Cisco Intersight is an operations platform that helps IT operations teams control and automate Cisco UCS, converged, and hyperconverged infrastructure. Intersight consolidates and automates infrastructure lifecycle management from data centers to the edge in one solution delivered as-a-service.
N/A
Microsoft System Center
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft System Center Suite is a family of IT management software for network monitoring, updating and patching, endpoint protection with anti-malware, data protection and backup, ITIL- structured IT service management, remote administration and more.
It is available in two editions: standard and datacenter. Datacenter provides unlimited virtualization for high density private clouds, while standard is for lightly or non-virtualized private cloud workloads.
To manage multiple environments, each of the environments has to be specifically accessed, whereas Cisco Intersight reduces the complexity and provides a single pane.
Our organisation has some experience with Dell OME (the centralised management plane for Dell PowerEdge server, equivalent to Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service and UCS Manager, but not enough to contrast the two or say why one is better than the other.
The simple reason is we use Cisco Data center products and there is no other products that can offer these features for Cisco products other than Cisco Intersight.
I personally think that Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service is at the top of its class when it comes to managing data center hardware. The cloud-connected design feels very modern and easy to use. The mobile app is something I wouldn't expect to get in a server management …
It has strong integration with cisco Solutions. Using cisco intersight you have fully managable environment. It is must have for cisco infratructure. For cisco usc serwera it is best choise becouse of deep integration and really great functionality. You can do things faster, …
Since Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service is cloud-delivered, there is a great deal of flexibility found in this platform, including the ability to manage infrastructure from anywhere at any time. Cisco is also able to continually upgrade, modify, and enhance this platform, …
I really dont have a true comparison as we have just started down the path of managing our datacenters with Intersight vs UCSM. I can see where Intersight has a better/easier UI in terms of the workflow to create polices/templates ect.
When we compared it to our existing solution for managing our compute platforms we needed multiple tools to accomplish what we were able to accomplish with Cisco Intersight. We needed a tool just to manage our chassis/blade infrastructure, another to manager our SANs and then …
We compared this to the Dell offering of something similar and it was no contest. With Dell all the firmware, package management, updates, etc are all managed with separate products. You're tasked with building you own repositories of software, drivers, and firmware and …
I think that intersight is a more mature product, with little to no installation overhead. Its interface is easier to use. Also features workload optimization and vulnerability advisories that are not present in cloud forms.
Intersight does not require any on-prem infrastructure deployment. No need to worry about patching or updates to any appliances or software. Other solutions must constantly be deployed and maintained by IT staff.
We use the Dell OpenManage product previously when we were using Dell servers. Cisco Intersight has much more capabilities than Dell OpenManage had in the past. I haven't used any other product lately which would allow me to compare the features. We use What's up gold for …
None. We are a Microsoft business, and this is THE tool for imaging, packaging, remote support, and antivirus management. Microsoft's tool is the best for managing its software, systems, and antivirus clients. I will say that Microsoft Intune, the cloud platform, can be used …
The versatility of the suite of application provided by the Microsoft experience center was way above the other competitors , it helped gained leverage over the other products in the market . That why we made the decision of choosing Microsoft system center as a infrastructure …
We use Azure, we have lisences, so we have no needs any other cost. And also, we want to save backup data in Azure. Veritas ask additional cost reagurally and have to rebuild bakcup environment.
Because Datadog was too small, we decided quickly to use Microsoft System Center. We use a lot of other Microsoft products so that discussion was quickly set internally.
We have used Ghost from Symantec (licensed), FOG and Clonezilla which are freeware products. All three products had their pros and cons. The two freeware products were functional but did lack some polish, and Ghost was a good product for imaging of desktop computers. All did …
We previously used a mix of FOG and Clonezilla to image machines. The biggest issues with these products is that changing one piece of the image required you to rebuild the entire image itself. These pieces of software also did not allow you to manage applications and Windows …
We are using Microsoft products for a long time, so the overall confidence played a part in the decision, the feature set and licensing cost was also very high when compared with above products, so we decided to use System Center for our environment, so far it has solved many …
Microsoft System Center has more options. Microsoft System Center has the ability to image PCs as well as remotely connect to PCs, and software installation and patching where Symantec Ghost Solution Suite didn't handle all of these options as well. We haven't looked at many …
Much better UI for system center. Also, Tivoli was discontinued, so it was an easy decision. Altiris was acquired by Symantec but was unreliable and painful. It's UI was unresponsive and generally outdated. It wouldn't clean up old packages and would hog GB of disk space, …
I would say Microsoft System Center and Oracle were about the same. Oracle seemed to be a little more user-friendly, but for the most part, they are both comparable.
I have used ZENworks, Altiris, and Landesk. They are all good products in their own right and have many strengths. The pricing, bundling SCCM with our Microsoft site license, really helps create an ROI that puts SCCM over the top. Pricing aside it is a tool designed by …
I have not chosen this software directly because I found myself in an environment that already used this product, a purely Microsoft environment. Therefore the choice that has been made has proved very effective and above all suited to our needs, and for this reason, no …
It's better than others because Microsoft knows its own OS better than anyone. It has a very rich feature set and allows companies to hit many areas of need with one tool. You can have IT staff get multiple tasks done just by logging in and they don't even have to leave their …
We built our POC of the private cloud with vRealize Suite and Microsoft System Center. We are VMware shop so we thought the vrealize will be solution for us but we found pretty fast the vrealize suite is very limited and very expensive compare to Microsoft. With System Center …
Cisco Intersight is very well suited for doing firmware upgrades across all of your cisco hardware. So far we have had no problems pushing out new firmware. It's also well suited for hardware management. Cisco TAC has the ability to pull logs for the IMC for themselves, which saves you from having to pull the logs yourself and then uploading them to the case. It may or may not be appropriate for upgrading operating systems. I have not been able to test it.
We used a product before that was designed to prevent users making changes and saving files to the desktop computer. This required a renewal of the license. By using SCCM in our environment we were able to discontinue using that product because SCCM allows us to completely restore a machine back to the original configuration. We have taught our users to save their individual work on either a network drive or a cloud drive. By doing this, if we do a re-image of their machine they have lost no data, and it makes for a faster resolution. In some instances having a computer in our SCCM environment it can become cumbersome when creating new users for very specific purposes. It can be done by creating new organizational units and applying new policies but when in a pinch it can be frustrating. For the most part we have tried to make "new" purpose images and groups to at least accommodate a quick install.
Standardising the environment by enforcing use of updating templates.
Show the difference on a profile between what has changed and what setting was last deployed.
Perform bulk deploy operation on profiles (like server profiles).
Policies underpin all settings (e.g. no more defining individual VLANs before being able to use them, or having to clean them up manually when they are no longer in use. You deploy a Domain VLAN policy that states which VLANs are configured on a domain (either standalone) or a domain profile template (if domains profiles are bound to an updating domain profile template).
Provides our users the ability to deploy and manage our own datacenter based on defined software with understandable solutions for storage, compute, networking and security.
We are able to update at once all the computers from all departments without having to install the OS on every computer.
It allows us to have everything in one place for database management and datacenter inspection as well.
It is difficult to spot an added or removed VLAN in an Ethernet Network Group Policy or VLAN Policy. The comparison widget will show you that something has changed, but if you have 100s of VLANs, the difference does not stand out. Workaround: we copy the data out and compare it in a text editor.
If you are transitioning from UMM to IMM, you lose some functionality like vNIC redundancy pairs.
It is not easy to map the UMM version 4.x server firmware version to the equivalent IMM version 5.x firmware version.
It is not possible to configure out-of-band management IP addresses on a per-domain basis. You have to configure these ranges via an IMC Access policy (which contains the IP address range/pool) on the server profile. This leads to "server profile template sprawl" where we have to maintain multiple server profile templates since our domains sit on different ranges, even though the servers are for the most part configured identically.
UCS domains in IMM only support one Ethernet Network Group Policy (VLAN group) per vNIC template.
Needs web based storefront for requesting new software
Needs ability to manage the packaging work flow better
Sometimes is slow to download and there is no indication the entire catalog is being loaded, resulting in confused users not being able to find common software in the available list.
Been using Cisco Software as a service (SaaS) platform in a production environment for a large medical and health professionals that has critical healthcare and patients care dependency.
Support team is very helpful getting system updated as needed, and vendor support is fantastic. Also get a dedicated Cisco networking engine to review and advise system health and recommendations.
Usability of Cisco Intersight is highly dependent on the licensing purchased. The default (free) license level provides a lot of value for the minimal amount of effort to implement. The paid license levels provide additional features (detailed inventory, configuration management and deployment, etc.)
No matter our issues with the software, its ability to centrally manage systems, patch, image, and remote help users has far exceeded our timeliness to help staff. Its ability to keep current, enable us to keep the network secure, and standardize our end-user experience has saved us many hours, dollars, and time every day.
If you have bigger problems with the on-prem version, the support team is sometimes a bit slow in their reactions and you have to keep going, to get your help. But finally, all problems, that we have addressed, have been resolved to my full appreciation!
If I had to dislike something about the system it would be how much it changes once you upgrade. This could be more of a problem of mine since I get used to one way and don't like it when it changes so much. I am enjoying the newest update, but it is a mess when you are actually going through the upgrades.
Our organisation has some experience with Dell OME (the centralised management plane for Dell PowerEdge server, equivalent to Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service and UCS Manager, but not enough to contrast the two or say why one is better than the other.
None. We are a Microsoft business, and this is THE tool for imaging, packaging, remote support, and antivirus management. Microsoft's tool is the best for managing its software, systems, and antivirus clients. I will say that Microsoft Intune, the cloud platform, can be used for those with heavy 365 usage, but for us, that does not meet our current company needs.
The negative thing is that we prefer to use the UCS Manager in our company because this bare metal is integrated into the FI and no extra appliance is required. SaaS is generally not viewed favorably in Germany.
Telling the user that they have to buy Intersight licenses even if they use UCS Manager annoys our customers.
We have been able to automate our patch management, firmware and other security concerns.
We have a standardized "image" ensuring our setup is consistent across the enterprise. This alone has saved us in time to support and time to understand how to use our desktops.