HPE Proliant ML Reviews

Our customers use the solution for Active Directory.

The product is good for companies that have small offices. We can install more internal disks in the product. We can utilize more than a terabyte of memory.

The product should allow management to troubleshoot remotely. The management should be able to access remote management instead of going to the server location.

I am using the solution in my current organization.

The solution is stable.

The product is scalable.

The support responds quickly to all our queries.

The initial setup is simple.

We deploy the product using Intelligent Provisioning. Once we have the ISO file, the product can be automatically installed. The deployment takes around 35 to 40 minutes. One person can deploy the solution. It is not difficult to maintain the solution.

Dell also provides similar solutions. Dell is cheaper than HPE. The choice of product depends on the customer’s needs.

We are system integrators. We set up servers for our customers. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We primarily use these as file servers. Rarely, we use them for applications.

We are in a physical environment. We have a head office that is based in Saudi Arabia, as well as a second one.

The most valuable feature is the technical support, which is both good and available easily.

I think that the RAID support can be improved because it is not very effective compared to the DL series. Generally, scalability can be improved.

I would like to see a centralized monitoring system for the ML series, where we can see all of them in one place. Something like InfoSight would work well.

We have bee using the Proliant series for about 12 years, since perhaps 2008. We used to buy a new one every three to four years.

These servers are stable and we have never had an issue.

The Proliant ML is not very scalable because we can hardly increase the memory. The RAID support is also much less than what you get with the DL series.

We have between 10 and 15 Proliant servers and hundreds of users.

HPE support is both good and easy to find, especially compared to competitors.

There are two or three local partners in this area and they're good.

We are also using the DL series. We primarily use these, as opposed to the ML series. The DL is better, for sure, because it's a little more high-end.

The initial setup is simple and there is nothing complicated about it. You really just have to turn it on because it's just the backend. After that, it depends on your software and what you're going to install, but it's open and ready to use.

Our in-house team implemented and deployed our servers. We have a service maintenance team of between three and five people, and we also have partners.

If there is maintenance that needs to be done and it is an issue under warranty then they will come and fix it, or sometimes give us a replacement. All of the other things are done here.

The ML series is cheaper than other products, and everything is included with the standard licensing fees.

This is a product that I would certainly recommend because they are the easiest and simplest form of servers available here in the market. It's easy to use for any purpose.

I would rate this solution and eight out of ten.

• The high resolution function is very good, one of the best on the market.
• It allows users to manage it remotely if something happens, which is quite neat.

Our main concern is having to rebuy the solution or having downtime, so the fact that these servers run well and do not break often addresses our concern.

The HP writing systems could be more customer-focused instead of process-focused. It can take some companies quite a while to write.

It deploys without issue.

I give it a nine out of 10. It is generally very stable.

It's scalable, depending on the services that you are running. This is a known factor, so you should plan for it.

I have found technical support to be responsive.

I have found that the bigger the case that you want, the better the price.

We evaluated Dell, but found that HPE fit our needs better. We found that HPE worked better in our environment, and also, that our staff were more competent with HPE than with Dell.

Ease of use. When you use one HPE item, it's very simple to get into anything else, software-wise. It's all about consistency and quality. I would actually say that we've had a lot less down time or minimal issues with the HPE hardware than with any other hardware we've had over the years.

Dependability. That is a big thing for us, because we are in healthcare.

I would like see better integration with OneView.

The product is totally stable, until you're playing around with some of the updates and stuff. Other than that, it is stable.

Scalability is there and it's very good.

Technical support is very good.

We are provincially-driven in Canada. The hardware that we purchase is all purchased through a provincial agreement. We have to go with whatever they go with. We previously had IBM, up to five years ago. Then we had to start implementing HPE gear, due to the provincial requirements, based on RFQs and RFPs.

The setup was very straightforward.

We have been evaluating other options. We have looked here and there at other vendors along the way. We do have other vendor equipment in our data center.

When selecting a vendor, we look for customer service, which is the most important thing, and then product reliability. We need as many nines as we can get.

Do your research and make sure that it fits your solution. There are so many new options out there.

The quality of the build is the “be-all and end-all” in my eyes. I like the fact that it's indestructible. We've had servers for a long time. Most companies have servers that last for only three years and then they replace them. We've had servers for seven or eight years. The only reason we get rid of them is because the newer models are out. There is nothing wrong with them.

I'm old school. When I look at servers, it has to have an HPE brand. I don't like Fujitsu. I've used them and I don't like them. I don't particularly like Dell.

HPE works out of the box. There's no poshness or no stupid laws and regulations. You just choose what you want and it just works.

It's compatible with servers and other HP equipment we use in the schools. I don't have any issues with compatibility. If I need drivers for specific products, they are there online. I don't have to run around all over the place looking for equivalent drivers or equivalent bits of software. In my job in education, I have found that HPE has support for all technology. It's a one-stop-shop.

I would like to be able to interact with touchscreen smart boards. It comes with iPads and Apple devices. I'd like to interact wirelessly with smart boards. I found Apple a little bit better for that. That's why schools are buying a lot of iPads at the moment. I buy HPE laptops for the teachers and stuff like that, but to make it interactive, it has to be physically plugged into devices to get it to work. Once they're connected, it works great. Schools are going on iPads now where they can connect wirelessly.

I've been doing this for 20 years and I've only had one HPE server die during that time. The motherboard failed. I just rang HPE and an HPE engineer came out and fixed it within 24 hours. I can't find a fault with this product at all.

You can scale it. We don't scale it as such. We buy a product to suit our needs, and we've never needed to enhance it after we bought it out of the box. What we normally do is look at the specifications, see what that job entails, and build a server to those specifications. We look at a two or a three-year growth expectancy. That's one of the jobs I basically do.

I've used HPE technical support, and it is phenomenal. I had one issue once where I couldn't get the installation to start. It was a starting pack, which HPE has since built into your machines. Back then, it was a new product, Version 2, that I had never used. I just rang up and said, "How do you get this to kick in? Where's the CD? Where's this, where's that?" It worked really well. The fault was just in my knowledge. I didn't have that sort of range.

With the new version, you just press a key and it kicks in.

The setup is for single-layer network. We have servers on the main cover, and then it satellites out to individual premises in schools that go over the fiber link, and the group policies then travel from the main cover down to the satellite sites.

This solution has average security, but only for education purposes. We have standard encryption.

We inquire about the newest product that is coming out, and then we look at the cost-efficiency for how much it's capable of doing for what we need. If it's too big of a jump, then we will opt-out of that option, and look for an everyday solution. We're talking about primary and secondary skills. We haven't got thousands and thousands of pounds to pay for them.

I've used HPE in the past. I know it works out of the box. I won't change since it works. If you want cheap, then you get cheap. If you want good quality that lasts you forever, then you buy HPE. You pay for what you have.

Keep up the good work.

ProLiant is the industry standard and the most popular selling rack mount server in the history of rack mount servers. We use them out of momentum.

The quality of the cases has gone down. They flex a lot.

I’ve used the product for more years than I care to count.

They are a very stable product for us and are just as reliable as the blade servers.

We use them for remote offices, normally in pairs, and we haven’t had any issues. They’re easy to work on and can deal with tight quarters where it is really hot.

HP support is very good. I've never had an issue with it. HP stands behind their product so they work hard to fix issues.

To pick a solution, we generally create a matrix and then fill in what we want out of the product. We pump in vendors and choose whoever meets the targets that we set. I would rate the ProLiant a 9 out of 10.

I've used these servers for 20 years since the days of Compaq, and so they're easy for me to use. They're good products and once you learn them, they're simple to manage for administrators and IT infrastructure teams. That's really the most important feature -- the ease of use.

This is a bit of a strange question because it's not a perfect solution for an organization that is reliant on its customers. The servers are not only for us but for our customers as well because, ultimately, we work for our customers. These servers let us provide the best service to our customers.

The software needs some improvement, especially when there's an issue. When implementing software updates, patches, or fixes, sometimes we need to stop a part of the service. Of course, this is downtime that interrupts services and impacts the relationships we have with our customers. We need to be able to rely on software that won't require downtime to update or at least have much more minimal effect on our business when there is a required update.

Deployment has been generally good with only minor issues.

It's very stable, except where I've pointed out the need to stop parts of the services for software updates, patches, or fixes.

It has scaled for us without issues.

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward, particularly the hardware. The software has a bit of complexity and there's, again, the issue of updates and patches.

We use the standard version of these servers. They're very useful for us and are the only servers we use for all our server needs.

We're standardized with these servers with the accompanying support and hardware. It makes things much more efficient for us to maintain and operate. Plus, it's easy for staff to manage.

We first used them 25 years ago, and therefore have many different generations of them. We actually have thousands of them in our data centers.

They deploy without issues.

We have stability problems when we install new generations, but they're usually resolved within six months or so.

It's very scalable.

I think that technical support is good enough for us.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Just use it.

It's truly effective and it's always on. We've tried other manufacturers who claimed particular purposes for their servers, but we never got any decent results from them. We tried HP servers a few years ago and we've come back to it. It's perfect for what we do.

For us, it's change in continuities where we've seen the most improvement. Each time we move new hardware, it's more and more effective. Everyone on the team is familiar with the hardware, so we don't have to teach them everything. It's simple for us to operate as a team, which is of primary importance for us.

It seems that when we have a single problem, it's a fight with the hardware. We get the package and we do the assembly. This takes us a week or more, and that's a problem. It takes too much time.

Deployment has been issue-free.

It's very stable. That's a main factor for us.

We're able to scale it, though we're mainly adding older servers to this new one. Scalability is not the most important thing for us.

Technical support has been good. We work in sensitive environments and technical support has been a positive point.

Initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented it ourselves in-house.

HP maybe seems sometimes more expensive than others, but we stay with them and we know why.

Complete video overview:

I can update this soon with benchmark results and also coming soon is memory configurations.