HPE Ethernet Switches Reviews

We primarily use the solution for data communication, the data center, and wireless. All of our switches are HP.

The switches offer simple management. I can control what I need using CLI. CLI commands are very simple and are somewhat similar to Cisco CLI. We can manage them, we can update them freely, and the warranty is unlimited. This is the solution's most valuable feature.

The solution uses a single interface and that interface contains everything.

We have been using the solution for about ten years.

The stability is very good on this solution. There have been no bugs, glitches or crashes.

Scalability on the solution is easy. It's not too difficult. Right now, we have about 150 users on the solution.

We've contacted technical support many times. They are quick to respond. We're satisfied with them.

I have used Cisco switches before. Cisco updates are more difficult on switches. Also, the initial setup is more difficult.

The initial setup is easy. Deployment only takes a few minutes.

I handled the installation myself.

The pricing is a bit lower than Cisco switches.

We use the 2500 PoE switches.

I have a lot of experience with HP switches. They're very reliable and are implemented easily. The features that they offer are more than enough for our hospital. There are other features on solutions like Cisco and Juniper, but for what we need, this solution is perfect.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for the customer's assurances in medium-size businesses.

The deployment model that we are using is on-premises, but it is going more and more in the cloud direction.

The most valuable feature is the IRF. It is very good, it has a multi-connection that you can do with multiple aggregation protocols to different chassis and this is a very valuable feature.

It's easy to stack more switches together if you need more ports.

Technical support needs improvement.

Customer awareness, as in the availability of the products, needs to be improved through marketing or other information.

Currently, we haven't seen any new switches and we don't know if there will be others.

In the next release, I would like to see them include more features like the Aruba solution, to have more possibilities concerning the software design.

I have been using this solution for nine years.

This solution is very stable. It's a very good solution.

This is a scalable solution. With the IRF you can stack the switches willfully together locally or geographically. You can have the same switch even if you have a switch ten kilometers away from your location.

Technical support needs improvement.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy.

The time it takes to deploy depends on if the customer. An SD solution that will use management to configure the switches automatically will take minutes. If you have to configure a stand-alone switch it can take half an hour.

For ten customers there may be one person to deploy the switch and maintain it. You would rarely have to replace a switch.

There is no license for this solution.

We need a license for having a management solution, but the switch does not need a license. There are free software updates and there is a lifetime warranty for a few of the switch series.

If a customer has an issue with a switch and has to return to HPE, they can have it replaced within thirty days.

To our customers, we offer a contract service to have an exchange within the next day.

I would suggest not to invest in this switch. Aruba, which is also HPE, has a great switch. Aruba is taking over these types of switches because of the DLAN and WLAN. 

I agree that HPE provides good products but I would go with Aruba OS.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

It has standard layer 2 functions with basic layer 3 features if needed. It offers standard security such as 802.1x, RADIUS/TACACS authentication, port-security, DHCP snooping and much more.

Interface types, such as offering more of a mixture of 1Gb and 10Gb fiber/cooper interfaces. Faster backbone speeds when stacked.

HP 2920 The companies I have installed it for have kept it for roughly for 2-3 years.

No issues. However, the CLI is a bit different from Cisco but once you have the HP terminology down it’s easy so long as you plan the deployment properly.

I haven’t heard any complaints from customers that I worked with.

No. These switches can be outfitted with two 10Gb modules on the back for up links to other switches or to hosts. It can also be stacked with another 2920 for better port density.

Clients who choose the HP 2920 switch 9 times out of 10 had older Cisco switches. They felt moving to HP would be more cost effective.

It was straightforward especially if you're a custom to using Cisco switches. The CLI and terminology are a bit different and might confuse several engineers. Fortunately, HP has released a document that states the equivalent HP commands.

I have helped clients weigh out the pro’s and con’s and in the end it always came down to cost and 9 times out of 10 HP won the cost battle.

Weigh out the Pro’s and Con’s between Cisco and HP and consider price as a last resort. Also, from my experiences it’s best to go with one solution then to mix and match different vendors.

We primarily use this solution for video surveillance.

The best part about this solution is the price.

This solution is easy to use.

The technical support for this solution has improved from what it was.

We have had some rare occasions with glitches, so the stability can be improved.

We have been using this solution for about a year and a half.

This solution is stable, but on the rare occasion, we have had glitches like dropped packets.

We do not tolerate serious issues in the backbone or infrastructure. We do not go for something cheap and hoping that it will work, especially when it comes to networking.

I cannot comment on the scalability because it is not something that we consider. When we decide on a solution, we go for it completely, from the beginning to the end. We start with the complete solution on day one, as opposed to starting small and then looking to scale it later on.

The number of users for each of our switches depends on the circumstances. In some sites, we have ten or twenty users. In other sites, depending on how big it is, like an industrial facility or a hotel, we do not know. Many of our solutions are used in retail or hospitality environments.

We do not speak with HPE technical support because everything has to go through the distributor.

Most of the time, we use solutions from Cisco. They are well supported in Egypt. However, new regulations in Egypt require that if we are buying a product from abroad then we have to be a partner, and have a letter from the vendor to indicate this. Is has to do with the ability to provide local support.

Because we are not a partner with Cisco, we need to purchase equipment from the local partner. This means that we have to work with their fees and time schedule. Paying in advance is not a problem, but you have to wait for an unspecified period of time to receive your equipment. They won't give you an estimate as to the duration.

We switched to HPE simply because they are easier to get than Cisco or Sophos.

Our deployment took a couple of days.

We have not had to maintain our switches, except for one time when we had a bad experience. It was a long time ago, and we had HPE switches from a system integrator. One had a problem and it was under warranty, but instead of replacing the switch, they started swapping pieces one at a time. This switch was in a very crucial data center and it was very difficult to get there.

Ultimately, we lost the customer and the system integrator lost their reputation. I think that HPE lost a lot because it was much easier to replace the entire unit instead of replacing one piece at a time. They ended up replacing entire modules. Since that time, we don't rely on local partners. We talk to HPE directly or we collect the whole unit and send it to HPE.

Our in-house team handled the implementation.

Licensing fees are on a yearly basis.

These switches are not as stable as those from Cisco.

We were looking at some switches from Alcatel-Lucent, but they are not popular in Egypt.

This is a solution that I recommend.

My advice to anybody researching this type of solution is to not go for the cheap solution. Go for the right one. You get what you pay for.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for Layer 2 switching and we are using it for the searching, VLAN features, and some DDoS prevention and protection.

The Layer 2 switching capabilities are very useful. 

It has an easy initial setup.

The solution offers lifetime warranties. 

It has good stability.

it's been issue-free, and we haven't needed any support.

It can scale. 

We haven't had any issues as of yet.

The quality could be better. For example, I much prefer Cisco. However, they are both almost at the same level. 

The pricing could be lowered. 

I've been using the solution for four years. 

It's a stable solution. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. If it is configured correctly, I will rate the stability nine out of ten. 

They have 24 or 48 ports. It can scale. You choose according to your needs. We have 100 users. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

We've never faced any issues, and our team is very knowledgeable. So far, we have not needed support or assistance. 

We use a variety of products, including Cisco, HPE, Aruba, Ruckus, Cambium, and D-Link. 

For switching and networking, it is okay to set up. We didn't run into any issues. 

The deployment is quick and only takes half an hour. We used the console and the GUI during the process. 

I have one or two resources available to handle any maintenance tasks. 

We handled the setup ourselves via the GUI. 

The solution is a bit expensive.

I tend to prefer Cisco over HPE. We buy HPE mostly for its warranty. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

On-premises

The primary use case of this solution is for the office network connection.

What I like the most is the management system integrated with the HP system. Our server is HPE and we have the management system to supervise. Now it is our system, but at the same time, it is the HPE because it is integrated into our system.

I am now using a new model because we had a problem with the speed, but the problem was with the network infrastructure, not with the HPE. We did not have the fiber backbone in our company.

We need more support to fix simple issues. For example, to find a problem in the LAN or why the systems speed is slow.

When we have a lot of clients on the system, we lose signal and have to restart our antenna. 

It would be better to be able to provide my number and have the information needed in regards to the equipment when a change is proposed.

You will need the assistance of a technician because the implementation is not that easy.

If you change your old equipment then it will be replaced but you have the same issues in five years' time because HPE does not have the equipment to solve my issues.

In the next release, I would like to see technical support for simple issues and to simplify the implementation.

I have been using this solution for six years.

This solution is stable. 

The switches have been installed for a minimum of five years, and have never been switched off. The problem is the cable or the rack gripped the cable, not the switch.

The switches are old, but there are components available that are not too expensive.

We have fifty users. This includes a technical and IT office with three people, a mechanical office with ten engineers, and an electronic office with three engineers.

This solution is scalable.

In our company, we want to change to a Fiber backbone and the switches we have are too old and only have STF ports with a maximum speed of one gigabit. The network needs ten gigabits to scale one gigabit for the client.

The technical is okay for our system. With the issue we have now, we contacted web support. We were satisfied with the support that we received. 

We had a problem with the shipment being lost, and they had to ship another one, but that was a problem with the shipper and not HPE.

The support not only solves my problems but they try to solve future problems that may occur.

Previously we used Cisco Atlantis. We switched to HPE because we had a good impression of this solution and good experience with the switches. Our network system was also older, with older equipment.

I find the setup in Cisco to be more difficult than HPE, but I know HPE better than Cisco.

If you use the web interface, the GUI interface, you need to have a basic knowledge to manage the network, it's easy. If you use the command line interface it's not as easy.

The time it takes to deploy really depends on the complexity of the network. If, for example, you have one HPE switch without a VLAN system, it's not easy. A network deployment can take a week with ten switches and to set up every port.

To implement this solution to make a separate VLAN for the CMC or to deploy the VPN connection we used an external technician. The technician, in this case, was HPE certified.

There were three options, but we prefer HPE, it was our first choice.

My advice would be to draw the network system before calling a technician. It's necessary to do a good job.

The price is not the only thing to consider when making your decision.

The switches are guaranteed for life, it's a great solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

On-premises

We are using HPE Ethernet Switches for the inter-server connection. I am using a 12-year-old version of the solution.

HPE Ethernet Switches have a lifetime warranty. I am using an old version of the solution, but I have heard the new models have incorporated a lot of new features, such as remote setup.

They should continue to work on new features.

I have been using HPE Ethernet Switches for approximately two years.

 I have found HPE Ethernet Switches to be highly stable. It has been working 365 days a year for many years.

We have not requited the scalability of the solution. HPE Ethernet Switches have been good enough.

I have not needed to contact technical support. I have not had issues.

We were using Juniper switches previously. We changed it due to the cost. HP had offered us a very low cost to buy the switch.

The installation is simple, and the configuration was straightforward. The process took approximately one hour.

I did the implementation myself and only one engineer is required for support.

HP switches are priced well.

I would recommend HPE Ethernet Switches to others. 

I rate HPE Ethernet Switches a ten out of ten.

On-premises

We use HPE Ethernet Switches to connect access devices. 

We were able to onboard HPE Ethernet Switches easily to the cloud. It was fast and took only five minutes to complete. 

HPE Ethernet Switches must ensure that the updates and patching are done regularly. When we have new software updates, we can resolve issues quickly. 

I have been using the solution for ten years. 

HPE Ethernet Switches is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Aruba's technical support is good and cooperative. 

I used Cisco before HPE Ethernet Switches. We chose HPE because of our company's single-vendor policy. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward and takes less than five minutes. To deploy the solution, you need to know the site's size and number of users. This is important since you need to know the model that needs to be purchased. 

I rate HPE Ethernet Switches a ten out of ten. You must understand the product well so you won't waste money. You need to know the deployment to purchase the suitable model. There are different products which can result in high costs.