Funny you should ask. I just spent half a day with one of their systems engineers on site.
The newer Dell's seem to be decent boxes - a good range of options to fit most needs, without being too big a line to get familiar with. I personally think they're doing a fairly good job at hitting some of the annoyances I've had with Compaq boxes over the last few years, especially in the 1U server areas. The 1655MC looks interesting, but I've been told that it has a relatively short shelf life - the current incarnation runs on PIII procs, with the next generation, due out withing 12 months, with PIV procs, which aren't expected to be backwards compatible. Therefore, its fairly important to max out the shell of the 1655MC early on. They are, however, doing a sweet promotion - buy 3 blades, get the chassis for free, and apparently the blades are less than comparably equiped 1650's. Also note that, at this point, they have no ability to connect to external storage except via the network - so using them as front ends for databases, etc, are pretty much out of the question. Dell is also seriously pushing the Dell/EMC partnership. Not to the exclusion of DAS environments, but I'd expect in the next 2-3 years to see Dell move entirely away from external SCSI cages[1]. From looking at their CX line (the next generation EMC Claarion line), its getting very cost effective to move into fibre attached storage, even at relatively small volumes. The NAS appliances look interesting, finally, for a couple of reasons. First, they're really pushing the NAS on SAN concept - buy front ends and grow your storage on the SAN as necessary. Second, Trend[2] has released antivirus specifically for Windows powered NAS devices. This was probably the biggest issue in deployment for a number of shops, mine included. They also support most of the functions that NetApp and the other big players support - snapshot backups, etc. I've said it before - I'll work with any tier 1 vendor - and I've worked with 3 of the 4 at this point[3]. There are benefits and downsides to each company, really. I think there's more flexibility in the Compaq line, and I think with that, there is also more familiarity with their servers. However, I've also experenced a higher than normal failure rate with Compaq over the last few years. Frankly, I like what I see with Dell. We're switching back to them mainly to take advantage of their biggest strength - they still make the most IT friendly desktop/laptop line of boxes out there. So, it only makes sense to leverage the economies of scale that come with puchasing large numbers of client machines. I personally didn't care which brand of servers we used, but I don't think you'd go wrong with Dell. ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA [1] I think the rest of the industry is a bit farther behind on that, but its coming anyway, IMO. [2] I don't know who else is, but I'm sure there are others at this point [3] Dell, and pre-merger Compaq and HP separately. Haven't touched IBM directly yet. > -----Original Message----- > From: Byron Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:40 PM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: OT: Dell PowerEdge support | Windows platform > > > Interested in any experiences out there with the Dell PowerEdge line, > specifically related to support process, parts replacement, > and if possible > any experiences with these really new 1655MC blade servers > using Windows > 2000. > > All comments appreciated. > > Byron Kennedy > Senior Network Engineer > > MarketTools(r) > Real Market Research Insights. In Real Time. At Real Savings. > > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > ------ You are subscribed as [email protected] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
