IBM Power Systems Reviews

We've been very satisfied with the solution's capabilities. 

The installation is easy.

It's very stable. There is less downtime.

The product can scale. 

The compatibility with other products could be better. They have a proprietary package to install on the server. With the application or the database, you can install on top of it.

Some competitors may have more features or a certain advantage over this product.

The solution is quite expensive.

We'd like the solution to have a cloud base. Most of it is on-premises.

I've used the solution for almost ten years.

It's very stable. They have a different Hypervisor compared to an Intel-based Hypervisor, like VMware or Red Hat. The Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is like an embedded Hypervisor, so you don't have to rest up the server. If you ever install the packets or any update, it does not require you to rest up the server. It's more stable, and you don't need more downtime.

Maybe the entry level is not very scalable. However, if you are using the enterprise level, like Power E-series, the enterprise series, not the entry-level, it's very scalable. Within the core or maybe the memory, and also the IO, it's very scalable.

In Indonesia, they have local support, however, maybe for certain products, the support is just not as good as the main product, like the Power System or Storage. Maybe for another product, the support is very limited.

We worked with IBM products, among others. 

The installation is very simple. 

From the installer, you install the machine. Maybe you want to install the operating system. It's quite different from Windows or Linux since this is Unix-based.

Compared to Intel, IBM Power Systems is more expensive compared to Intel. Still, if you compare the TCO or the license that you can save using IBM Power, the pricing is almost the same with the Intel base, however, it depends on the application license or the database license. 

In general, the pricing is quite high.

I manage the product at the company. I'm a consultant. We deal mostly with enterprise-level organizations. I'm an IBM partner.

If a company wants to implement the IBM System, maybe it has to check the compatibility of the apps and the DB. Also, if they want to implement the TCO, they have to check the TCO compared to the Intel base. Sometimes, they are only checking the base hardware installation. If they implement the DB or the apps, the pricing may be reduced since the core in Power System is more powerful than the Intel base.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The reliability is the main thing. Reliability and ease of use. The cost of ownership is down too.

It runs all our enterprise systems and because of the reliability, we don't have the same issue with downtime and unexpected downtime that other companies may have. I have been there for 10 years, running the Power, and we've had three unexpected experiences of downtime in 10 years.

We just want to see continued reliability and performance. And continued value for the price. The licensing could be simplified.

I have been using Power for 10 years. I have POWER7 and POWER8 and I use them for IBM i. We also have an 822L and Linux Red Hat. We started using Power on Linux a few months ago. We moved to it mainly because of the reliability.

It's got all the scalability I need. I can add on to to the box that I've got. Scale it out from where I'm at.

I have not had any problems with technical support. They have all done well every time I have needed them.

We were using Power5.

It was pretty straightforward. I have been doing this a long time, so it is pretty straightforward for me. There are more hardware things now that I've moved to external storage. It does become a little more complex there.

The licensing has improved over the years. I've been working with IBM for 30-plus years. The licenses have gotten better. We are experiencing some issues with Linux licensing between the different flavors, between Ubuntu and Red Hat, and which license you need for which machine, so that's getting to become a little complex.

No.

The OpenPOWER Foundation has brought many advantages. There are a lot more things available now, carried over from other industries.

I personally do consider IBM to be a market leader in servers. In order to maintain that position they just need to continue the performance and the reliability.

The use case is for hosting a lot of the bank's applications.

Some of the most valuable features are the processing power, stability, and security.

I would like to see the scaling model improved so it's not just either tiny or huge.

We have been using IBM Power Systems since 2001, so it's been 20 years.

IBM is quite stable. That's one of their most popular aspects. We just upgraded our power systems recently, so we're going to be working with them through the next five years at least.

The solution is being used quite heavily.

The scalability is a bit above average. It's not the best, but it's a good deal.

The SKU modeling part they have is not very flexible toward customers. Either you have to go very big or you have to go very small. There isn't an in-between. There's not a lot of variety in this.

I have onsite support and I talk to technical support a lot. My experience has been good.

Setup was straightforward, with the help of the professional services from IBM. Maintenance is handled by the IBM team, especially the hardware.

We used IBM partners. Usually it's IBM themselves, not the partners.

The licensing costs are okay. With IBM Power Systems, it's inclusive, so you can differentiate the price of the hardware from the software itself. The power systems are quite expensive. In the end, you equate a means of value. From a value proposition, it is either justifiable or not.

The additional costs are the maintenance and warranty professional services.

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.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

My advice for an organization that is looking to implement this solution is that they should have the adequate expertise of personnel that can run the system. They should study their TCO and ROI regarding whether it is worth investing in this, given that it's a very expensive solution. These are the two most important aspects.

I would also advise dealing with an appropriate partner or dealing with IBM directly.

The solution's most valuable features are speed and capacity on demand. It works faster than Intel Power Processor.

They should improve the solution's pricing. Also, they should provide proper documentation to understand the setup process.

I have been using the solution for more than two years.

It is a stable solution.

It is a very scalable solution as it has capacity on demand. We can activate many features depending on the business requirements.

The solution’s technical support team is good.

I have worked with Lenovo Server, HP Server, Dell Server, and SolarWinds earlier.

The solution’s initial setup was complex.

The solution's native server is not much expensive. But, the additional software required for visualization and data protection is highly-priced.

The solution is suitable for prevention and maintenance. If you have the budget and a knowledgeable executive to manage the system, you should buy IBM Power Systems. I rate it a nine out of ten for its availability and visibility.

Reliability would be the strongest thing. Speed and performance are a couple of the other top ones.

It helps our run times and our batches run faster. It allows people to get their job done faster. It allows us to deliver better SLA's. I'm not sure that it uniquely positions our company in our industry.

I don't know how you can improve on something that is as stable as it is.

IBM changes licensing, so to speak, with the wind. You never know what they're going to go with. It would be nicer if it were simpler. And, maybe not so costly, that would help.

I've been using AIX and Power for about 20 years.

Stability is 100%.

The boxes we bought, they're probably not really scalable, because we locked into 850s in a lot of them, but the 870 is more scalable. I think for what we have, and the size, they do fine.

I've used them over the years, but not in a while. In the past they were very good.

Straightforward, as are the upgrades.

When upgrading from previous versions, in terms of ROI, maybe now there's a little bit, but at least that way it's always backwards compatible, so we don't really have any upgrade issues. I guess the payment back would be the low likelihood of failure or failed upgrades.

We just moved to POWER8 this year, and we saw a big improvement from POWER7.

It is costly compared to other solutions but we justify it by the reliability.

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

We have four 850s and one 870. We use them for AIX.

When I think servers, and market leaders, I think of Intel. Since they got out of that business, IBM is a leader in what they're focused on right now, which is Power, mainframe. That's really the only thing that is left. They have no competition.

What is there not to like about it? It works every time. You hardly ever have any real issues. It's fast, the most efficient hardware I've ever worked with. I like Power because I think it just works the best.

You absolutely have to get that better performance all the time. The managers are always saying, "Well, let's make it faster, faster, faster."

I've been using Power since the birth of Power. I've been in it for 24 years. When I first started it was all Micro Channel and I've been along through the evolution right up through to the POWER8s and new, coming POWER9s. I've ever only been interested in working with IBM products.

We're using it for AIX and we also are setting up some SAP HANA on some 870s. 

Everyone has an issue at some point, but over the 24 years I've been in this, I have seen very few issues, which is why I really like their product over everyone else.

Scalability has always been kind of a key factor. There's no good product if it's not scalable, and Power is the easiest-to-scale product I've ever worked with.

Depends on which technical support you get. With all the different places I've been you really get the Advocate Program or you don't. If you're in the Advocate Program you get the top help right away. Their tech support with the Advocate Program is awesome.

If you're not in the Advocate Program you have to go through the series of the lower-level tech support, and usually they're not really helpful. In most cases I've ended up figuring out what the problem was before they had an answer. 

Regarding upgrades they're generally pretty straightforward. We use NIM to do our upgrades. All you do is create your new lpp_source SPOT and, if you're going from version to version, use nimadm and alt disk - you've got it covered.

We have a Linux team does all the Linux, but we're working with them to help them install the Linux.

In terms of a return on investment from upgrading from a previous version of AIX to the current version, from a financial standpoint I don't really see a difference.

But for performance, it's not so much just the performance, it's the new features that come in the code that makes it appealing to me.

Regarding their being a market leader, I think they've always been in front of all their competitors. Maybe if they made some of their web components a little easier to utilize, that would make me happier.

I primarily use Power Systems for high availability and security.

Power Systems' best features include its user-friendliness and self-checking/self-healing abilities. It's also the best solution for MIMIX and high availability.

Power Systems' price could always be lower.

I've been working with Power Systems for over thirty years.

Power Systems is totally stable.

Power Systems is very scalable.

IBM's tech support is one of Power Systems' best features.

The initial setup is very easy - you just power it on, and it's ready to work in an hour.

Power Systems is very cheap and provides good value for money.

I would 100% recommend Power Systems to other users and would rate it ten out of ten.

I'm not sure of the actual term, but being able to delegate and take back the chips, and DB2. DB2 is a must.

We're able to streamline and clone our systems. All of our systems on the floor do the exact same thing, and that works for us.

Not sure. Everything works great.

IBM does a great job of incorporating the latest technology, but it's hard to give IT a 10 out of 10, we're always growing and fluctuating. 

None at all. (Then again, we keep developers off our systems). 

No issues. Unlimited growth with Power.

We have CE's and they're awesome. Scale of one to 10, they're tens.

We've had Compaq, we've had Solaris, we have Dell for our workstations, but IBM for our "big iron." It does what it's supposed to do, better, faster, and more efficiently. We also chose IBM for the support and the products.

Very straightforward. The field engineers usually come in and place the hardware on the floor and install it, and we take it from there. 

Compared to what we've dealt with, with Sun Solaris/Oracle and Compaq, the cost model is great.

In terms of the upgrade from previous systems to POWER8, we've seen a return on investment. We're able to do more with less. We're actually using fewer engineers to do it. I'm kind of skeptical that we could do even more with even fewer engineers, but yes, it can always be improved.

We have the whole scope of hardware, and we're running AIX 7.2. We have POWER7, POWER8. We actually still have some POWER5 on the floor. 

Power uniquely positions our company in the industry because of the unlimited growth.

I consider IBM to be the market leader in servers. They just need to keep doing what they're doing.