HPE GreenLake Reviews

I have dealt with HPE GreenLake for approximately one year. Initially, I offered service only, but this year, I am using it to sell HP products because the supplier in Puerto Rico, Solution Box, helped me with everything in the process on the HP side and showed me the value. HPE GreenLake platform is available for the end user. When a client needs everything in the infrastructure, it is possible to pay month-to-month and not pay entirely for the solution. That is real value.

Currently, we are using on-premises with HPE GreenLake because the solution simulates the cloud in an on-premises environment. For the cloud, we are using Azure or Office 365 for email. The really great value of HPE GreenLake platform is that I manage everything in the same platform, including a simulation of the environment. This simulation tells me what hardware is needed, what internet bandwidth is really needed, or a circuit for SD-WAN for replication—everything in the same platform.

Some valuable points about HPE GreenLake are that it is a managed solution in the same pane of glass. HPE GreenLake integrates well with the existing infrastructure, and it is straightforward.

HPE GreenLake positively impacts my organization because it saves money and time, and it improves my sales because I have another solution to reduce costs for the client. The client may need to pay two thousand dollars to change every infrastructure in one payment, but not all clients have the total amount available. However, if it is possible to pay month-to-month for the solution, it is much easier for the client to accept the proposal. HPE GreenLake's real-time monitoring tools are good, and I really need them to improve the services.

HPE GreenLake solution is very good. Another solution that really improves the offering is what HP created for its own hypervisor solution. Because VMware is very expensive right now, offering another solution for a hypervisor from HP at a much lower cost of six hundred dollars a year is really awesome. In the last month, VMware changed everything regarding pricing, which is really bad for the market.

I have dealt with HPE GreenLake for approximately one year.

It does not impact my resource consumption, and it is good.

It does not get expensive if I need more and more resources with HPE GreenLake. When the client's infrastructure really changes, they need to pay additional amounts. The best option with HPE GreenLake solution is that the hardware resources are available, but the client never pays for the specific total resource. They only pay for consumption at the end of the month. Maybe in three months, the company is not using any more resources than they are using now. In the next month, the consumption has another price. This is good for the end-user.

I would rate HPE support a ten out of ten.

I rate HPE support a ten because when I have any issue, the support is really present. Including the partnership, the local HP person in Puerto Rico is always available. For any situation or any question, they are available and try to help me resolve the solution.

Positive

We did not use a different solution before HPE GreenLake. The client would buy the product or another partner would sell the product, but I handled the integration. Now, we are using only HP 40G switches. I sell everything from HP, from Aruba, Light-On, or TP-Link for 40G switches.

The setup for HPE GreenLake is straightforward because HP provides every setup, and I only provide the management. HP guarantees the setup is good.

The best option is that in case the client needs more resources, it is available on time. Maybe the client has ten terabytes for this, and the storage solution is forty. But the client pays for what they are consuming right now. In case the next month the client consumes twenty-five, they pay for twenty-five. Everything can increase, and HP puts more resources and makes them available when the client really needs them. It is available because HP is monitoring every solution, CPU, and RAM. In case the client is consuming more RAM, it automatically adds more resources to the hardware. In case the client needs this resource, it is available. It is the best option in the market right now. Dell does not offer a similar solution. I do not see it in Dell. I see real value in HPE GreenLake platform.

In my opinion, HPE GreenLake pricing is also a good price. I would rate this review a ten out of ten.

For two to two and a half years, I have been using HPE GreenLake as a platform for infrastructure as a service. It is hosted in our data center with compute and storage nodes, all managed by an HPE team based in Bulgaria. They operate and maintain the infrastructure round the clock for us.

We have a service and cost model based on utilization for specific KPIs, measured by memory and storage, with no costs for CPU consumption. This approach has allowed us to manage and optimize utilization and consumption effectively. We have a portal for real-time connection to monitor and adapt our consumption if needed. 

Our physical servers are on-prem, and although GreenLake is hosted in the data center, on-site virtual machines like domain controllers and small file servers are protected by the GreenLake contract. If a machine breaks, the GreenLake team handles replacement and technician coordination. Additionally, we have a small backup solution on-prem, but it is not covered by the main GreenLake backup service. 

By establishing a service provider responsible for backup and restore and having monthly service meetings with them, we have reduced our management effort by more than fifty percent. The service is well managed by HP, with effective notification processes keeping us fully aware of backup activities.

I am still struggling with monitoring, particularly with OpsRamp, which is not fully customized to our needs, especially for disaster recovery. In our scenario, we define a disaster recovery test case, specify the outcome, and want to see how it is reflected in monitoring. Currently, it is not well customized from my perspective.

I have used the solution for two years and two and a half years.

Regarding downtime, bugs, and glitches, where ten represents the best, I would rate GreenLake a nine in terms of stability.

As it is fully monitored, we are always aware of our utilization and consumption. If there is a drop in space, HPE immediately acts on it. Therefore, I would rate its scalability a nine.

If you want details on the dashboard, I am not the right person. Regarding protecting on-premises virtual machines, the physical servers are on-prem, and GreenLake is hosted in the data center. 

The on-site virtual machines, including a domain controller and a small file server, are not part of the main GreenLake service but are protected by the GreenLake contract. When a machine is broken, the GreenLake team is responsible for its replacement and technician coordination. 

Currently, we have a small backup solution on-prem, however, it is not included in the main GreenLake backup service.

Positive

In terms of deployment, you usually have a list of activities or work packages. Initially, it was quite well organized with a kickoff and execution of tasks. We achieved eighty percent of work packages quickly, however, the last 20%, including documentation and labeling cables in the data center, took longer than expected. From my perspective, this could be more efficient or better structured. 

Overall, for having a Minimum Viable Product and subsequently going live, it was well managed, structured, and successful.

Normally, I would increase my IT team by two people to manage the infrastructure. It is more or less a reduction.

We had a service and cost model established on utilization for specific KPIs, and we were measured by memory and storage, with no costs for CPU consumption.

We had two solutions in mind. One was from a system integrator based on Dell and NetApp compared to HP for server and compute. Both technologies fulfilled our requirements, however, we chose HP because of the 24/7 team in Bulgaria and the service process, including a dedicated service manager and monthly sales calls. This demonstrated that the service covers business needs and was a decisive factor for us.

I am unsure if I am entitled to give advice, but based on my guess, potential improvements could be by 10% to 20% My job title is Head of Data Center Operations and IT. 

Overall, I would rate the product nine out of ten.

The product is excellent. HPE GreenLake is the best tool that can replace some other tools for those who are afraid to go and put their application on the cloud, making it one of the best options for the client.

The tool allows users to operate with on-premises infrastructure and the cloud that runs on the client's on-premises infrastructure, making it somewhat similar to a hybrid cloud infrastructure since users have full control.

HPE GreenLake replaces all the existing virtualization solutions in the market. The best part is that customers don't need to bind their operations with HPE alone, allowing them to have a VMware or Hyper-V environment. Customers in the market can also choose products, like Red Hat Enterprise Linux, so you can operate HPE GreenLake with its products from its competitors all year round, and it does not keep its bound to HPE infrastructure.

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.

I have experience with HPE GreenLake years.

HPE GreenLake is a tool my company is not supposed to sell in our region because there are no approvals, but I am satisfied enough with the tool and can sell it as I am an HPE partner. My company is certified to sell HPE products. I have done my certification related to HPE.

It scales up very greatly.

The solution's technical support does an excellent job. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

HPE GreenLake is unique in its own way because you have your cloud applications in an on-premises client infrastructure. Most clients have to go to AWS or Azure, and the hardware required to support such cloud services, so the customer pays very heavily in terms of the total cost of ownership. Customers also doubt data security in the cloud services, and such fear is eliminated if one has HPE GreenLake.

HPE GreenLake can be deployed very quickly. Once users ensure that the hardware is in place, there are software tools, like HPE InfoSight, to help them, and the time required to deploy the product depends on the size or scale of the organization where the product needs to be installed. Practically, the users can take care of the product's setup phase within 24 hours.

The ROI from the use of the solution stems from the fact that there is no need for its users to make any upfront payments when they purchase the product, as it offers them the choice to use a pay-as-you-grow model. Users can also skip the use of AWS or any other cloud infrastructure and have full control over the tool.

HPE GreenLake is an excellent product because customers have multiple benefits using it as you only need to pay-as-you-grow model, so users don't have to keep a particular size of the solution or maintain a huge buffer and all, especially when they opt to use it as an on-premises solution in their infrastructure where they may need to take care of the expansion in the future. HPE GreenLake takes care of the buffer space and resources required to some extent as it operates on a pay-as-you-grow model, where users can increase their resources as their business expands.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We primarily use HPE GreenLake to take server backups in our environment. It involves backing up servers from Jira, specifying the time range, and utilizing VMware ESXi to perform the backup. The backups are stored on NetApp, and we have multiple storage locations.

The most valuable feature for me is the ability to perform backups with a graphical user interface (GUI). It makes the process easy. 

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

I have been using HPE GreenLake for about one year.

The tool's stability is around four out of ten. There have been instances where the system was slow, especially during restores.

I would rate the scalability at around four out of ten. It's not good. My company has two users. 

The initial setup was complex. It required the involvement of three people. 

In terms of pricing, it's a bit on the higher side.

I haven't used a different solution before HPE GreenLake. We chose it because our data center is based on HPE servers. 

While the concept of HPE GreenLake is good, the product has some issues. I would recommend comparing it with other solutions. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

It offers businesses the flexibility and scalability of the public cloud while having their infrastructure on-premises.

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.

I have been using it for a year.

The storage has already been expanded twice and it has proven to be easily scalable. I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use Dell products as well, and it is preferred over HP for its professionalism and ease of administration. While HP is straightforward to use, there were instances where unknown configurations required support from HP, and the experience wasn't satisfactory. Dell's support is considered better overall. While there may be differences in latency between HPE and Dell, it does not significantly impact performance or decision-making.

Based on the team review, it was very simple.

The price could be more flexible. It depends on factors such as market availability, stock, availability of experienced engineers, and the proficiency of the administrative team. I would rate it eight out of ten.

The general satisfaction with the solution is rated eight out of ten.

One of our successful use cases was a customer that already had HPE SimpliVity and multiple clusters of it at different locations. They wanted to consolidate these workloads while also having a replication site. We proposed a consolidation model and recommended the HPE GreenLake solution, which they found appealing. The customer liked the idea of having the hardware on-site but also having a cloud-like experience where they could pay for the infrastructure on a monthly basis and have it maintained and supported by the HPE team.

One of the most valuable features of HPE GreenLake is that it provides clients with the security of having their data on-site while still having the convenience of having someone else take care of the infrastructure. Some customers prefer this as they feel more secure with their data on-site. Additionally, it allows the customers to have the best of both worlds, they receive a cloud-like experience of subscription and consumption, and the performance of an on-prem solution for their more demanding workloads. This is one of the main benefits that drive clients to choose this solution.

The solution integrates well with Dell, Cisco switches, or other switches.

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

I have been using HPE GreenLake for approximately three years.

It can work well for both on-premise and cloud environments, as well as hybrid models. The solution is stable and can accommodate any solution lines that HPE offers, such as dHCI, HPE SimpliVity, ProLiant servers, Nimble, and electric storage arrays. Additionally, it can easily integrate with network switches, making it a very stable solution.

The complexity of the setup depends on the solution being deployed and factors such as the amount of networking required and the previous environment. The difficulty of deployment can vary depending on factors, such as the Microsoft Windows operating system version and the VMware version. HPE generally handles the installation, but Connection is also certified to do it. It can be straightforward as the customer can choose to have HPE or Connection handle the installation. The level of responsibility is flexible and depends on the customer's preference.

HPE GreenLake has been growing in popularity due to its subscription model. The flexibility of the solution allows it to adapt to the changing market trends towards more edge performance and workloads.

There are several aspects of HPE GreenLake, but the sales flow is generally okay. It was a learning experience for both Connection and HP to figure out how the flow should work. Once we were used to the process, there wasn't much to change. The solution is versatile, it can handle dHCI, HPE SimpliVity, and other HPE solutions. I don't see any major areas that need improvement.

I rate HPE GreenLake a nine out of ten.

If the customer has the right partner then the overall experience with the solution can be good. 

The most valuable feature of HPE GreenLake is the integration.

HPE GreenLake can improve the price.

I have been using HPE GreenLake for approximately seven years.

HPE GreenLake is highly stable.

The scalability of HPE GreenLake is very good. My clients have been using the solution for a long time and it has been flexible.

The technical support of HPE GreenLake is good.

The setup of HPE GreenLake is straightforward. However, there is some complexity. The length of time necessary for the deployment depends upon the scope of work for the customer. For example, what activity we need to do. However, in general in a common standard scenario, the configuration doesn't take too much time.

We have enough knowledge of the HPE GreenLake platform to configure it for our customers.

We provide our customers with a customized HPE GreenLake so that they don't need to tweak anything in the infrastructure.

My clients are receiving a return on investment, this is why they are using it. You only have to pay for what you use in HPE GreenLake. It is highly flexible and is why it is a successful solution.

HPE GreenLake payment model is you pay for what you use. You can purchase a yearly, quarterly, or half-year license. The overall price of the solution is a little high and hopeful there can be better margins in the future.

I rate HPE GreenLake a nine out of ten.

There is always a scope for improvement in solutions.

Our use case is to build a large enterprise storage cluster.

We are using the service to do colocation.

The service has eliminated the need for overprovisioning. If we do not have this type of service, we would have to buy storage for five years and use maybe 50 percent of that storage right now.

Our IT team is more productive right now. We eliminated the need for doing some manual tests.

It is the flexible way to pay for everything that you need and pay as you go. We can pay for just what we need right now.

It has great flexibility and scalability. It is a very good, stable service.

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

2 years

100 percent, it is a very stable service. We have not had any outages.

It is a great way to scale.

The technical support is very good.

We are a solution provider, and we bought new storage to provide services to our customers.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is a very simple, easy to install and implement.

We deployed it in-house.

We have seen ROI.

We have reduced our organization's capacity management efforts around 40 to 50 percent based on the personnel managing the service, since this is the easiest way to manage.

It has saved our organization 30 to 40 percent. 

The service has decreased the time it takes to deploy IT projects by 50 percent. When we don't have this type of service, we need to take 45 to 60 days to have storage ready. Right now, we have a buffer onsite and are online in a few hours.

We have reduced a lot of our VMware licensing costs.

Lenovo and HPE were on our shortlist.

We chose HPE because this was the more precise service.

Look carefully and understand with this model you can buy just what you need right now, and not overprovision.

Our primary use case for HPE GreenLake Flex Capacity is to provide storage to meet our fluctuating needs on-demand.

Many times in the past we ran into a situation where we need to add a bunch of space for our engineering department when it was developing something. Now we can just add that on the fly without any interaction from HP.

It helps us figure out what we have and what to do to plan ahead. If we see a trend, we can plan our best architecture for the future.

This solution has eliminated over-provisioning because we know we have storage at hand. We don't have to over-provision. We can just add as needed.

In terms of IT productivity is less of a hassle administratively. We won't have to worry about if we're going to have enough space or if we need to expand. We can do it right on the fly and our storage administrators can do that easily.

The most valuable feature is the ability to add storage space as needed.

The solution covers our storage requirements. That is all we needed it to do.

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.

We find the service to be extremely stable.

The solution is very scalable. We have no issues with that whatsoever. We've been able to do whatever we need to do at any time.

Technical support is good when we've needed to use it.

Our decision was made through our constant conversations with our HP representatives and IAS (Integrated Archive Systems) working together to make a plan to fit our needs.

As far as a different solution, that would have been to just have a storage system where we'd have to call in HP to come in and add more storage every time we needed it. We didn't want that because we wanted to evolve from that direction.

The setup was pretty straightforward. No problems there.

This solution completely decreases deployment time to demand. There isn't really deployment time involved.

We used IAS as a reseller. Our experience with them was very good and we continue to have a good relationship with them.

I don't think we have seen an actual return on investment or that the return is not directly related to the product. We have a reduction on storage costs of about 20%.

The pricing is based on the plateaus of usage. The more you use the more you pay but within ranges.

We believe it has saved the organization money. As far as the exact amount, I'm not sure. I would say probably about 20% on storage costs.

We are an HP house all the way, so we didn't have other choices. Before deciding to go with HP, we looked at a lot of other solutions out there and HP seemed to be the best one for us. They're on your side, they help you out when you need it. We find that they've been responsive and really easy to work with.

I'd give this product a ten out of ten. The ease of use, scalability, customer satisfaction and the great service department have combined to make our experience with them outstanding. HP and IAS as our service providers have been great as a team.

The fact that we can now add storage on the fly without any downtime means better productivity and scalability on demand. We're never waiting on a vendor to come in and add more storage, we can just add it and keep working. That gives us more flexibility to do other things and we're not waiting for somebody else to configure it for us. We never have to worry about if we're going to have enough space or if we're going to be able to expand. 

The only areas we did have a problem with was when we reached a certain plateau. It makes sense that as you grow, you pay more. Well, at one point, according to HP, we were at that plateau. We got charged extra for going over the storage allowance. We thought we didn't deserve that extra charge because, by our understanding, we hadn't reached the plateau yet. So we had to contact the company. They had to reevaluate and check out the claim. It turns out that they had set the usage plateaus incorrectly. I think they should handle that part of the billing differently and make it clear to the customer when they are reaching the limit of their usage in the contracted range.

As far as people considering the solution, I would tell them this is probably the best way for them to go. They don't have to worry about growing their storage when needed. They can just do it on the fly and be done with it. It's flexible and it's a time saver.

We're working in a new data center in Virginia and are using it for our primary storage and compute. We're a cloud services provider and we provide co-location and disaster recovery. We're using it on the cloud services and the disaster recovery sides of the business.

We haven't had great success with it. Both times that we've had to increase the hardware, the deployment took way longer than expected. In addition, we haven't yet gotten to a use point where the cost is below what it would cost us to provision the same set of services on HPE hardware outside of the GreenLake service.

In terms of our capacity management efforts, it's actually provided us too much capacity at this point in time, and we're working to try to fill that capacity. We're currently over-provisioned in that service.

It hasn't increased the flexibility of our IT operations because in that platform, on that set of racks, we're not able to add in different solutions that we would normally buy internally and deploy on that set of gear. So we have to create a separate set of gear for anything extra that we want to add into the environment.

I think the solution has cost us money. It hasn't decreased the time it takes to deploy IT projects.

The most valuable feature is the ability to grow into a lower price point at some point in time.

Also, there's more visibility into the solution than we have in some of the other areas, but not significantly so.

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.

We solely use HPE hardware across our organization, so I don't know that its stability is different than any of the others. We have more experience with some of the other hardware - 3PAR, c7000, the blades, etc. - so we're more familiar with them. We've had some issues with trying to configure the Nimble correctly for a few of our applications that we're working on, but support has been pretty good in working with us to get through those.

In terms of scalability it's tough for us. Right now, it's actually counterproductive for our scalability. I'm hoping that once we reach the upper band in our contract that it will provide us some scalability there.

Technical support has been really good.

We had heard about GreenLake at conferences and thought it might be an opportunity for us to use more HPE resources. We chose to try it at this particular deployment, versus our normal, self-provisioning of the equipment. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We deployed it ourselves.

We have not seen ROI.

Right now we're paying about $180,000 per year.

HPE is our shortlist.

My advice would depend on what the application is. In our particular application, it hasn't been helpful thus far. If you have an application where you're going to be at a price point, right out of the gate, which makes it cost-effective and you're only going to continue to grow at a steady pace, then I think this solution makes sense. But if you're starting at the very bottom of the scale, where the price point is high and you're not going to use the services that come bundled with the products, then it might not be as cost-effective as it could be.

I would rate the service at three out of ten, simply because of the costs associated with it. I could implement what we have now at a third of the cost.