Infrastructure And Systems Manager at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Jun 3, 2026
It is difficult to provide specific areas for improvement at this time. We may realize approximately 20% gains in the future, but the previous SAN we used was not very time-consuming, so the improvement is not very significant. We anticipate gains of approximately 10 to 20%. The management interface could be simplified. The cloud console contains two main sections: one for hardware and one for logical volumes on the LUNs being managed. This split is understandable because the hardware console contains HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 for block storage and HPE Alletra for backup, both accessible in the same console. The separation of the SAN hardware console and the backup console is logical and understandable. We have four compute nodes, and the system was not designed to shut down gracefully with only two compute nodes remaining. Running with just one compute node functions properly, and the system continues to operate at reduced capacity. However, when we experienced a crash involving half of the system, HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 failed completely. This behavior is documented as normal in the documentation, but we hoped the block storage could manage to run with half the power. This capability will be available in a future release but is not included in the current version. Our testing before moving to production was not entirely successful, but this aligns with the documented specifications. When we perform failover and data center crash tests, the system performs very well. We have deliberately crashed all four compute nodes, and the secondary storage site manages the workload without any virtual machines malfunctioning. This level of reliability is excellent, and it demonstrates why we selected HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. Improvements in this area would make the solution even stronger.
We are facing issues related to your services and support with HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. Your product is very good, but we are facing technical issues and issues related to queries that have not been resolved in a timely manner, which would be improved on your side. I would like to improve the response time first of all, and the second thing is clarity on who will be responsible for technical support. We faced situations when getting support where multiple channels were involved, and sometimes a technical person would call, but there was no call and no exact support at the right time. The pricing is much higher compared to others, and if I compare it, it is a little higher, but overall it is acceptable. You definitely have to improve your pricing first of all. Additional features that I would like to see in the future to make it closer to ten depend on situations, so I cannot specify at this time. All the features you have already applied in HP storage are good, but I think AI-based calculations and analyzing will be much better.
I think there are some issues to enhance in HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. In HP, there is no NAS as of now. Earlier, there was a NAS, but they stopped the unified boxes, creating challenges with customers. For enterprise customers, it is better to keep the environment separate, but for SMB customers, they should introduce unified boxes so that customers can easily use SAN/NAS functionality. That function is not available in HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. It is available in Dell PowerStore and NetApp. If the customer's requirement is pure NAS, in that environment, I cannot suggest HP solutions. If the customer asks for a unified box in an RFP, I have to go to alternative OEMs like NetApp. As I mentioned, NetApp is known for the unified feature. In HP, there is no option to provide a unified box. If the requirement is for object storage or pure SAN, HP will best fit that environment. In NetApp, there are limitations on the SMB customer side due to the need for iSCSI switches between servers and storage. In contrast, with HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000, I can connect directly to the switches.
I would like to improve the situation, as I have heard many complaints about price. Prices are dramatically increasing and I have heard complaints from end customers. In the next release of HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000, I would like to see mixed vendor Peer Motion features. For instance, the ability to migrate from HPE to Dell and vice versa would be a useful feature. The feature to HPE storage is already available, but the ability to migrate away from HPE would be helpful for customers who want to change vendors. However, I do not think HPE is ever going to provide such a feature because it makes it too easy for customers to move away from their product. Regardless, this would be helpful for some vendors to move away from. I would not assess the solution's AI-driven predictive analytics and performance reporting as particularly effective. Using AI for system predictions, you are monitoring parameters, and if any kind of threshold occurs, you have to react to it. This is not AI. AI is writing a book or programming something that really needs creativity. Monitoring a system is monitoring a system. You can automate it, but this is not intelligence.
One area that has potential for improvement is the replication side, as Alletra Direct GUI does not provide options to view replication details. While the DSCC portal offers this information, it is not available in the integrated GUI.
Learn what your peers think about HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: August 2026.
Maybe they need to create a new line or basic line such as MSA for a small business. I have no idea at this time for a missing feature or something that needs to be added in the future.
The main point for choosing HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 over the vendors we compared it with is the costing, which is much lower compared to the others. Currently, I believe HPE Alletra is giving good performance, and reliability totally depends on how many hardware failures we are getting. It could be a good solution, but the performance and reliability depend on how the hardware is sustained for a longer duration, including the controllers and everything. I have never used the feature of HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 to move workloads from on-premises to the cloud and back.
When the system first came out, it had some problems with the Data Center Cloud Console, which made implementation difficult. However, I have implemented it over the last four months, and it works very easily. The implementation in the Data Center Cloud Console and the startup and configuration is very easy, working similarly to the old Nimble OS systems.
Video Strategy Senior Solution Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Jun 25, 2025
HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 could be improved by integrating it with GreenLake, as this would enable us to do end-to-end monitoring across both on-prem and cloud environments better. It has a lot of capabilities, but we haven't yet put it in action.
It's still a block environment. The file storage is too big. If they can lower that so I can store files and objects on the same device, that would be great. You need two different boxes for block and file storage. They aren't using the same hardware. It's the same hardware, yet not a compiled solution. I'd like one box in my data center. I see some features from InfoSight in the GreenLake management platform. However, it's not on par yet.
Solutions architect at PinkRoccade Cloud Solutions
Real User
Jun 18, 2024
I do not have any areas for improvement. We are experimenting with Alletra MP. In the next couple of years, we will be migrating our primary systems to Alletra MP, so I have no need for new features at the moment.
Network engineer / owner at a photography company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Apr 12, 2024
My main concern is that changes made on the devices take a long time to configure and show their status. It's very inconvenient how long this takes. For example, if I configure five switches at a time. They all come with the same default name, so I have to identify them somehow. I select the first switch, change its name, and save the configuration. But it still has the same default name. So, I'm having a hard time figuring out what configuration has been implemented... Is it configured? Why is it not shown in the portal? I'm disappointed with the portal. The debugging of devices could use improvement. Connection problems on devices as well. Better logging within GreenLake to understand what's happening with devices—why something isn't working, those kinds of things.
HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000, formerly HPE GreenLake for Block Storage, is a flexible solution known for central management and scalability, ensuring improved uptime and seamless system integration.HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 offers an intuitive interface, AI-driven predictive analytics, and the ability to scale capacity and performance independently. It provides a pay-as-you-go model for simplified management and reduces operational expenses and downtime. The solution is characterized by...
In file protocols regard, an area for improvement exists.
It is difficult to provide specific areas for improvement at this time. We may realize approximately 20% gains in the future, but the previous SAN we used was not very time-consuming, so the improvement is not very significant. We anticipate gains of approximately 10 to 20%. The management interface could be simplified. The cloud console contains two main sections: one for hardware and one for logical volumes on the LUNs being managed. This split is understandable because the hardware console contains HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 for block storage and HPE Alletra for backup, both accessible in the same console. The separation of the SAN hardware console and the backup console is logical and understandable. We have four compute nodes, and the system was not designed to shut down gracefully with only two compute nodes remaining. Running with just one compute node functions properly, and the system continues to operate at reduced capacity. However, when we experienced a crash involving half of the system, HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 failed completely. This behavior is documented as normal in the documentation, but we hoped the block storage could manage to run with half the power. This capability will be available in a future release but is not included in the current version. Our testing before moving to production was not entirely successful, but this aligns with the documented specifications. When we perform failover and data center crash tests, the system performs very well. We have deliberately crashed all four compute nodes, and the secondary storage site manages the workload without any virtual machines malfunctioning. This level of reliability is excellent, and it demonstrates why we selected HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. Improvements in this area would make the solution even stronger.
We are facing issues related to your services and support with HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. Your product is very good, but we are facing technical issues and issues related to queries that have not been resolved in a timely manner, which would be improved on your side. I would like to improve the response time first of all, and the second thing is clarity on who will be responsible for technical support. We faced situations when getting support where multiple channels were involved, and sometimes a technical person would call, but there was no call and no exact support at the right time. The pricing is much higher compared to others, and if I compare it, it is a little higher, but overall it is acceptable. You definitely have to improve your pricing first of all. Additional features that I would like to see in the future to make it closer to ten depend on situations, so I cannot specify at this time. All the features you have already applied in HP storage are good, but I think AI-based calculations and analyzing will be much better.
I think there are some issues to enhance in HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. In HP, there is no NAS as of now. Earlier, there was a NAS, but they stopped the unified boxes, creating challenges with customers. For enterprise customers, it is better to keep the environment separate, but for SMB customers, they should introduce unified boxes so that customers can easily use SAN/NAS functionality. That function is not available in HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000. It is available in Dell PowerStore and NetApp. If the customer's requirement is pure NAS, in that environment, I cannot suggest HP solutions. If the customer asks for a unified box in an RFP, I have to go to alternative OEMs like NetApp. As I mentioned, NetApp is known for the unified feature. In HP, there is no option to provide a unified box. If the requirement is for object storage or pure SAN, HP will best fit that environment. In NetApp, there are limitations on the SMB customer side due to the need for iSCSI switches between servers and storage. In contrast, with HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000, I can connect directly to the switches.
I would like to improve the situation, as I have heard many complaints about price. Prices are dramatically increasing and I have heard complaints from end customers. In the next release of HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000, I would like to see mixed vendor Peer Motion features. For instance, the ability to migrate from HPE to Dell and vice versa would be a useful feature. The feature to HPE storage is already available, but the ability to migrate away from HPE would be helpful for customers who want to change vendors. However, I do not think HPE is ever going to provide such a feature because it makes it too easy for customers to move away from their product. Regardless, this would be helpful for some vendors to move away from. I would not assess the solution's AI-driven predictive analytics and performance reporting as particularly effective. Using AI for system predictions, you are monitoring parameters, and if any kind of threshold occurs, you have to react to it. This is not AI. AI is writing a book or programming something that really needs creativity. Monitoring a system is monitoring a system. You can automate it, but this is not intelligence.
One area that has potential for improvement is the replication side, as Alletra Direct GUI does not provide options to view replication details. While the DSCC portal offers this information, it is not available in the integrated GUI.
Maybe they need to create a new line or basic line such as MSA for a small business. I have no idea at this time for a missing feature or something that needs to be added in the future.
The main point for choosing HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 over the vendors we compared it with is the costing, which is much lower compared to the others. Currently, I believe HPE Alletra is giving good performance, and reliability totally depends on how many hardware failures we are getting. It could be a good solution, but the performance and reliability depend on how the hardware is sustained for a longer duration, including the controllers and everything. I have never used the feature of HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 to move workloads from on-premises to the cloud and back.
When the system first came out, it had some problems with the Data Center Cloud Console, which made implementation difficult. However, I have implemented it over the last four months, and it works very easily. The implementation in the Data Center Cloud Console and the startup and configuration is very easy, working similarly to the old Nimble OS systems.
HPE Alletra Storage MP B10000 could be improved by integrating it with GreenLake, as this would enable us to do end-to-end monitoring across both on-prem and cloud environments better. It has a lot of capabilities, but we haven't yet put it in action.
I don't have a feature set I'm looking for right now for the next release.
It's still a block environment. The file storage is too big. If they can lower that so I can store files and objects on the same device, that would be great. You need two different boxes for block and file storage. They aren't using the same hardware. It's the same hardware, yet not a compiled solution. I'd like one box in my data center. I see some features from InfoSight in the GreenLake management platform. However, it's not on par yet.
I do not have any areas for improvement. We are experimenting with Alletra MP. In the next couple of years, we will be migrating our primary systems to Alletra MP, so I have no need for new features at the moment.
We just started using the solution. With support, occasionally, we have a little trouble escalating things.
My main concern is that changes made on the devices take a long time to configure and show their status. It's very inconvenient how long this takes. For example, if I configure five switches at a time. They all come with the same default name, so I have to identify them somehow. I select the first switch, change its name, and save the configuration. But it still has the same default name. So, I'm having a hard time figuring out what configuration has been implemented... Is it configured? Why is it not shown in the portal? I'm disappointed with the portal. The debugging of devices could use improvement. Connection problems on devices as well. Better logging within GreenLake to understand what's happening with devices—why something isn't working, those kinds of things.