I would like to have more detail in the monitoring.

The tool is pretty strong since there are no issues in it at all. My company had deployed the solution for a client operating in the Kuwait region, and in the past few years, my company has never had to deal with a single complaint about the product.

Unfortunately, HPE GreenLake can be sold only in Bahrain, UAE, and the Middle East, meaning it can be sold in only three or four countries because it requires certain approvals from countries where it has to be used.

There is a need for improved support in HPE GreenLake, including more administrators and engineers to provide faster resolution for issues. Storage issues can impact the entire data center, especially in virtualization environments where multiple virtual machines are connected. Availability of hardware and timely monitoring have been reported as a problem, with some difficulties in obtaining hardware due to limited stock in the local market.

In the GreenLake portal, I would really like to see more granularity in the costing model. That's the one limitation that we do have: We have a lot of departments. We want to be able to break down, in a granular way, that this department is using X amount of resources, that department is using Y amount of resources. 

Currently, it just looks at the platform as a whole, from a hardware perspective only. I would like to see virtual machines. I want to know we're using this many virtual machines and they're using that percentage of the resources. I want to be able to tag it and say, "This is this department's fees, this is that department's fees." That way I could charge back internally to my own departments. I need to be able to cross-charge.

Just charging me, the customer, doesn't work well. It's almost never is it going to be a single customer who's actually using it. When it's IT, we're distributing it out to a lot of people, and we need to be able to pick out and show that, all the way back to the units. That way, we could really justify why they should give us an extra $10,000 a month.

HPE GreenLake can improve by making some of the user's experience better. It can take some time to learn.

The support service needs improvement. The support team isn't very active in addressing cases. It should also provide a web application. 

It offers flexibility in IT operations, but it hasn't done it yet. We should see this in the future.

We are still managing the VMs in our IT operations.

HPE GreenLake can improve the price.

I'd like to see better reporting and monitoring of growth so we can better detect where the needs are for scaling. Also, I'd like to see more analysis so we can see where our company is growing and use that to make future plans.

The time to receive a price when I am going to a proposal is too long.

Part of the integration, with cutting things over to Unisys, may have hurt us a bit. We had a couple of rough implementations earlier this year. Part of that was due to some internal system changes on HPE's side. We are keeping an eye on this to make sure it doesn't happen again. It was dealt with and cleaned up when brought to the attention of our account team.

From what I heard in the keynote address today, it sounds like they are expanding it to Aruba and pretty much any HPE product. Based on what we need, that would be able to cover the whole range.

I feel like I'm paying for 20 percent that I'm not using, because it's always over-provisioned by at least 20 percent or a minimum commit of 80 percent. Once you get up above that, you're looking at provisioning more and then that increases it again. I would like some flexibility on pricing at those lower bands, and not having such a high commit-percentage, if that's economically feasible.

There is room for improvement in the ability to scale down without a significant increase in cost. Fulfillment of the hardware in a more timely manner is also an issue.