AWS Storage Gateway vs. Cisco UCS Manager

It is well suited for our backups. We store backups in 2 places EBS volumes in VPC and s3 buckets. From our on-prem servers, we connect to both and backup job runs smooth. It is less appropriate if you are already hosting in the AWS Cloud. There are direct ways to access storage areas without the need for gateway.

Incentivized

It [Cisco UCS Manager] is extremely well suited to large virtual infrastructure environments with resource dense blades. This solution is also great if you want to consolidate a large number of servers (if they are servers that need to stay physical, but can fit in the profile of a blade) - this would reduce data center space utilization as well as power and cooling. Cisco UCS Manager is also great if you're looking for centralized management of a larger number of servers. This would not be a great solution if you have a very small shop - it's not cheap and probably wouldn't give you a ROI if you only have a couple dozen servers total. I'd say it would be overkill for small shops, but if you have the money and don't care, you'll still like it.

Incentivized

• The AWS Storage Gateway can be deployed very quickly. We required only a couple of hours to get it setup and was able to present it to the backup server as a media manager and VTL drives.
• The provisioning of the virtual tapes was also pretty easy to setup. Being able to utilize Glazier storage provided a great ROI.
• The documentation AWS provides is very user friendly, allowing us to set up the AWS Storage Gateway the correct way.

• It is very all inclusive for management of every part our our Cisco blade center.
• It allows us to directly connect to a hardware-based server in the blade center as though we were physically at the console.
• It allows us to monitor the entire system for faults.
• It lets us manage connectivity.
• It is set to alert us via email if a fault occurs.

Incentivized

• Ease of finding useful helpful tips on using AWS
• Dumbing down of the technical jargon on the site
• Short sharp to the point step videos - answering some common questions
• Remembering not everyone is an IT person - could be more user friendly

Incentivized

• Automation: There is a simple power-shell CMD lets, but it leaves more to be desired.
• Navigation: Navigating the interface can be confusing.
• Integration: Integration with ESXi hosts while doing FW upgrades would be hugely beneficial without the need for additional tools.

Incentivized

Cisco UCS Manager allows for integrated management of all UCS components, streamlining processes like server provisioning, networking, and storage configuration

Incentivized

AWS Storage Gateway is a good product and for certain use cases works really well, however i would like to see it support additional protocols in the future.

Incentivized

The automation capabilities of Cisco UCS Manager help streamline tasks such as provisioning, configuration, and monitoring, leading to increased efficiency

Incentivized

AWS Storage Gateway is supported by the AWS Support team, they provide excellent support and great SLAs for our needs.

Incentivized

Cisco UCSM Support has been very quick to reply and address our concerns, issues, and questions. We have found that Cisco's documentation is clear and concise and fairly easy to find. With Cisco support's help, we are able to quickly and safely meet the demands of our end-users, consistently.

Incentivized

AWS Storage Gateway is better than Unitrends Data Center Backup and Recovery because it was entirely cloud based. Unlike Unitrends that requires a physical appliance that then would be connected to a AWS bucket. The AWS Storage Gateway was able to utilize Glacier storage, while Unitrends could only use either S3 or S3-IA decreasing the ROI with the more expensive storage class. Furthermore the licensing model for the Unitrends is greater that with the AWS Storage Gateway.

I think UCS Manager would be able very comparable to other vendors offerings when it comes to server configuration. I think Cisco did a good job in giving you full access to many options that you might not see with Dell or HPE. Every manufacturer would need a similar tool to control their server environment, but I think what Cisco has built into their Manager is a little better than others I've used. You can just see and change so many settings. I would say that is also a bit of a negative by a little bit because sometimes it is hard to dig in and find what you need to change and often might need to reach out to TAC or take a training course to understand all of the interface.

Incentivized

• Accessibility of data in Cloud: Previously it was difficult to access our stored data.
• Cheaper storage as opposed to physical: At this point have saved enough money (when compared to physical storage)
• One con is the scope of services included with some features. You aye only need 10% of what's there's but paying for the other 90% you don't use cam be costly.

• The positive is I was able to consolidate my small server infrastructure from 3 racks to one rack giving me space back and much power savings
• The negative would be it could feel a little daunting to manage as there are many tabs and pieces to the interface.

Incentivized