HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC)

venkman — Tue, 26 Dec 2006 14:19:33 GMT

What would be the major points in an argument on why someone would choose HP (iLO) over Dell (DRAC) and vice-versa?

Re: HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC)

OlivierV — Fri, 29 Dec 2006 04:49:16 GMT

One point is the iLO's can use AD accounts without schema extension. And I find HP cards easier to manage and configure remotely

Re: HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC)

acartes — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 16:16:21 GMT

iLO is easier to use, better organized, fuller featured, and offers better integration with management tools via agents.

iLO 2 has bigger, richer remote console compared to DRAC. iLO IRC contains power and media controls.

iLO supports java-based and ActiveX remote consoles. This allows for non-IE browser (Netscape/firefox) support and Linux clients.

iLO supports a full implementation of CLP. This is a text-based command-line interface standard from the DMTF. The DRAC currently has skeletal command support (view log, control power, exit).

Power regulator and monitoring through iLO 2 are non-existent in DRAC and require additional configuration if supported.

No system Identifier (UID) control through DRAC.

topic HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC) in Server Management - Remote Server Management

HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC)

Re: HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC)

Re: HP (iLO) vs. Dell (DRAC)