The tool has shortcomings in its performance monitoring part. The product should offer better performance monitoring to users.

There is room for improvement in support.

HPE ConvergedSystem could be enhanced by improving the built-in backup solution, as the current one fell short of our needs and led us to opt for third-party tools like Veeam. Additionally, addressing challenges related to remote copy functionality, especially in low-bandwidth conditions, would significantly improve the overall usability and effectiveness of HPE solutions in our setup.

Pricing is an area of concern in the solution where improvements are required.

HPE ConvergedSystem needs to improve its price. 

HPE ConvergedSystem needs to improve its management. I would like the tool to add cloud management features so that the system can be accessed anywhere from the cloud. 

In terms of our HPE ConvergedSystem, currently we use Gen8 Blade Systems and HPE c7,000 chassis in our environment. We have a three-part 7400 module in our environment. We also have StoreOnce 6000 models here for backing up our operating systems. Currently, we have problems with the HPE StoreOnce module in regards to the backup operations. This is because sometimes we can lose our backup reports storage from the Veeam side. We checked this issue on the HPE side and it was suggested to us to use the catalyst model instead of a 6-sharing model. They say that this approach can solve our issues easily, but we are still testing to see if this is the case.

Full flash systems require high utilization of the application. Due to this, HPE changed their systems into full flash modules. Currently, we use inbuilt modules in our environment. These kinds of modules require fast disks and SSD disks, but SSD disks are generally used for the caching of operations. The majority of our data is located on the fast disk. Due to this, sometimes we experience some ancillary issues. 

The solution needs to add NFS features.

The issue with scalability is, at some point, the hardware infrastructure. Discussions involve your current array or rack, whether it must be completely removed, and whether you must bring in a new structure.

With ConvergedSystem, we'd like to see just how portable and scalable HP can make it. Is it really just an add-on each time and not a complete redesign? HANA requires an upgrade as the number of units increases. We're hoping that HP can make scalability easier over time.

The interface is not fully integrated with the ESXi, which is something that could be improved.

My biggest pet peeve with the HC250 are the descriptions that they put on our parts list. For example, multiple times now someone asked me, they said, "Hey, they want to take this option off the quote," and I said, "No, it's required." Then they came back to me and they said, "You know the customer, they don't believe you," and I said, "Okay." Basically, with ConvergedSystem, if you're doing a VMware solution, you don't have to buy the software from us. If the customer has the correct licenses, the correct type of licenses, it's an option for them. The description for the software that's required, which includes the VSA, which includes our OneView integration, which includes all this other stuff, they call it the VMware software license. People think they can remove that and so, they come back to me and I say, "No. This is what this part number includes, but it's the description." There's my biggest pet peeve with ConvergedSystem.

We don't have any problems with it at the technology level. I can't think of any improvements they can make. I think they are doing pretty much what any other converged infrastructure services system can do. Perhaps faster allocation of memory or storage.

However, I am sure we are not the only healthcare company that works with them. They need to work more as a team to solve common business problems.

If you're asking me about the technology, I don't see anything that they can do, other than growing the hyper-converged. But I think things have grown as far as they can. However, in terms of their direction as an enterprise, I don't think they are very good. It was a very rough ride. The people they sent, I don't think they had experience in doing these kinds of implementations before. It was pretty painful. It's working now but it took too long.

HPE ConvergedSystems doesn't upgrade as often as other solutions. For example, I have had to change the infrastructure several times for our customers who have SAP, they have gone from P4000 to P6000.

We are currently migrating our customers to SAP S/4HANNA. Their infrastructure has a five-year lifespan. After five years, they need to change it. They now have a new CEO, CFO, and CIO, and the new customers want to try new things.

Perhaps they will change the infrastructure. This firm has many customers with new CIOs and CDxOs, and they are considering changing their infrastructure. The infrastructure is better with what they currently have, but with new people, they want to look at other possibilities.

I would like to see monitoring solutions included, as well as brand support.

Customers' infrastructures must be supported at all times. In Colombia, for example, we meet many customers who have different brands, such as Dell, IBM, or HPE, which is either their headquarters or a branch. However, each branch has a single point of contact and a single support provider. The customer prefers to deal with only one branch and one support representative. I recommend that HPE provide support for various brands and Dell products.

I think the MTG inside HP could be improved. It would simplify quoting for services. When you get a quote from HP now, they tend to quote separately for services and the product. This makes it difficult to try to quote for the client and to integrate the solution. 

For the future, it would be good to see integration with cloud services. Our customers want to share the solution, currently on-premise, to the cloud, and it's sometimes difficult to implement. It would be great if they could bridge the two. 

Something that we think should be better in the HANA converged solutions is all of the monitoring of the solutions. I think there is improvement space there, to have more data available for the final customer. And from the service point of view, the HPE team that is supporting the solution, could do a little more and have more data to show to the final user, in our case, about the performance and trans with the box.

We would like the system to be even faster.

I would like to see a full flash array added and the pricing improved, as HP is expensive.

I would like to see better manageability and integration with third-party tools.

I would like to see persistent memory deployed in this solution, as I have not yet seen it in any converged system.

One thing that we find peculiar is, when you buy ConvergedSystem, it seems to be behind in the versions it supports. For example, vSphere 6 is just now being supported. OneView 2 is just now being supported, even though they have announced OneView 3. We're already a version behind. I know they're probably working and testing as quickly as they can, but we always seem like we're behind the curve with these new features that we know are out that we can't take advantage of and that are supported on the blades individually. They're supported on the blade system individually, but once you get the ConvergedSystem, all of a sudden, they're not supported. I understand that we want a rock solid infrastructure that's well-tested, but I'm hoping they can speed up compatibility with newer versions of software and drivers and so on.

The solution needs to be easier to use. The administration's ease of use it poor and it needs a better administrative console.

The solution has a complicated front-end.

In terms of features, the solution is very complete. It doesn't seem to be missing features that I can see that would need to be added in future releases.

This is an expensive solution and could be improved with lower pricing. 

Features that should be addressed concern the HPE functionality and the interaction with VMware. We would also like to see additional website functionality, because the surfeit of those who come online makes the addition of complete information challenging.