. It's been largely quite capable.