Bull Blade Servers vs. Lenovo Flex System Blade Servers

Smaller environments may not get the benefit of a BladeCenter. If you only have a few servers, it would be cost effective to just purchase individual servers. If you need to share a SANS, need high-level uptime and redundancy, or just have a need for lots of servers, then a BladeCenter would be beneficial.

Incentivized

• Physical disks management
• Integration with VM
• Ethernet scalability without any lost compression.

Incentivized

• I wish we'd used this BladeCenter more because it simplifies IT.
• It could be my browser, IE. I click and wait till the screen updates and changes so I can do specific actions.
• If there's an urgent alert at night, I'd rather get an SMS.

Incentivized

They are reliable, safe and very profitable equipment, their operation is easy, they provide high availability as all their components are redundant and thus the continuity of the operation can be guaranteed wherever they are installed, in addition to having the option of gradual growth, you can start with a single node and grow until the chassis is full.

Incentivized

I find that IBM/Lenovo servers are more robustly constructed and provide more comprehensive online technical specifications, which are useful for troubleshooting and budgeting purposes. Their gear is strong, solid, and trustworthy. Hardware problems are extremely rare for us. IBM/customer Lenovo's service is top-notch; it's always quick to respond and really helpful. Support doesn't have you answer a lot of questions before helping you. Since they recognize you as a server administrator with some amount of expertise, they can converse with you at that level.

Incentivized

• This has been a positive return on investment due to improved resource utilization in the data center
• An opportunity to generate savings.
• Invest it in other operational needs.

Incentivized