Cisco UCS Director Reviews

I was responsible for fixing this solution in my company.

My role was designing the zones.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the fabric sharing.

The security features are good.

HyperFlex is not the best of the hyper-converged solutions.

We cannot depend on this solution to manage all of the data center's infrastructure. We can count on it to replace the traditional Blades or rack-mounted servers, but not a hyper-converged system.

Adding integration, or an API to manage another vendor's hardware, would really add value to this solution.

This is a stable solution.

This solution is scalable.

There are approximately two thousand people using this solution.

The technical support for this solution is very good, at least in our region. It may be different in other regions.

The initial setup of this solution is somewhat complex. It requires an expert to configure.

The deployment took approximately one month. For a small deployment, that is a long time.

There are two to three people required for maintenance in order to avoid a single point of failure.

My advice for anybody considering this solution is to first have the vision to convert all of your x86 data center hardware to UCS. Do not add it for a specific use case, such as a cloud manager. Cisco recommends this solution for cloud management, but it should not be done unless you plan to replace all of your hardware with Cisco.

This is a good solution, but I would like to see integration with other hardware vendors.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use this solution to generate workflows.

It is deployed in our private cloud environment.

This solution has improved the performance of our network.

This is a user-friendly solution that is very good and easy to use.

The scalability of this solution needs to be improved because as it is now, you cannot scale the storage alone. Rather, you have to scale the storage and the compute together. I would like to be able to add more storage, and not be tied to upgrading anything other than storage alone.

I would like to see more integration with other solutions.

This is a very stable solution.

This solution is scalable, although it is not possible to scale the storage alone.

Technical support for this solution is excellent. We have had a few issues, but the response time has been very fast.

This was a replacement for our HP Blade Server. We switched because Cisco gives us better performance and security for our files and servers. The Cisco technology, itself, is better.

The initial setup of this solution is not easy, and we had problems while doing it. It needs a specialist to install, configure, and enhance it. This solution is not plug-and-play.

We used a reseller to assist us with our deployment.

We also evaluated IBM, but ultimately found that Cisco was a better move for us. Financially it is a good deal, and it has good support.

This is a product that I recommend for others.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from this solution is that you have to have patience at the beginning. You cannot rush it.

This is a good product, but improvements never end.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use for Cisco UCS is workflow enhancement.

The improvement for our organization has really been ease of use. We'd be a mess without the solution. 

The most valuable feature for me as a user is that you can make API calls to it. That's a cool feature.

The solution could be improved is including a feature where I could do things programmatically versus having to create workarounds to get what I want to get done. Any more features would be welcome. They should keep developing API.

As far as the stability of the solution, it's pretty rock solid. It works really well and I have no complaints.

We don't have the need to grow too much or too fast. We're strictly west coast and there's not a lot we're doing to change that. So as far as personal experience with scaling, I wouldn't know too much. If we ever became a national global company, yeah, we'd probably use it and roll it out to scale up and I don't think there would be problems.

It is hard for me to judge technical support because we haven't had to use it. It's a good problem to have. I did call one time — the only time I did have to call in anything on the UCS — and the problem was resolved in like five minutes. So, as my only contact, I'd say he was very good. At a scale of one to ten that experience with support was at least eight. I mean it wasn't anything major — the world wasn't on fire. But it's good to know that the tech people are knowledgeable and dedicated.

We are so committed to this technology that I don't even know if there's another UCS Manager out there.

I'm not sure how complex the initial setup was because it happened before I came to the company.

The initial implementation was done through a VAR (Value Added Reseller). Again, I wasn't here for the rollout but I didn't hear anything negative about the experience.

I think this solution should be considered an eight out of ten. To get a ten from me and for what I do, there has to be more flexibility in the API. I'm tired of being the tip of the sword. Enhance programming and programmability.

As I said, I don't know if there's somebody else who does something like Cisco's UCS management. So I think my capabilities kinda get pigeonholed a little bit.

We primarily use this solution for automation. In my team, we manage approximately one thousand UCS blades. As such, scalability is very important. We use UCS director for simplified deployment, where we can use a single pane of glass to view everything across our thirty-five to forty data centers that we have globally.

This solution provides us with what we need for scalability. When it comes to managing devices, if we had to log into each and every device, one by one to do whatever we need, then that is not scalable. We would require between fifty and a hundred engineers to do that, and I don't have that luxury. I only have about twenty engineers on my team.

UCS plays a role in our ability to be agile in our deployment. It gives us the ability to deploy in a short time period. Prior to using this solution we had to do a lot of manual work, so we had dependencies on several different teams for the network, storage, and whatnot. UCS director enables us to be more productive and more agile, and also more self-sufficient because we don't have to depend on anybody else.

The most valuable features are its ease of use and the deployment process. To get started, you have to understand your use case. Once you do, and you have the talent in-house who can manage it once deployed, it is fairly straightforward. We were able to easily bring all of the members of my team up to speed and get them using it, which is one of the major benefits.

The user interface could use improvement. UCS director tries to do just about everything, which means the user interface can get a bit cumbersome if you don't know what you're looking for or know where to find it. It can be really difficult. Simplifying the user interface would go a long way to making it more usable.

The solution is a mature product and it has been fairly stable. Once in a while, we open a tech case with Cisco but generally speaking, it's been fine.

So far, we have not run into any scalability issues.

The few times we have had to use technical support they have been responsive.

Prior to this solution, we had a more manual process. We manage a lot of systems so the goal is always to simplify what we do. Moving to this solution gave us a more unified system.

Once we got all of the requirements and understood our use case, the initial setup was fairly straightforward.

The vendor that we work with, Presidio, assisted us with the implementation of this solution. They took in our requirements and looked at what the end goal should be, and they delivered what they promised. There were no surprises. 

I think that the ROI we have gotten so far makes it worth the cost of the solution.

The cost of this solution is significant.

USC Director was the only product that we looked at because it was a Cisco environment that we were trying to manage. Our thinking was that a Cisco product would work better with Cisco systems.

I am very happy with the product, and we will be pushing it to its limits as we go forward.

My management team likes the fact that we are now more agile. When we have new business, we no longer have to wait for weeks to get systems into production. It is now a matter of days, or sometimes hours, from the time we receive shipments at a data center to the time it's live in production. Without UCS director it wouldn't be possible.

As your environment grows, manageability becomes a problem. When you're trying to deploy rapidly, and your goal is to get to market as quickly as possible, you need to be agile. UCS Director allows us to be agile and deploy on all sorts of systems, both for VMware and for non-VMware systems. Anything that has to do with hardware, we can manage with UCS Director. It works well for our organization, so far.

Is this solution a fit for everybody? It depends on how large and how complex the environment is. If you are only managing ten systems then I wouldn't tell you to invest in Cisco UCS director because you're not going to get the same benefits that I'm getting from it. It just depends on the environment, the situation, and the size.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to recognize that sometimes you need outside help to understand what you're trying to do, in terms of your end goal. If you just jump into it, you might not realize the full investment. As long as you know what you're trying to get, and you're a fit, then I would recommend this solution. Outside of that, I wouldn't tell just anybody to try UCS Director because it's not for everybody.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is used for configuration purposes.

An easy and strong configuration, along with its low cost, are some of the features of the solution.

The configuration server lacks in certain areas and needs improvement.

I have experience with Cisco UCS Director. I am a partner, distributor, and reseller of the solution.

I only have experience in the presentation of the solution.

It is not easy to add or expand the product.

The customers only require help with configuration. Cisco provides very good technical support at my place. I rate the technical support between nine to ten out of ten.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process was easy.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing around five to six out of ten. So, it can be somewhat expensive.

Cisco UCS Director is very easy to deploy, offering strong support. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.