VMware vCenter Reviews

As a cloud service provider, we offer infrastructure as a service using VMware components. 

To centrally manage all ESXi servers, we use vCenter. Its features, such as high availability (HA), Distributed Resource Scheduler (DRS), and vMotion, make vCenter a unique and valuable product. These features significantly aid my team in delivering superior services to our customers.

As a cloud architect, I'm involved in designing and implementing various solutions, mainly with VMware for virtualization from the computing perspective. 

This includes VMware vCenter, ESXi, VROps, vRealize Automation (vRA), and NSX for networking solutions. My team also works on storage, backup, and security.

I also have experience with VMware vRealize Automation (VRA), which integrates with Center. 

In the past, my team deployed virtual machines for our customers because we couldn't offer a self-service portal or automation solutions. 

With vRealize Automation, we're not only able to automate tasks but also manage vCenter resources efficiently. It allows us to assign resources to customers as needed and provide them with a self-service portal. 

Now, customers can complete tasks independently thanks to automation and workflows in VRA, significantly reducing the need for direct support from my team.

The primary benefit is its user-friendliness. It's not overly complex, allowing new team members to quickly get up to speed. 

Centralized management of ESXi servers and virtual machines is another key advantage, enabling control from a single console. 

This centralized administration, along with vCenter's integration with other VMware products, simplifies the management of our virtual infrastructure.

The integration of vCenter server with any software, whether from VMware or a third party, is smooth and straightforward. We know the required ports and credentials for integration, allowing us to easily integrate vCenter with various products, enhancing our cloud infrastructure.

However, there was a challenge we faced with vCenter, and tried to fix it. Initially, vCenter had its own client console, which was deployed on our laptops to connect to the vCenter server. This client was amazing because it offered a clear view and direct access to vCenter without dependencies. 

However, VMware transitioned from this client software to a web-based console, aiming to eliminate dependencies and make vCenter more accessible. This change introduced challenges, such as the need for patches and browser console errors requiring restarts. 

The web-based interface felt cluttered and complicated compared to the cleaner, more straightforward client interface. This complexity can be overwhelming, especially for those not highly technical. 

This abundance of options on a single screen can be overwhelming, unlike the simplicity of a Google web page where you just type and search.

There is a feature called Fault Tolerance (FT), which has been part of vCenter servers since the product's inception. 

However, it has a lot of complexity, and when my team tested it, we found it difficult to manage. It also has some bugs. Consequently, we decided not to offer any fault tolerance features to our customers. 

So, there are a lot of things that need to be improved in fault tolerance.

I have more than ten years of experience with vCenter and still use it daily. It's a core product for us, something we engage with regularly.

From my experience, vCenter server has rarely been a point of major concern regarding availability. It mainly provides centralized administration, so its unavailability doesn't directly affect the functionality of our cloud infrastructure. 

I've encountered a few instances where vCenter was unavailable or crashed, but the impact was minimal since ESXi servers and the virtual machines on them continued to run smoothly, although features provided by vCenter were temporarily unavailable.

Initially, when vCenter was introduced, scaling it to support a certain number of ESXi hosts and virtual machines was quite challenging. This was around 2012 and 2013. 

However, it has become increasingly scalable over time. Nowadays, we can deploy multiple vCenters in a cluster formation to scale extensively. I haven't reached the maximum capacity of vCenter because it's huge.

I've been working with VMware for about 10 years now.

Earlier, VMware support was very good. The technical guy on the call used to understand the issue from their side. And then, if that issue was beyond their expertise, they generally called other guys or used to forward our call to the next escalation team or something like that. We just used to call them once, and then we got our solution during that one call.

But in the last four to five years, there's been a kind of 360-degree change in terms of customer support from VMware. And most of it's going in the negative direction, which we are not happy with. 

The technician now says, "Okay, this is beyond my expertise. I'm going to escalate it to the next team, and they will be in touch with you in a couple of hours or maybe the next day." And trust me, nobody contacts us until we open another ticket, reference the ticket we opened previously, and ask them to give us priority one support. And again, they start troubleshooting it from scratch. Again, "This is beyond our expertise, and we will forward this call to our next escalation team, and they will get in touch with you." We get stuck in this kind of loop most of the time.

If I'm using ten tickets with VMware, three to nine times it happens when we, you know, keep chasing them for the technical things. Even though they fixed the issue, we ask them to provide a complete justification, the root cause of why this issue occurred, what exactly we did to fix it, and how we can make sure that this issue will not come again in the future. They don't have a clear answer for us. But since things start working for us, most of the time, we don't bother about that. 

But for our reference purpose, we want to keep RCA (Root Cause Analysis) and other documents updated so that we can fix those issues from our side or take any preventive action even before we hit the same situation again. But in the last four or five years, we've been lacking there. Because we're not getting that much good support from VMware, which we used to get back in 2012, 2013, 2014, or so.

Neutral

We have one of the Microsoft Hyper-V solutions.

I've installed it on servers and provided regular support, so I do have experience with the initial setup process. 

Earlier, it was a bit difficult because it required a separate database server installation before installing the central server, and then the database had to be integrated during the vCenter server installation. 

However, this process has been significantly simplified now. vCenter now includes its own database, eliminating the need for separate database installation. We just follow a single setup to deploy vCenter along with its required database, which we are quite pleased with.

The deployment takes approximately 30 minutes to 45 minutes, depending on the infrastructure where it's being deployed, so generally less than an hour.

When I was part of the deployment team, I was the only one responsible for it. Now, we have a dedicated team for installation and deployment, but only one resource is required to deploy the vCenter server.

Assistance from VMware is not really required because the process is very straightforward and simple. 

We just need to follow the instructions provided in the setup wizard, enter the required values, and the installation completes smoothly and straightforwardly.

I have mostly deployed it on-premises and haven't had the opportunity to deploy it in a hybrid environment.

The licensing model was a bit complex, but thanks to the vCenter product usage program, which VMware introduced, it's kind of easy for us to use a pay-as-you-go model. So, it's streamlined now, and we are okay with that.

I would advise that at least you should be very well aware of all the functionalities you are going to offer to your customers. Then, you should see whether those functionalities are there in the vCenter server and working as per the documentation provided by VMware. You should be very well aware of it. 

One example is the fault tolerance problem. Although VMware said it was fine, practically, we haven't seen it working as expected. So features need to be identified in advance before choosing vCenter server.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten because I'm very much happy with all the features provided by vCenter.

We use the product for managing a large-scale virtualized infrastructure, specifically overseeing ten ESXi hosts. It helps us upgrade the databases for all the hosts through one console. It includes virtual machine creation to packet updates, and with additional tools like vCenter Lifecycle Manager, we can effortlessly handle patches and host migrations.

The product's emphasis on high availability and DRS aligns with our priorities, making vCenter an integral component in our virtualized environment.

They could provide an easier way to learn NSX and troubleshooting processes for the product.

The platform is 200% stable.

We have not contacted the technical support team thus far. We have not encountered any significant issues or bugs in our production environment. We have been managing the product easily over the past six to seven years.

The initial setup is easy. If someone were to approach me for guidance, I am confident that, given their interest and willingness to learn, I could teach them how to install and manage the product. It would probably take around typically within one or two days for the process.

However, learning and troubleshooting NSX may be more complex due to a perceived lack of proper educational materials and documentation.

The product is expensive. From my experience, the per-core licensing model adds to the overall cost. They offer different licensing packages, including standard and enterprise. One notable aspect is the potential hidden costs associated with a few features. Using distributed switches or advanced tools may incur unexpected expenses. It's essential to thoroughly understand the licensing structure to avoid such hidden costs and ensure alignment with the organization's needs.

I advise others to create an account on the VMware Partner Portal, where they can access trial versions of vCenter. Utilize the 60-day trial period to explore and test the hypervisor. Later, make a purchase decision depending on the budget and business use cases.

I rate it a nine out of ten.

The implementation of vCenter has significantly impacted our IT team's productivity positively. It provides a centralized and efficient tool for managing our virtualized environment.

The platform has a user-friendly interface. It is easy to create and manage virtual infrastructure.

They could provide flexibility and cost-effectiveness for product licensing. Currently, the licensing model allows for the coverage of two virtual machines with a single license when running Windows Server. However, for smaller environments with fewer servers, it might not provide significant benefits.

For efficient reliability and scalability, they could provide additional functionalities supporting multi-location setups and dedicated role-based services. The ability to seamlessly manage and switch between different locations needs improvement. Additionally, there could be more features for dashboard automation.

The platform is stable. The users can connect to the servers and work on the shared files.

The product is scalable. We can purchase one license for VMware’s essential kit for deploying around three servers in one environment.

The initial setup required considerable effort and careful planning to ensure it aligned precisely with the direction of the infrastructure to make configurations as flexible as possible for future requirements. While this approach was time-consuming, it proved crucial to avoid potential mistakes or limitations in decisions made during the setup. It helps with adapting to future changes, implementing upgrades, and integrating new solutions seamlessly into the virtualized environment.

We utilize the basic licenses of the product. However, they offer much better licensing plans for larger companies.

The platform helps us create a full backup of the virtual machine for disaster recovery. We have setups in two locations, it ensures availability through a dedicated connection for information exchange.

I recommend it to others for its ease, security, reliability, and stability. It offers various types of licenses. Additionally, the simplicity of administration efficiently manages both large and small environments.

I advise others to learn and understand the configuration and maintenance process. It is suitable for organizations considering the deployment of virtual infrastructure on-premise, especially in the context of private cloud setups.

I rate it a ten out of ten.

The product has broad use cases. Our customers use it for mission-critical production environments, general hosting, or for private cloud environments,

It's a very good tool for centralized management. It is a powerful tool, but it's a very basic tool. We can leverage its full power only when we include other tools like vROps. The solution is feature-rich, but it is not rich enough. We have to buy more VMware products to make it more valuable.

The product is strong in host profiles and standardization. It is much easier to manage than Hyper-V. The high availability has contributed to the efficiency of our operations. I rate it a nine out of ten. It is really good. As a basic tool, it is fine.

We have to buy more VMware products to leverage the centralized management. It doesn't come with Network Insight and vROps. The only challenge we're currently having is Broadcom buying VMware. It will be a big challenge because we don't know what is changing from a licensing perspective, from perpetual to subscription. Many of our customers are planning to migrate away due to the uncertainty.

I have been reselling the product for 20 years.

The tool is stable enough.

The scalability is adequate. Many customers do not scale beyond the limits of the tool. Our customers are small, medium, and large businesses.

The technical support is not the best. Other partners are more responsive.

Neutral

The tool is easy to deploy if someone has the right skills. If someone has skills, it's pretty easy. One person is enough to deploy the solution. It is easy to maintain.

The return on investment is pretty good.

The solution is expensive. The price could be improved. Our customers pay for monthly and annual licenses. With Broadcom buying VMware, everything is going to be subscription-based. The license and support costs are typically bundled together.

The product is on par with Prism Central. However, Prism Central is a little bit less complex.

The vendor must bundle more software into vCenter. Network Insight and vROps must not cost us additionally. It should be bundled with the solution. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We utilize VMware vCenter for monitoring hosts, migrating virtual machines, and monitoring server performance.

Our infrastructure management has been greatly enhanced, particularly with features like vMotion being crucial for our operations.

The management and monitoring capabilities have significantly influenced our operational efficiency, proving to be highly beneficial for our needs.

The most valuable aspect for us is the ability to monitor all servers simultaneously and effortlessly move them between hosts. Additionally, adjusting server specifications such as CPU, memory, or storage capacity, whether increasing or decreasing, is incredibly convenient and beneficial for our operations.

The scalability features provided by VMware vCenter supported the growth of our organization.

There are numerous scattered versions of plugins compatible with VMware, which can be challenging to manage. Consolidating these plugins into a unified environment with customizable options to enable or disable features would be highly beneficial. Additionally, the ability to work with hardware beyond the compatibility list would add further value to the platform.

I have been working with it for five years.

The stability is exceptionally high, providing a seamless experience. I would rate it a perfect ten out of ten.

It is scalable given that I have sufficient hardware resources. If I decide to add more hardware, I can do so easily, but it's essential to select the appropriate hardware services before making any purchases. We have more than one hundred and fifty users. I would rate it seven out of ten. It is continuously in use, running throughout the entire day.

Previously, we utilized hardware, primarily within a Microsoft environment. However, we transitioned to VMware due to its capability to move servers without downtime. This flexibility makes it incredibly user-friendly and adaptable.

Our deployment was done by a third-party system integrator. The process was completed within a few hours.

In terms of return on investment, VMware proves to be cost-effective, especially when considering the long-term perspective. Evaluating its cost-effectiveness requires a considerable duration due to its long-term impact.

The pricing is significantly high. I would rate it ten out of ten.

I would recommend it to others considering implementation, particularly if they have a sufficient budget. However, for those with budget constraints, there are alternative solutions, including open-source options, albeit not as comprehensive as VMware. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for VMware is in our IT environment, specifically within our data center for our Enterprise Application Testing (EAT) server.

The product has improved our system's proactive support for in-built AI tools. It automatically identifies potential issues and helps customers with feedback.

The product's most valuable feature is the ability to clone and snapshot the process for POC.

vCenter's demo functionality needs enhancement. One notable area for enhancement revolves around cost considerations, as introducing features such as DDoS protection or data compression could reduce expenses. We have an infrastructure comprising around 200 VMs that require approximately 20 terabytes of storage for efficient data management. The deduplication and compression features help organizations manage large numbers of servers, streamline operations, reduce storage requirements, and navigate capacity upgrades more seamlessly.

Nowadays, all the products have cloud functionality. Thus, they could introduce a hybrid cloud system and a unified licensing model. We have to buy several SLM licenses for different components, including a demo. Instead, they could include all functionalities in one license.

We have been using VMware vCenter since 2010.

I rate the platform's stability an eight out of ten. Whenever we encounter any technical issues, the support team resolves them.

VMware vCenter is suitable for medium enterprises. We use the product for user acceptance testing and for providing cyber security for product and test environments. Thus, we are using a substantial number of 18 servers in our business infrastructure.

However, Nutanix is more scalable than VMware. We can host as many clusters as required using it.

The initial setup is simple. However, Nutanix has a simpler process.

The platform is highly-priced. It is suitable for medium enterprises. We use the product for user acceptance testing and for providing cyber security for product and test environments. Thus, we are using a substantial number of eighteen servers in our business infrastructure.

However, Nutanix is more scalable than VMware. We can host as many clusters as required using it.

We have evaluated Microsoft Hyper V, Nutanix, and other vendors along with VMware vCenter. Among them, Nutanix is more preferable.

VMware vCenter provides excellent flexibility in terms of managing virtual infrastructure. We can provision services anytime. We can easily create a distribution suite and manage networks. I rate the platform's efficiency for multicluster operations an eight out of ten.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for backup.

The most valuable features of the solution are virtualization and ease of backing up the virtual and on-premises servers.

The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using VMware vCenter for five years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight to nine out of ten.

I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support is very good compared to other virtualization tools. We used to get a response within ten days. We should have premium licensing to get support. I feel that the cost of the support is higher.

Positive

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup an eight out of ten.

The solution's deployment process is very straightforward. For a small environment, the solution can be deployed within a day. The solution's deployment time depends upon the environment. For a smaller environment, the deployment and configuration can be completed within one or two days.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

The user administration is straightforward, and the restore is quick and easy. All software has bugs. VMware vCenter is one of the standards of virtualization in the market for on-premises. I would recommend the solution to other users. After its merger with Broadcom, the solution's license price has become costlier, and the previously available customizations are no longer available.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Our clients normally use VMware vCenter for centralized management of different VMware hypervisors, mainly in private networks and private edge computing platforms.

The most valuable feature of VMware vCenter is the centralized management that allows us to see resources from different data centers and VMware clusters in a single dashboard.

We're currently working with VMware vCenter to manage two different VMware ESXi hosts. That lets you configure alarms, centralized security management, centralized VM deployment, automation, VM migration, and VM backups.

You cannot configure a centralized firewall with VMware vCenter. You need to go one by one, cluster by cluster, hypervisor by hypervisor, and VM by VM from VMware vCenter. VMware vCenter does not have a centralized security dashboard, and it is pretty tedious to configure.

I have been using VMware vCenter for four years.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for stability.

Our clients are usually pretty big businesses that are more digital transformation-oriented.

The solution's technical support is pretty bad. The only way we received support was by reaching out to the upper company layers to ask for support through the company alliance.

Negative

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a six to seven out of ten.

It takes a few hours to deploy the solution, and it's not a fast deployment.

The solution's pricing is not too bad for big companies. The solution is pretty expensive for small businesses because there are few lower-scale VMware vCenter solutions. The cost-effectiveness of VMware vCenter is pretty good, and I rate it at nine out of ten.

We're working with small workloads, and it's been more about technological validation. We have demonstrated to the client all the capabilities they would have by installing VMware vCenter and what they can monitor with VMware vCenter. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.