The most important part of the product is that they need to engineer the product in such a way that it has built-in monitoring tools, like VxRail or some other solution. The product should also be available in a standard edition or a standard license since currently there is a need to pay for an extra license, which is very expensive, especially when considering the budgeting part of our company. The most important parts that need improvement in the solution are its integration and monitoring capabilities.
Network Administrator at a educational organization with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
2020-12-30T21:36:00Z
Dec 30, 2020
In terms of what needs improvement, I would say the biggest pain point for us is the matrix for the firmware upgrades. It is a pain. You look at that thing, you might as well be reading Greek. You just look at it and you're like, well, is it this with this one? Or this with this one? My model matches this, but my CPU is running this. It's just a nightmare. It would be a whole lot better if they could clean up their documentation on it. It would be good if they organized that more making it a little bit easier for people who don't understand the language as much. I think that's kind of what Cisco in general is, if you're not a CCNA or something like that you're going to have a lot of trouble managing and maintaining it. I think that's probably one of the biggest failure points with Cisco, from their documentation all the way to their products. I mean it's a solid product for sure. And they have some of the best experts working for them. But for small house users and schools, it's not really feasible.
Assistant Director IT (Data Center operations) at Freelancer
Real User
2020-10-27T21:18:00Z
Oct 27, 2020
One thing that could be improved is the cost -it is very high for this Blade chassis as compared to other vendors. Especially in Asia. Asian customers mostly prefer a cost effective, cheaper solution. The Blade chassis is perfect quality compared to the Dell chassis and I personally like it, but the customers want cost a effective solution for this server.
Group General Manager-ICT at a consumer goods company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
2020-08-16T08:00:15Z
Aug 16, 2020
For the SAP Hana in-memory processing takes a lot of resources and we are forced to delete some logs to improve on speed especially during peak hours (i.e. when almost every one is using system) I would like to see better pricing available. They can try to compare with their counterparts on the same level with the same specifications, the same processing capacity, and try to match their price. I am always asked to justify why we should purchase such expensive hardware when there are other brand names available with same capacity for a lesser price.
Learn what your peers think about Cisco UCS E-Series Servers. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
Cisco UCS E-Series Servers are next-generation, power-optimized, x86, Intel Xeon 64-bit blade servers designed to be deployed in Cisco Integrated Services Routers Generation 2 (ISR G2) and the Cisco 4451-X ISR. These price-to-performance-optimized single-socket blade servers balance simplicity, performance, reliability, and power efficiency. They are well suited for applications and infrastructure services typically deployed in small offices and branch offices.
The platform's pricing needs improvement. There could be more collaborative tools included.
The most important part of the product is that they need to engineer the product in such a way that it has built-in monitoring tools, like VxRail or some other solution. The product should also be available in a standard edition or a standard license since currently there is a need to pay for an extra license, which is very expensive, especially when considering the budgeting part of our company. The most important parts that need improvement in the solution are its integration and monitoring capabilities.
It is not a solution that is cloud ready. So, it should be made cloud ready. The solution should have a cloud version.
In terms of what needs improvement, I would say the biggest pain point for us is the matrix for the firmware upgrades. It is a pain. You look at that thing, you might as well be reading Greek. You just look at it and you're like, well, is it this with this one? Or this with this one? My model matches this, but my CPU is running this. It's just a nightmare. It would be a whole lot better if they could clean up their documentation on it. It would be good if they organized that more making it a little bit easier for people who don't understand the language as much. I think that's kind of what Cisco in general is, if you're not a CCNA or something like that you're going to have a lot of trouble managing and maintaining it. I think that's probably one of the biggest failure points with Cisco, from their documentation all the way to their products. I mean it's a solid product for sure. And they have some of the best experts working for them. But for small house users and schools, it's not really feasible.
One thing that could be improved is the cost -it is very high for this Blade chassis as compared to other vendors. Especially in Asia. Asian customers mostly prefer a cost effective, cheaper solution. The Blade chassis is perfect quality compared to the Dell chassis and I personally like it, but the customers want cost a effective solution for this server.
For the SAP Hana in-memory processing takes a lot of resources and we are forced to delete some logs to improve on speed especially during peak hours (i.e. when almost every one is using system) I would like to see better pricing available. They can try to compare with their counterparts on the same level with the same specifications, the same processing capacity, and try to match their price. I am always asked to justify why we should purchase such expensive hardware when there are other brand names available with same capacity for a lesser price.