FlexPod XCS vs Vblock [EOL] comparison

"You can add more boxes and you can have more IOPS available if you want. It's very easy to add new hardware to the cluster."

"Things got a lot faster. We can pull and test in DEV systems much more rapidly and are clearing up a lot of DBA time. In the past, every time we tested it, we needed to be refreshed. In the past, it would take a day of our DBA's time, and now it's just point, click, and ten minutes later it's done."

"It is a very well-thought-out solution with great virtualization. A good option we have is mapping a storage LUN onto an ESX cluster. That way, in case a particular ESX is down, it can migrate (using vMotion) to another host in the cluster, resulting in high-availability."

"With FlexPod, it is about the synergy of the server, the storage, and the whole management layer. Together, it is really about minimizing staff. You don't have to hire more people. You can work with the minimum level of resources and the availability is really good. We have had very little downtime."

"The feature I have found most valuable is data protection."

"The solution has decreased the unplanned downtime incidents in our organization by 25 to 30 percent."

"It has been a great product, primarily because of a lot of its deduplication features, and the out-of-the-box thinking on block level storage from NetApp."

"The Validated Designs are very good because they act as a reference to see whether we have done things properly."

"It's an integrated box Mac solution, so it's a plug and play. The deployment and build is pre-made and ready to deploy. It makes it easy to apply."

"The most valuable features are reliability and high availability."

"​We have seen measurable increases in our system performance. Those increases have been directly measurable in application performance and the delivery of critical business information to our users.​"

"​It has improved system performance, batch times for off-hours processing, and reliability with production applications.​"

"Finding a fully bundled, deployed, and configured solution with a short delivery time and unique support is really attractive."

"Access to VMs is now faster due to the centralized management console."

"The high redundancy of components has minimized frequent service degradation/failure."

"Systems run solidly."

"The management interface of the UCS part of it is a little bit clunky. It uses Java, so when we're managing it, if I have a computer that doesn't have Java on it or has the wrong version of Java on it, there's some iterations that have to happen to get into the manager of it."

"​Newer platform reference architectures take a long time to harden and be publicly available.​"

"There is a lot of documentation that has to be reviewed before you go through an upgrade. It is not as straightforward as some other solutions."

"The majority of the time, if we need more storage, then we need to work with customizing the NetApp deployment. Right now, we just do a generic deployment, then wherever we have a need for storage, we have to move some application out of the next FlexPod deployment. One thing is to customize based on the requirements, but the requirements change so frequently, they are absolutely obsolete in six months."

"Parts of the initial setup were complex, especially on the networking side."

"The integration between both companies, Cisco and NetApp, is very good but it still needs to be enhanced in terms of visibility and observability."

"A piece where FlexPod has come up short in the past and an area for them to improve upon: single pane of glass management and single pane of glass upgrade process."

"The initial learning curve is pretty steep."

"I would like to see them improve their switching infrastructure and rely on Cisco configurations. They are a bit more complex and technical, but result in a slightly reduced cost in terms of switching on the network side of it."

"With respect to the technical support, there is room for improvement."

"The integration with other vendors' products needs to be looked at. It's not as flexible as we would like it to be."

"Improve the patching process and timeliness of updates/releases."

"While most public clouds are deployed on Linux, there is current no certified Vblock working on KVM hypervisors."

"VCE tools, like Vision or AMP were not stand alone, and depended too much on other management consoles."

"Tighter alignment could simplify and speed up the configuration and delivery process.​"

"The implementation and support could be better."

"We have saved time with Snapshots, SnapMirrors, and backup and DR capabilities versus other platforms that we have looked at in the past."

"As a startup, for the amount of budget we have and the amount we spend, we are getting what we expected."

"Licensing can be interesting with the new version because of the Intersight integration. I don't know what that looks like yet. I have seen some of the different licensing models, but with the new purchasing, all customers are going to have to buy some sort of Intersight licensing with the Blades or FlexPod. I am curious to see how that option shakes out. Previous to the UCS X-Series, the licensing was the same."

"The footprint in the data center is quite large, especially when you scale out. Maybe find some hardware in the future, where if a new blade comes out, then Cisco can say, "Look, we'll buy those blades back off you, and we'll give you this blade for X amount of money." A buyback scheme would be good for hardware, and even NetApp as well. Something like a buyback scheme for blades and stuff moving forward would be good, because I know that they're going to put more power into them. E.g., replacing four blades might equal one blade, which would be awesome, but we are still going to have those four blades around. Maybe having something where it will give you this much money for these blades so we can upgrade. That would be perfect."

"The product is kind of expensive even from an entry-level standpoint. I would say FlexPod would be the way to go if you are a larger business or one with large data volume."

"It's expensive, but when you pay for enterprise support and enterprise products, you have to pay the big bucks."

"I find the licensing and pricing structure to be favorable."

"We have saved money using FlexPod. We have saved time and money for new service deployments."

"The paid support for Vblock is expensive."

"Vblock is priced at a premium because people don't want the headache of managing and deploying different products."

"Related to tech support: I believe it is too expensive."

"I would not say the pricing is not good value. It is still on the expensive side, near the top-end of cost compared to what's available now. Also, the licensing has to be improved. There has to be a clear definition of the licensing from the initial set-up so the customer knows what they are paying for, without being hit later on with extra licensing. The licensing definitions should be clearer and, perhaps, have one set of licenses rather than multiple licenses."

"Vblock appears from the first while to be very expensive. There are more items you cannot see in the BOQ: customer service, support, delivery short time, and highly experienced VCE engineers."

"Strive for a consolidated ELA."

"It is not cheap."

"I think the pricing is on the higher end of the spectrum. There could be some adjustments that could be made there. Regarding licensing, watch compatibility with external products that you run on Vblock. It has got to be properly architected, otherwise, you will run into licensing issues."