HPE BladeSystem Reviews

We are using it for our hypervisor. Within our organization, there are roughly 2,000 users, using this solution. 

Software-defined hardware might sound counter-intuitive, but it is the way of the future.

HPE BladeSystem is easy to use. It conserves a lot of space.

The management side of this solution could be improved. In our case, it's managed via OneView — it's an appliance. It could be better, its interface doesn't feel 100% intuitive. 

In addition, HPE tech support is very poor.

I have been using HPE BladeSystem for three years.

HPE BladeSystem is both stable and scalable.

A contractor implemented this solution for us.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give HPE BladeSystem a rating of eight.

We use HPE BladeSystem for many purposes, such as enterprise applications and Oracle transfers.

The most valuable feature of HPE BladeSystem is simplified management.

There is always room for improvement everywhere with the HPE BladeSystem.

I have been using HPE BladeSystem since they were released, approximately 25 years.

HPE BladeSystem is a stable solution.

The HPE BladeSystem is extremely scalable.

We have some clients that have thousands and hundreds of people using the solution.

The initial setup of HPE BladeSystem is straightforward.

The price for HPE BladeSystem can vary between $100,000 to $1 million or above. The price can be high.

The solution is simple and easy to manage.

I rate HPE BladeSystem a ten out of ten.

I am using the HPE BladeSystem for Hyper-V servers.

The most valuable feature of the HPE BladeSystem is the ease of management and the robust design.

I have used HPE BladeSystem for approximately five years.

The stability of the HPE BladeSystem is good.

The HPE BladeSystem can scale very well.

We have approximately 2,000 users using the HPE BladeSystem. We have many students and professors using it.

We are using HPE BladeSystem on a daily basis.

We have not needed to contact support because we have not had an issue. However, the partner support we had could improve. There are some disadvantages compared to Dell. The questions that are asked from the support are too lengthy, this causes a delay in support.

The initial HPE BladeSystem was easy.

We have the engineers from HPE set up the HPE BladeSystem for us.

There is a one-time purchase for the HPE BladeSystem.

We evaluated Dell before choosing HPE HPE BladeSystem. They were very similar solutions. However, after the negotiation by our commercial team, they choose BladeSystem based on price.

I rate HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten.

HPE BladeSystems are used for computing workloads.

HPE BladeSystem provides good commuting performance.

The other similar solutions used different CLI commands than HPE BladeSystem. The HPE BladeSystem CLI commands should be the same as the other companies which would make it easier to manage. It would be better for the system administrators to manage HPE BladeSystem and other systems together. I wanted to configure this service with the CLI but the commands are different than the other solutions making it a bit more difficult.

I have used HPE BladeSystem within the past 12 months.

HPE BladeSystem is stable.

I have not used the support from HPE.

I have used HPE ProLiant DL Servers previously.

When comparing the HPE ProLiant DL Servers to the HPE BladeSystem, the HPE BladeSystems are compact and need less space for installation. They can provide the same computing as the HPE ProLiant DL Servers in the same unit and are a lot easier to manage.

HPE BladeSystem is easier to implement because of its size than other solutions. It's easy to install, easy to build up the BladeSystems, but the enclosure is too heavy.

I would recommend this solution for large enterprises. Medium-sized companies would find it difficult to afford the HPE BladeSystem's overall capital expenses.

I would recommend this solution to others. If they require a system for computing workloads then this is a good solution.

I rate HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten.

BladeSystem was done really well.

I like the stability.

I would like to see the upgrade path a little bit smoother. We can't pull the servers from the current Blade, over to the NonStop system because of the different connectors.

I feel that it is a waste of money. I invested in it and I can't port it over.

The back of the blade system from their older generations will not connect to the new chassis. You will need buy new servers to the NonStop chassis.

HPE BladeSystem is a stable product.

We are a small-sized company.

We use only HP products. 

Every generation of NonStop is just an upgrade from their BladeSystem. They could have let be known that it was BladeSystem two, but they just gave it a different name.

The initial setup is complex. You need the help of a consultant.

We have two people to deploy and maintain this solution.

BladeSystem is a little bit cheaper.

I would rate HPE BladeSystem a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for media and backup servers.

The solution has good performance. 

All around, it would be nice if the solution were cheaper. 

I have been using HPE BladeSystem for around 15 years, which is the entire length of my career. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

I do not have experience with technical support. 

The decision to switch from other products to the current solution was not within my purview. 

I do not have experience with putting the solution together, as it comes pre-configured. The installation is easy. 

Items which are more cost-effective have a greater tendency to be refurbished. This is why I don't really consider the pricing to be problematic. 

This said, it would make everyone happy if the solution were less expensive. 

I would recommend the solution to others. 

I rate HPE BladeSystem as an eight out of ten. 

As a company, as a service provider, we primarily use the solution in order to give service to other companies.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's an easy process. 

Technical support is pretty good.

The solution is quite mature.

The stability, in general, is good.

I have noticed that the solution does provide a very good ROI for companies.

I've dealt with the product for about 20 years at this point. It's likely been two decades. I've spent a lot of time with it overall.

The performance is okay, 

The scalability is okay.

Technical support is good. They are going a good job overall. I would describe them as helpful and responsive. We're satisfied with the level of support that is on offer.

I have not found the initial setup to be overly difficult or complex. It's straightforward. The process is simple. 

The solution is one of the best in terms of providing an excellent ROI to its users.

We are HPE partners.

We mostly deal with eh latest version of the solution. I can't speak to the exact version number. 

I'd recommend the solution. It's a good choice for the right use case. A company needs to look at it and decide if it's right for them and their purposes, however.

Overall, I would rate the solution at eight out of ten overall. We've been mostly happy with its capabilities.

In my company, they tried to convert to hyper-converter due to the fact that the on-premise server is still a low demand. Some workloads we have moved to public CoW. We tried to reduce our footprint, our data center, to use only hyper-converged. It's good for that purpose.

The solution is very easy to use. It's not overly complex. I'd describe it as a user-friendly product.

The solution is stable. The performance is good.

The solution can scale to a certain extent.

It's an old-fashioned technology now. 

I'm not sure precisely what should be improved. I can't recall any missing features.

If the hardware offered higher efficiency, that would be an ideal situation for our company.

I have ten years of experience with this solution. It's been about a decade. I've used it for quite a while.

The solution is very stable. We find it to be quite reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. Its performance is very good.

While the solution is pretty scalable, every company has its own context. Therefore, the scaling process might be different. In my future plans, for example, it's hard to reduce my footprint, as the workload has moved to CoW. Something that's based on-premise has limited parameters. That's why I'm trying to use the totally hyper-converged system. 

I don't really have any direct experience with support from HPE, however, when they had the reports about the system, I would say the review was that they were okay. There have been no complaints. We're satisfied with the level of service, from what I can tell. I have heard nothing negative about the level of service.

I'm not an operations person. I can't speak to how easy or difficult it is to implement the solution. It's not an aspect I worried about or specifically had to deal with.

As I wasn't a part of the implementation process, I cannot speak to if there was any assistance with the process. 

We are simply a customer and an end-user. We don't have a professional relationship with HPE.

I'd rate the solution, on a scale from one to ten, at a nine. We've mostly been quite pleased with the product and its capabilities. 

I would recommend the solution to other users, companies, and organizations.