Cisco UCS Presentation Part 3 - Traditional Blades

[sanoreddy]

I am a Cisco Engineer works for HP.

Noticed Cisco wants to get in to Serverworld (cloud computing, MCS servers look a like to HP Proliant DLxxx servers)

HP introducing routers & switches to their customers and planing to make a datacenter without a Cisco device.

so its a Cisco Vs HP battle :)

[Lux1983]

Hi Jeremiah,

I appreciate the effort, but this part of presentation is quite misleading. Almost everything you mentioned as issue on "traditional blades" is not true and was not true at the point in time you made the presentation. Virtual Connect solves issue of quick deployment and change management on blades, while Flex-10 solves problems with bandwidht and number of NICs per blade. VCEM and Insight Software solve the issue of managing multiple Blade Chassis. Disclaimer: I work for HP.

[jon780]

The term is "interconnect". Not "built-in switch". That's very misleading. It's not "built-in", it's modular. You're also ignoring things like VFlex and the fact that the HP c7000 has 8 interconnect slots. That said, UCS is a far more elegant solution. The question is, can you save in labor costs the nearly DOUBLED price of UCS versus HP blades.

[bluzytrix]

Thank you for uploading this video. I want to point out that although your overview of blades is partially valid, the majority of it is not. When you talk about cost, you can't just stick a tag on the chassis and individual blades but must look at it from the perspective of total ROI over many years as that is how the people making the decisions are thinking. Also, please study Virtual Connect as that solves a lot of the issues you mentioned.

[healthitguy]

Nice breakdown of the complexities of the traditional blade approach.