We evaluated Oracle and HP but ultimately chose IBM due to our past positive experience with them. We have previously used IBM for a few applications and were satisfied with their performance. Since our storage software systems are also IBM, it made sense to opt for IBM servers and storage for better compatibility.

Our company did compare Intel with IBM during our internal evaluation process.

It is mostly try to compare it with VMWARE virtualization as it supports Linux, but when it comes to stability, IBM Power systems are unmatchable.

A second option after IBM Power Systems is HP Unix servers.

IBM is better than HP Because IBM is a product where all things have to be integrated, including the operating system. But HP is just software.

My company plans to move from IBM Power Systems to Oracle SPARC.

We did not evaluate other options. 

I consider other options all of the time but it's simpler to just keep going with what we have. 

We also like what Power does. It's very reliable and very powerful. And because of the code compatibility we are able to run the same programs today that we did back in 1992. That has a lot to do with it. There is no cost to upgrade the software side of things. It's just a hardware upgrade, in some cases.

We did look at Dell Systems, however, they were very expensive.

We use competitors, Intel-based Linux.

To start out, I actually put the first Power systems in the bank. The first applications we were using, they only ran on Power. There's one application, that we call "wire transfer" - banks use that to transfer money to the Federal Reserve - and it only runs on AIX Power. That's what really got us going. Then, over time people realized it was a better. We used to be an HPE shop and over time we proved that we were better than HPE, and we just retired our last HPE server.

Really mostly IBM for the workload that we run. IBM and the System i is very well suited for it, for the core banking systems.

We use a competitor, Intel-based Linux. We went with Power because of reliability, performance; it's a good product overall.

I have evaluated Oracle before we decided to choose IBM Power Systems.

We're an IBM/VMware shop, so all of our AIX runs on Power, and everything else is going to run on VMware. We're a composite type shop.

I work with Dell servers in addition to IBM Power Systems.

I didn't get to choose, it's the platform that I was given to work on. But if I had to choose, I'd probably choose Power anyway. I like that it's not Intel because we have a monoculture in CPU's.

No, we are pretty set with IBM Power. We're running AIX and SAP all on Power boxes.

No.

While the solution is quite expensive, the level of service provided is second to none. It makes it worth the price.

It was only Power for the most part. We started with it a long time ago. The rest of our environment runs on Linux, SUSE and Redhat for application web servers.

We do have a lot of Wintel as well, so it's more of a mix and match. Yes, other things have been considered. We went with IBM because we have been with IBM hosting, and one of our main apps is running on AIX. We would have to do a lot to convert it. So it seems to be running fine where it is.

No. We have been running on Power ever since we went to SAP.

Compared to similar solutions, IBM Power Systems has a proven record. They have their own reputation. You have the availability of technical expertise in the market. They're quite compatible with most of the solutions that we work with.

You can compare Power Systems to Oracle Exadata. Oracle Exadata collects only for databases, but IBM Power Systems has a shared processor pool that we can allocate and using this shared processor, we can reduce the licensing cost for Oracle databases and achieve better performance when you combine it with IBM Flash System storage.

Solaris is unique. There are not any other platforms that I would compare to right now.

We also work with Lenovo.

We evaluate Oracle Exadata or Nutanix HCI. For a huge sizing, we go for Power Systems. For a small sizing, we can use an Intel-based solution. Nowadays, some of the core banking applications are moving to the Intel platform, and that's why we are recommending Intel-based solutions, but IBM Power Systems is still a number one solution. It is our preferred platform for core banking applications.

No. We were an HPE shop and we converted over to Power at POWER5. We thought the Power roadmap was just better, better suited for us.

We didn't consider competitors for this part of our environment. We chose IBM for its reliability. It runs our Oracle back end systems.

Only IBM, for now.

We are strictly IBM.

We go with Power Systems because the reliability and the availability of the systems are key. They are the best systems, as far as reliability and availability go.

We haven't considered any competitors at the moment, but we do have competition back there in my country, of course. We chose IBM because of its performance, resiliency and the capacity you have to make LPARs. It's very good.

We are the service provider and so we have the IBM i at every level in the cloud. This is pretty much due to the demand from the customers. It's not us, it's really our customers asking for it.

We also work with other solutions. We do everything; we do Windows, Linux, AIX, as well as IBM i. All different platforms. 

Compared to Intel, Power is a much more stable solution. Security is also much better. Compared to the other platforms, Power definitely has more capabilities.

We have done testing with Intel, we have done testing with POWER, and the performance we were getting with POWER is actually very good compared to what we were getting on the other systems. So that's the actual background.

No, we are staying with the IBM Power Systems. 

We've primarily beem a Power shop. There have been other considerations, for x86. We were sing Linux on Intel before Power. We chose IBM because of total cost of ownership. 

It's always been the platform for enterprise applications and go-to production systems that need that sort of reliability to run.