Cisco UCS Director Reviews

I was responsible for fixing this solution in my company.

My role was designing the zones.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the fabric sharing.

The security features are good.

HyperFlex is not the best of the hyper-converged solutions.

We cannot depend on this solution to manage all of the data center's infrastructure. We can count on it to replace the traditional Blades or rack-mounted servers, but not a hyper-converged system.

Adding integration, or an API to manage another vendor's hardware, would really add value to this solution.

This is a stable solution.

This solution is scalable.

There are approximately two thousand people using this solution.

The technical support for this solution is very good, at least in our region. It may be different in other regions.

The initial setup of this solution is somewhat complex. It requires an expert to configure.

The deployment took approximately one month. For a small deployment, that is a long time.

There are two to three people required for maintenance in order to avoid a single point of failure.

My advice for anybody considering this solution is to first have the vision to convert all of your x86 data center hardware to UCS. Do not add it for a specific use case, such as a cloud manager. Cisco recommends this solution for cloud management, but it should not be done unless you plan to replace all of your hardware with Cisco.

This is a good solution, but I would like to see integration with other hardware vendors.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use for Cisco UCS is workflow enhancement.

The improvement for our organization has really been ease of use. We'd be a mess without the solution. 

The most valuable feature for me as a user is that you can make API calls to it. That's a cool feature.

The solution could be improved is including a feature where I could do things programmatically versus having to create workarounds to get what I want to get done. Any more features would be welcome. They should keep developing API.

As far as the stability of the solution, it's pretty rock solid. It works really well and I have no complaints.

We don't have the need to grow too much or too fast. We're strictly west coast and there's not a lot we're doing to change that. So as far as personal experience with scaling, I wouldn't know too much. If we ever became a national global company, yeah, we'd probably use it and roll it out to scale up and I don't think there would be problems.

It is hard for me to judge technical support because we haven't had to use it. It's a good problem to have. I did call one time — the only time I did have to call in anything on the UCS — and the problem was resolved in like five minutes. So, as my only contact, I'd say he was very good. At a scale of one to ten that experience with support was at least eight. I mean it wasn't anything major — the world wasn't on fire. But it's good to know that the tech people are knowledgeable and dedicated.

We are so committed to this technology that I don't even know if there's another UCS Manager out there.

I'm not sure how complex the initial setup was because it happened before I came to the company.

The initial implementation was done through a VAR (Value Added Reseller). Again, I wasn't here for the rollout but I didn't hear anything negative about the experience.

I think this solution should be considered an eight out of ten. To get a ten from me and for what I do, there has to be more flexibility in the API. I'm tired of being the tip of the sword. Enhance programming and programmability.

As I said, I don't know if there's somebody else who does something like Cisco's UCS management. So I think my capabilities kinda get pigeonholed a little bit.

The solution is used for configuration purposes.

An easy and strong configuration, along with its low cost, are some of the features of the solution.

The configuration server lacks in certain areas and needs improvement.

I have experience with Cisco UCS Director. I am a partner, distributor, and reseller of the solution.

I only have experience in the presentation of the solution.

It is not easy to add or expand the product.

The customers only require help with configuration. Cisco provides very good technical support at my place. I rate the technical support between nine to ten out of ten.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process was easy.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing around five to six out of ten. So, it can be somewhat expensive.

Cisco UCS Director is very easy to deploy, offering strong support. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

The typical use case is for web services. It is integrated with our database.

The documentation is very good.

I would like to see more flexibility when it comes to managing other stacks, like VMware virtualization.

I have been using Cisco UCS Director for about one year.

The system runs smoothly. We have not had any big problems.

The scalability is very good and it is flexible.

Technical support is very good overall. They have specialized engineers and they are very proficient.

We had a small problem with incompatibility but it was resolved by Cisco support. It was not a big issue. In total, it took about six months for the deployment.

Our in-house team handled the deployment.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to first consider and understand the use case. Think about your high-level design, the business requirements, how scalable and how flexible it has to be, and what your own availability is.

Overall, I think that this is a very good product, although nothing is perfect. There are still some small improvements that can be made to make it better.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is the interconnection between two applications. One that resides on the data center and the other that resides in the architecture. 

It's a scale-out architecture and a hybrid setup. In case there are any workloads, it works on either public or private cloud architecture.

One of the features that I would like to highlight is the multi-cloud management capabilities on the USC Director. I can manage multiple workloads whether it's on AWS, Azure, or on-premises. They can be managed by using the UCS Director. That is one of the most important features that I find to be the most relevant.

Normally, UCS Director is used primarily for orchestration, but when we look at a non-Cisco data infrastructure components, the UCS Director needs a bit more improvement in terms of integration with third-party systems and with existing older systems.

I feel that more development or a more integrated road map should be set up so that it becomes a common platform for any infrastructure. 

In the next release of this solution, I would like to see changes in the navigation controls of UCS Director. That would be helpful. Modifying the icons that are available for use, as well as virtualization aspects.

I have been working with this solution for two years.

In terms of stability, it is very good.

There is a significant amount of development happening in the background and constant releases for bug fixes, which is one of the features that is offered. Cisco provides very thorough release cycles. 

When you are looking at upgrades and bug fixes, we have a more stable solution compared to any other vendor.

Scalability is amazing. As of now, it supports the open virtualization format, which is the format for VMware and vSphere. We have the virtual hard disk as a concept, which is the VHD. It works with Microsoft Hyper-V.

If you look at the ecosystem, you have better compatibility metrics. The only problem is that if I have an HP infrastructure already in place, I have to set it with external APIs to manage third-party solutions.

As usual, the technical support from Cisco is amazing. The process is clearly defined, and if you have the right service contract it is easy to approach them. It is very easy to get support from them.

The support is offered during the pre-sale activity when you are doing the sizing of the requirements, as well as post-sale. If you run into a problem then there is consultative support available.

The initial setup was easy.

We were able to deploy UCS Director and get it up and running within four to six hours.

My advice is to look at the features that you are looking for. 

If you are looking for central management and a self-service catalog, and are predominantly in a mix of the cloud as well as on-premises architecture, then you should look at UCS Director as a solution.

There are some advantages offered, such as:

• Adaptive provisioning, which ensures real-time availability, capacity planning, and internal policy. 
• Dynamic capacity management, which provides continuous monitoring of the infrastructure and resources. 
• Multiple hypervisor support, which is very important.
• Computing management, which allows you faster provisioning, providing you with monitoring and management on a physical and bare-metal server.

Before you do the sizing and the requirement, ensure that you go through with the compatibility metrics of UCS Director before you invest.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The main use for this solution is for orchestration.

The main feature of this solution is the integration with all the Cisco solutions and other vendors.

There could be an improvement with the integration with the newest solutions from other vendors' technologies.

I have been using this solution for three years.

The stability has been good.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support has been very good and responsive.

The installation was straightforward.

I believe this solution provides a good return on investment.

I would recommend this solution to others because it simplifies a lot of tasks via orchestration.

I rate Cisco UCS Director a nine out of ten.