Pricing is very high. It should be less. In comparison to other brands like Dell or Cisco, I think HPE is not CTS. HPE should not be CTS. It should be less than Cisco and IBM. IBM has higher costs. Compared to Dell and Cisco, it is costly, and some management software is also expensive.
In terms of improvement, the operating system development is slow, making it hard to keep up with modern tech and integrate with third-party products. Unlike other platforms, it lacks easy integration with popular cloud services like Office 365. This means if you are using HPE, you might face challenges connecting to the cloud and need to rely more on on-premises servers. Also, the support is lacking in some third-party products, limiting your options.
Oracle Database Administrator at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Sep 15, 2023
HPE Integrity has always been one step behind in areas like virtualization technologies, cloud enablement, the speed of backups, and replication. HPE Integrity has the strength and the robustness, but they are not abreast with the latest developments as much as I see with IBM or Dell. HPE Integrity is not strong regarding DR readiness, archiving, speed of backup, and replication. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement of the solution. The solution's technical support team needs to improve their speed of response to customer issues. In the future, I want to see the solution enable its users to provision servers quickly. Generally, a person should be able to provision the servers in 15 minutes. I want to see an enhanced snapshot technology in the tool so that a person can have a quicker file system snapshot. I also want to see replication in the tool and more tuning for replication to happen quicker on any available bandwidth and networks. I want to see the tool have the ability to rapidly copy files from server to server in the same LAN environment. I want the system to leverage memory and I/O throughput to enhance features of the tool, like copying, archiving, and snapshots. If you have to provision a new server, you should be able to provision one as fast as possible, meaning it should be faster than its current speed. As too much downtime is required for the extension of mount points and maintenance, I want to see more things done while the systems are up and running.
We have only just used this solution for a small period of time, it is difficult to fully assess it. We need more time to learn and know all of its components. The monitoring is an area that needs some improvement.
HP Integrity solutions provide an unparalleled portfolio of resilient systems for mission-critical environments. When availability matters, the new HP Integrity NonStop X enables you to stay ahead of your competition by mitigating the risk of downtime and effortlessly meeting your business processing, OLTP, and database requirements all with an industry-standard x86 architecture.
Pricing is very high. It should be less. In comparison to other brands like Dell or Cisco, I think HPE is not CTS. HPE should not be CTS. It should be less than Cisco and IBM. IBM has higher costs. Compared to Dell and Cisco, it is costly, and some management software is also expensive.
The manageability must be improved. Regular management is a little complex.
In terms of improvement, the operating system development is slow, making it hard to keep up with modern tech and integrate with third-party products. Unlike other platforms, it lacks easy integration with popular cloud services like Office 365. This means if you are using HPE, you might face challenges connecting to the cloud and need to rely more on on-premises servers. Also, the support is lacking in some third-party products, limiting your options.
HPE Integrity has always been one step behind in areas like virtualization technologies, cloud enablement, the speed of backups, and replication. HPE Integrity has the strength and the robustness, but they are not abreast with the latest developments as much as I see with IBM or Dell. HPE Integrity is not strong regarding DR readiness, archiving, speed of backup, and replication. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement of the solution. The solution's technical support team needs to improve their speed of response to customer issues. In the future, I want to see the solution enable its users to provision servers quickly. Generally, a person should be able to provision the servers in 15 minutes. I want to see an enhanced snapshot technology in the tool so that a person can have a quicker file system snapshot. I also want to see replication in the tool and more tuning for replication to happen quicker on any available bandwidth and networks. I want to see the tool have the ability to rapidly copy files from server to server in the same LAN environment. I want the system to leverage memory and I/O throughput to enhance features of the tool, like copying, archiving, and snapshots. If you have to provision a new server, you should be able to provision one as fast as possible, meaning it should be faster than its current speed. As too much downtime is required for the extension of mount points and maintenance, I want to see more things done while the systems are up and running.
HPE Integrity needs improvement in terms of pricing for scalability. They should release smaller versions for specific applications or usage.
The virtualization of HPE Integrity could be simplified. We have discussed this issue with HPE and hopefully, they will have an update.
HPE Integrity is a pain. HPE hasn't put much work into developing the solution in the past few years because it will be discontinued soon.
We have only just used this solution for a small period of time, it is difficult to fully assess it. We need more time to learn and know all of its components. The monitoring is an area that needs some improvement.