HPE ProLiant DL Servers Reviews

It's reliability, really. It just works. It's one of those we've been using for 10 plus years and I've been in the company for 10 years. We rarely have a failure; and it just keeps working. It kind of base builds, ready to go, whereas before you needed to add bits and pieces. We don't need to do that anymore. Just out of the box, plug it in and it goes.

It's been in for so long, it just works.

I think the big thing for us, which is unique, is a dedicated HPE Cloud offering in New Zealand. It would be quite cool. I don't know if that's actually feasible or viable for HPE. Cloud is something we're interested in, but the solutions in New Zealand aren't really up to it. So you have to go to Australia. You get latency issues.

Through 10 years of various iterations and a lot of cycles of a product every three years. We used to swap out but we're virtualization now, we're taking that in to account, so no issues. We have the odd drive failure, and that's about it.

On the ProLiant, we've opted not to go down the blade enclosure. We went the dedicated service of the DL380s and pretty much the scalability of that is around the network. We've got to look at some virtualization technologies there.

We've logged a few calls. They're amazing, really good. Over the years we've had a few hard-drive failures, yet it's all pretty seamless. We just put in a HPE Networking as well.

When I first started the company was looking at Dell, and I was a Compaq engineer in my day.

HPE ProLiant DL Servers are easy to maintain. When we need to update the firmware or we need to log on remotely via the IO management interface. It's very convenient, easy. The supply chain is fast when we need to replace some failed hardware, such as hard drives or power supplies. Most of the time, it only takes a few days. The HPE ProLiant DL Servers services are officially certified for Red Hat usage which is a big advantage.

The solution could improve by providing more best practices from an architectural point of view. What are some recommended configurations for use, such as in a VM environment? HP provides some best practices but they are based on VMware, not on Red Hat. It would benefit for others to see the different use cases. How the HPE ProLiant DL Servers were used in the context of Red hat virtualization, and some configurations as an example to allow us to identify some points that we can improve in our platform. We could make our system more reliable and scalable.

I have been using HPE ProLiant DL Servers for approximately three years.

The stability of the solution is good.

The scalability is good, but it depends on the virtualization software that is used. It does not only depend on the hardware.

All of our employees use this solution because all of our infrastructures are on HPE ProLiant DL Servers.

We open support tickets when needed with HP. They answer pretty fast and the HP engineers are knowledgeable. The agents answer specifically to our needs and we don't have any issue with them.

The solution is web-based making the installation straightforward.

The time it takes for the full implementation depends on the project. The time can vary if it is a small, medium, or large project. This time could also vary between the specific platform that we need to build. The time it takes is typically between three to four weeks.

We did the implementation ourselves.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate HPE ProLiant DL Servers an eight out of ten.

We use HPE Proliant DL Servers as rack servers.  

There were a number of incidents, but overall it is stable. I think that we had a problem with a drive bay. Once we replaced the drive bays, everything is now working fine now.  

Surely it is possible to scale the product. If you want to pay to upgrade the hardware like the processor and RAM cards it can be scaled.  

We try to support the local suppliers most of the time and so we are working with them instead. We do not have a direct agreement for technical support with the team at HPE (Hewlett Packard Enterprise).  

I can recommend HPE Proliant DL Servers to other users.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product as an eight-out-of-ten. To make it ten-of-ten, would be two things. First, when they make a sale they should provide support for the product to the buyer. I think they also need to make the hardware as relevant as possible as it is not completely up-to-date. For example, the drive bays generally seem to need to be upgraded.  

This kind of product is mainly a cost product. You need to have a good price. It is not a question of big features because there are no main differences between products.

I think the main feature is that it works. We have good management for the product, HPE OneView, which might be a good feature of the product, where you can manage it. Instead of the hardware technology, that is it.

What we are doing with the product is, we are building services on top of the HPE products, so the main advantage for us is that we have a stable, reliable platform.

I would like to see better license management with the iLO. It is very difficult to manage the licenses for the hardware, as they can easily be lost. Then it is very hard to get it back. That must be better.

We have not experienced any stability problems; 100% stable.

It is a physical thing, so the main scalability issues are money and delivery time, and not the technology itself. It is difficult to evaluate scalability for a simple server. Scalability is determined by the software and we are not talking about Superdome, just a low-level ProLiant server.

If we scale, we buy more machines. No issues so far.

The standard technical support is fine. We also have support with Proactive Support and contact and sometimes you need it, especially for SAP HANA systems where it was average.

The HP ProLiant support was OK.

We have been buying HPE rack servers for years. We are talking every year about switching to another technology, and it depends on the performance and the price at that moment, for one year normally.

When we are looking at a vendor like HPE, the most important criteria are innovation, reliability, and good support.

We also considered Dell rack servers, Lenovo, and Fujitsu. In the end, we chose HPE because of price.

Have a deep look at the HPE products. They are a market leader, by the numbers. Have a look at them; make a thorough comparison.

• Reliability
• Scalability
• Performance

These products are used as corporate infrastructure servers and improve our ability to perform everyday tasks crucial to our business as well as allow for easy administration from an IT perspective.

As these servers are constantly evolving with better technology and performance, I would have nothing to offer in the way of a wish list feature additions.

I've used it for five years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It's excellent.

It's excellent.

This product was installed prior to my employment, but I have used servers from HP in the past and have always been satisfied with them.

The initial setup was very straightforward with a step-by-step wizard to help me get the servers configured quickly. I’m especially impressed with the RAID setup wizard which makes setup of complex disk pools a breeze.

I implemented one of the servers myself all the way through. The others in our environment were setup by Microsoft prior to my employment

The ROI with these servers if fairly quick. Their reliability and uptime provide a quick return.

I would highly recommend purchasing an HP server product

Our primary use case is focused on harmonizing databases. The method of deployment depends on our clients and their needs.

The size can be improved by making it a little slick. Additionally, we are at a disadvantage in support for people in African countries using the product because we don't have access to the support team 24/7. The solution has several support levels, such as essential and proactive support. They can extend support to African countries.

We have been using the solution for five years and are currently using the latest version.

The solution is stable.

The solution is highly scalable because the processor core is high to the extent of a dual processor. This means it can handle a heavy workload and virtualization. It's one of the best products that can be effective in a virtualized environment.

I rate the customer service and support an eight out of ten.

The initial setup took a few hours.

Implementation was in-house and required at least two or more people, depending on their level of expertise.

The pricing of the solution is high compared to other products.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the processing power can be improved. I recommend the solution to people who are considering implementing it.

We are using these servers as cluster nodes. We are running VM with Hyper-V.

This product is feature-rich and is easy to install.

Sometimes, there are connectivity issues and the server is not able to connect to our SAN. One example is when we reboot from SAN storage, we face issues such as not being able to detect the SAN port. After we installed two new physical hard disks, that issue went away. It should be more stable.

We have been using the ProLiant DL Servers for the past four years.

These servers are stable, although sometimes there are connectivity issues. We do plan to continue using them in the future.

This is a scalable product. We have a five-node cluster with close to 3,500 users using different applications.

Technical support is rapid and very good. They take our calls immediately and resolve issues within four to five hours. The last time we had an issue, it was resolved immediately.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy. It will take about an hour to deploy, from scratch.

We deployed this product ourselves.

We have a data center team and a NOC team, with seven people who are managing these servers.

This is a good product and I can recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.