Implementation was done in-house.

We used one HPE engineer, two resellers, and a few government officials to deploy HPE OneView.

The implementation was completed in-house.

Our company completed implementations in-house. Junior technicians who review user guides can easily understand the concepts of configuration and installation. 

We took help from HPE.

I think the implementation was pretty straightforward from what I could gather. It didn't look too complicated, at least on the appliance side. I've been told that you can create profiles for hardware that you don't have. 

My biggest gripe is that a profile is tethered to a particular hardware type. I would like to be able to take a profile, of more generic nature, and apply it to different types of blades without having to build another profile for that blade type. I would like some inter-operability there, without having to have multiple templates. Other than that, it's been fairly stable. 

I think there are some configuration things you can do in Virtual Connect that can harm you from an availability standpoint. OneView still allows you to do that, which I don't think it should. Those are just my thoughts, as far as a criss-cross between virtual connects, where you can actually create an outage for yourself for updates. But other than that, it has met our needs. I think the biggest things for me are the profiles that I can flip between different hardware types.

I was able to do it myself.

In house.

We had HPE engineers on the phone. 

I implemented oneview my self, but had some help from HPE.

We contacted them from our account manager and we got the information we required for implementation.

By myself; in-house.