IBM PowerVM Reviews

As a consultant, I primarily use IBM PowerVM for solutions related to SAP and Oracle.

The valuable feature of the solution is the technical aspects, focusing on elements like processor infinity. This involves automatically assigning resources and setting priorities. For instance, specific processes can be prioritized over others, ensuring that higher-priority tasks can utilize resources from lower-priority systems in case of limited resources.

SRM for site recovery is a feature that should be included. The only missing element is the disaster recovery tooling.

I have been using the solution for the past 20 years.

The solution is stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable, and all my customers using it are enterprises.

The support is great.

Positive

The initial setup is quite straightforward, using standard deployment tools. Automation is possible. While I'm more focused on planning as an architect, the setup can typically be completed within a few hours, often ready for use by lunchtime after the deployment request is made in the morning.

The solution is expensive. You have to usually purchase the hardware and acquire licenses for a specific portion. This includes some room for inbox growth. Additionally, you need to buy all the necessary software and maintenance on top of that.

If you have enterprise requirements and seek a stable platform, IBM proves to be a suitable choice for overall enterprise solutions. Overall, I rate it a nine out of ten.

The solution is comprised of robust technology and is RISC architecture. The hardware is excellent. We never have any issues with it.

The stability is excellent. It's 99% stable. It offers amazing uptime.

The solution is very secure. It does a good job of protecting against cybersecurity threats. We feel safe in this environment.

IBM, as a principle itself, is available here in Pakistan, which is quite helpful. Technical support is great. The parts availability and their engineers, and even their support level at the backend, including a proper research team that can cater to any sort of the issues, are all available here.

They do have the high availability models, they have the HACMP, and they have the GPFS, and they have the Live Partition Mobility. The technology is advancing fast. 

If one can afford commercial offering with respect to the licensing cost and things, their research is going in the right direction in order to hopefully make it more affordable down the line. 

Whenever you go to the virtualization, you may experience performance issues. They need to better cater to virtualization with respect to performance. I'm not saying I'm facing any performance issue, however. It's more of a theoretical concern, as people say you have to compromise with respect to the performance whenever you move to virtualization.

The licensing could be better. The pricing and the licensing fees are very high with respect to the number of core licenses. So price factor on the Intel-based architecture is much less compared to IBM, for example. 

We have not confirmed their roadmap with respect to the cloud. Since IBM has acquired Red Hat, they may promote Red Hat for the cloud version. We don't know whether they are introducing AIX for their cloud platform as well or not. That we would love. Otherwise, we need to move to the Linux environment. In any case, they need to be more transparent with their plans for the cloud.

I've been dealing with the solution for a very long time. It's been more than a decade at this point.

The stability really is quite good. We never seem to have any issues whatsoever. The uptime is excellent. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Technical support has been excellent. I would rate them at a ten out of ten. They are extremely helpful and responsive, and they have a presence in our company, which makes it easy to not only get help but to get replacement parts as needed. They are excellent and we are extremely satisfied with the level of service they offer to customers. 

They have a very good Call Home feature. It's more proactive support. Sometimes if a system has some issue and they know beforehand, they will inform you that your system might face issues. They really try to be more proactive in their approach to support rather than the typical reactive support you might get.

When there wasn't any virtualization, there were a number of boxes that were pretty much the same at IBM. As the technology grew, with machines offering 24 GB memory or 64 GB, or 512GB, the processor limitation became smaller. Virtualization came in around 2005 and onwards, and things were now become less complex now in terms of setup. 

In terms of the number of boxes, they have reduced everything to only one or two boxes. You only have to cater to the maintenance of one box, or you have to manage many SLA contracts. And with respect to the data center, the power consumption is much less. 

Basically, previously, everything was much more complex. However, there has been a paradigm shift within the technology, and the complexity level is not as high as it once was.

The pricing is too high. there are other options on the market that are priced at less of a cost. IBM needs to begin to compete with them a bit more.

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with IBM.

We are using the latest version of the solution, although I cannot speak to the exact version number.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten due to its very proactive support and robust hardware. They are excellent and we are very happy with them overall.

I'd likely recommend the solution, however, it depends. If I've been using IBM for a long time and needed to move to, for example, Linux, it would be a difficult task. There are certain skillsets needed. You'd need some sort of support model. IBM, however, supports SAP HANA very well. You just need to be clear on future plans. That said, I give full marks to IBM as it really is a great system. So long as you don't need the cloud just yet, it's great. 

We use it to create logical partitions. 

The tool's performance is top-notch. 

The solution is quite pricey. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Customer use the software for core and critical systems.

IBM PowerVM's most valuable feature is stability.

The product's pricing could be less expensive compared to other competitors.

We have been using IBM PowerVM for ten years.

It is a stable software.

We manage services for less than ten IBM PowerVM users. It is scalable. However, I can see a decrease in the number of customers for the product because of pricing.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment time depends on the number of customers. It takes approximately three to six months to complete. It requires two people to execute the process.

The software generates a higher return on investment than non-IBM products.

We have to purchase the product's licenses.

I rate IBM PowerVM an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case of PowerVM is for our core banking system. We split our servers into multiple partitions, each one has a specific task for the project. 

It's in English, so its exceptional qualities make the control environment more flexible, easier, more stable, and easy to recover after issues. Overall, it has many advantages over using different servers.

IBM now makes provides us with quality GUI tools to make the experience easier and successful.

I don't have an issue with the current configuration or with the GUI. I worked on both with the team. 

I would like for IBM to be more focused on the cloud. 

I have been using PowerVM for the last six years. 

It is very stable. 

The scalability is very good. 

It's easy to set up. It has easy protocols to setup. To some extent, it can be difficult. If you follow the guide provided by IBM I think it would be easy to undermine the environment. 

You have to implement it in two phases. You have to implement partitions which carry our loads of our function of our environment. Implementation of this is easy. To adjust administration, according to the requirements of publication of the organization, you have to consider some steps for it to work as storage. If you have the steps you should follow, it will be easy.

It took one week to fully deploy. 

It took two people to deploy the solution. 

I think everybody is going to be migrating to cloud and I think that IBM can make things easier if they also did this. 

I would rate IBM PowerVM nine out of ten. 

In the next release, I hope to see an extension of both the end part with the GUI.

The most valuable feature of IBM PowerVM is the performance of the database workload.

IBM PowerVM could improve the price because it is expensive.

I have been using IBM PowerVM for approximately 15 years.

IBM PowerVM is stable.

The scalability of IBM PowerVM is good.

We have approximately 2,000 IT managers and database administrators using this solution in my company.

The support from IBM PowerVM is okay.

I rate the support from IBM PowerVM a four out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of IBM PowerVM is complex. The deployment process took a couple of days.

We used a third party to do the implementation of the solution.

The price of the solution could improve, it is expensive.

I would recommend this solution to others because of its stability.

I rate IBM PowerVM a seven out of ten.

It is a complete solution. The virtual fibre, virtual network and SRIV are all stable and fit heavy load requirements. Therefore, the solution is suitable for its purpose and targets specific customers, which requires high stability and a high profile.

The solution should be advanced to fit with the container constantly.

We have been using this solution for eight years.

It is a very stable solution.

It is scalable and flexible.

IBM has very strong technical support and is among the best in the market.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Using this solution depends on the customer's requirements, and if they are looking for a stable and high-performance solution, then IBM PowerVM is a good choice.