Would your SMB customers mount a server on their wall?
-
@RoguePacket Did the wall mounting go well? Easy to maintain?
-
@ryan-from-xbyte said:
@RoguePacket Did the wall mounting go well? Easy to maintain?
Ours did. @sonshineacres is the one who did the wall mounts.
-
I've bought a similar product from these guys in the past. Wouldn't do a server with it, but I have done a patch panel and switch with it. Works great.
-
I have recommended this when there was no space for a tower server.
-
@ProliantMatt said:
I have recommended this when there was no space for a tower server.
I like wall flush mounts. Very easy to not bump into and never get put on the dusty floor.
-
@scottalanmiller though as the Tower server Product manager for HP, I say there is POWER in the TOWER!
-
@ProliantMatt said:
@scottalanmiller though as the Tower server Product manager for HP, I say there is POWER in the TOWER!
Do you hear a horn section when you say that?
-
NTG's last towers retired around 2009. A pair of Compaq Proliant 800s that ran NT4 till the end. Good machines. But that Pentium III 500 was getting slow by the end!
-
This post is deleted! -
@ryan-from-xbyte said:
@RoguePacket Did the wall mounting go well? Easy to maintain?
It was a 1U server thingamajig, haven't heard complaints. Seen in place for 12-18 months. Can empathize, as the area didn't have much in the way of space options. ...and I was there for an informal consult, less of a long term support for them.
Guess it was SMB mentality: attractive low cost, and matches otherwise low number feasible options.
-
While I I think things like this are cool, SMBs looking to save some funds can save several hundred by purchasing a tower and installing a shelve. The towers are always less expensive than the rack version, and the shelve probably cost less too. Granted not as soon line, but for $500+ savings...
-
Are towers always cheaper?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Are towers always cheaper?
I can't say always, but in my experience with HP's they have been.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Are towers always cheaper?
I can't say always, but in my experience with HP's they have been.
The lower-end towers are relatively inexpensive.
-
@Nara said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Are towers always cheaper?
I can't say always, but in my experience with HP's they have been.
The lower-end towers are relatively inexpensive.
Well sure. But so are entry level racks. For the same config I've not noticed towers as cheaper.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Are towers always cheaper?
In the secondary market, rack servers are cheaper. We rarely see towers in any of our bulk purchases and the lack of supply keeps the prices up. A similar rack could be $1,000 less than the tower.
-
@ryan-from-xbyte said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Are towers always cheaper?
In the secondary market, rack servers are cheaper. We rarely see towers in any of our bulk purchases and the lack of supply keeps the prices up. A similar rack could be $1,000 less than the tower.
Towers typically go to long holding SMBs who but them in cheap configurations, one at a time and run them into the ground. Rack servers are generally better configured, put into well maintained environments and purchased in quantity and put into reasonable life cycles.
-
I've definitely see that to be the more likely case.
I visited an office once to see how their EMR worked. Lucky for them I happened to look at their servers (which were two desktop models sitting on a table in the middle of cubeville). Each server had a failed drive in them. I pointed this out to the office manager and walked out just shaking my head.
-
I pretty much only use rack mounts no matter what. Just more versatile. You can always use a rack mount outside of a rack. But racking a tower is a pain.
-
Actually, I recommended a wall mount rack for the 1U Hyper-V server I setup at a client in November. They decided against it and went with a fully enclosed unit instead.
