Horizon 8 Reviews

The use cases mainly depend on our client's needs and requirements. One of the reasons is the high cost of hardware and associated maintenance and time it requires. When you have 300-600 systems, managing maintenance tickets and replacements becomes a significant challenge.

With a stable VDI in place, clients/end users experience fewer issues. A large number of users can easily have required changes in configurations across the entire stack on the back end without disruption to their work. VMware Horizon offers additional features in VDI that are not possible with localized systems or laptops. We are currently utilizing it partly with labs involving DNA analysis and with various forensic tools. However, its primary use case is for office environments.

It gives you better control and management options for adjusting performance requirements and securing the environment.

The use of VMware Workspace ONE with Horizon is quite impressive. VMware Horizon availability on both the cloud and on-prem and its flexible licensing options are worth noting. 

In addition, combined with ThinApp it offers efficiency and stability for the system, which is not always available in alternate solutions.

Speaking from my perspective, I think they could work on reducing the cost. There is room for improvement in the pricing model. 

I would like to see improvement in the license cost and the availability of perpetual licensing for Horizon. The solution offers a Term and subscription license.

We started setting up VMware VDI solutions many years ago, but the most recent deployment was completed in March 2023. The latest installation is of Horizon 8 and it's been a month since it was deployed.

It is stable. However, when shifting from a laptop or desktop environment, there are certain expectations that need to be set correctly. For example, users in some lab environments or universities have a habit of shutting down systems at day's end. It can be inconvenient and it either needs to be disabled or the VMs need to be restarted. These challenges can be addressed within a couple of weeks, and then everything becomes stable. So, stability improves over time with proper configuration and SOPs and as users grow accustomed to new environments.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

It is highly scalable. The architecture allows POD architecture/design, accommodating anywhere from 300 to 20,000 end devices/sessions. The scalability depends on the specific needs and the capabilities of the network infrastructure.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

From a technical standpoint, VMware Horizon is quite reliable and stable when compared to other products. It certainly has an edge in terms of stability.

The installation can be either simple or complex, depending on your desired configuration and the type of integrations you need with active directories and shares. There are plenty of options available. 

If you want a basic setup, it can be easily configured. However, you should have a good understanding of how the product needs to be set up. It's not overly simple, but it's not overly difficult either. The documentation is very comprehensive and helpful. As long as you have knowledge of the product and its components, such as the Connection Server and the licensing features, you can successfully configure it. Some training and support may be required.

If you have the necessary training, it will be easier to handle the deployment process.

The deployment time depends on factors such as the number of applications, templates, clients, and desired features. Generally, you can deploy it within two to three days and start working. We have two engineers for the deployment.

The same two engineers handle the maintenance as well.

VMware Horizon has subscription-based TERM licenses with many flexible options. I would really consider it to be of great value if VMware starts to offer perpetual licensing which used to be available.

We work with Several Virtualization Technologies and HCI systems including VMware vSphere, Oracle OVM, IBM PowerVM, Sangfor, Huawei FusionSphere, Microsoft Hyper-V, and H3C Workspace/VirtualDesktop. Nevertheless for VDI, our primary choice has been VMware Horizon to date.

If you have large contact center users or significant office users, and you are looking for a long-term ROI over a period of ten years or more, VMware VDI would be a suitable choice.

We are using VMware Horizon View for R&D. We use it like a machine that we need 24/7 at any cost. It should be accessible from anywhere, whether on an office premise or over the internet. But there are a few locations such as in the case of contractors, where we are not allowed to provide our machine. Here, we provide VDI infrastructure to them. They then connect the VDI and work. We integrate their system with Microsoft's Remote Desktop Service. Further, we tag the RDS with the solution. It acts as a connecting bridge between Microsoft hardware and the remote server.

VMware's most helpful feature is its ability to work like a centralized management system. When I say centralized management, it includes everything from vulnerability to application management, and much more. Regarding an R&D environment, we can quickly roll out VDI on their customized operating system. VMware is beneficial for customized platforms that offer auto-promotion and auto-deprovision. 

Initially, they had a VMware security server, which they replaced with a UAE server. The reason was to include more security features. They also included a load balancer feature on customers' demand. But, the paging server should have security enhancement features, which we can rely on and configure for small-scale businesses. They should provide high-end security at the initial stage. They are coming up with a hybrid cloud as well. There should be a function where one can connect and work; whenever not required, one can deprovision it. They should add things like voice interfaces. Whenever you need VDI, it should be a seamless experience. So those are the features I would like them to improve.

If I want to do any upgrade, in case of a zero-day vulnerability, I have to log out of every system. Then, it could be CCM, or it could be patching, or some other solution. We need to wait for the user to come online. To tackle this issue, they should include a feature like Golden Image management. So that we can build multiple VMs.

We used to work with VMware 3.2 and were the first to implement it back then. We used it for over two to three years. Recently, during the COVID time, we again implemented VMware for the remote management of VDIs. So, we have been using the solution for nearly twelve months now. We were testing and using it.

We need to understand every component, from the first tool to the last, and make a call accordingly. We must implement all the best practices and have a backend storage connection transfer. We need to specify how many VDIs and storage are required. If you calculate everything perfectly, it is a stable product. I don't see any issues in our environment other than a slight issue regarding an agent. Because when the VM agent starts to run from and talk to the different VMware servers, there could be a network interruption. We need to make the changes according to the review of the five users. It's a stable product.

It is a scalable product. We have around 50-80 people in our company using the solution.

I contacted them for a query about one of the zero-day vulnerabilities. They provided some assistance but it didn't help with the security scanner. Again, we interacted with the level two team; they immediately released a fix for that. They are doing it well. They have a proper installation matrix in place. They will do it easily if you ask them to escalate to the next level. You just need to instruct about the engineering level for assistance.

Positive

I had experience working with Citrix. But, I needed more confidence in the product because it depends on the active directory. Its value of profile and image management depends on Microsoft group policy. You cannot use the Citrix hypervisor because it is not stable. Comparatively, VMware is a good product. You get a bundle of features with VMware. With it, you don't have to depend on any other vendor for authentication.

The setup depends on the requirement. Implementing VMware 3.2 was a critical setup, as we were the first to deploy it. With the current setup, the site for deployment, even if it's a dedicated VDI, an automated VDI, or some golden image-based VDI, has no redundancies. The only thing is we need to have some networking knowledge. We need to know which port must be open from where to where and see the proxy and direct model. Also, we need to have a basic understanding of firewalls and networking. It helps us do an implementation faster.

Then it comes to redundant CR architecture, which includes the UA layer, the other view, and different standpoints. If we don't understand the account, we can implement it from an infrastructure standpoint. When it comes to a VDI, we get multiple ways out. Sometimes, auto-provisioning becomes complicated. When you need more automation to meet the requirements, it becomes redundant. We need an end-to-end understanding of the security networks, AD architecture, profiling, group policy, etc. We need to know how the authentication standpoint works. The port must be kept open from one authentication server to capture all the details and complete implementation.

I have been working with Microsoft products for twenty years. I advise others to be clear about their requirements, the use cases, and the kind of VDIs they need. They should know whether they want a centralized management system, out of provisioning, or if they want to build a VIN. They should also decide which purchasing programs to opt for. VMware is the best fix for the organization because they are prevalent in the hypervisor.

I would rate it as a nine. The reason is the number of tickets we have raised to VMware compared to the Microsoft product.

Our primary use case for the solution is to give end users clone desktops, and they can use their applications. So instead of providing a desktop, we give them a computer with just a client, and everything is loaded in that VDI session and not directly on that workstation. We deploy the solution on-premises.

The solution has provided flexibility by allowing an end user to remote in, log in, and get their VM. VDI session and have all the icons and applications they need to use and retain the same booking view regardless of location.

We have found the link loans for desktops most valuable.

The customer service and support team could be better.

We have been using the solution for approximately six years and are currently using version 7.0.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 800 users are utilizing the solution in our organization.

I rate customer service and support a six out of ten.

Neutral

We did not previously use other solutions.

The initial setup was straightforward, and two people were required for deployment and maintenance.

We have seen a return on investments.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the technical support team can be improved. My advice to new users considering the solution is that it is a good option. It is easy to set up and not that difficult to implement.

We use it in our call center, in the warehouse where we prepare products for stores, and in the warehouse.

We have 1,000 users in my organization. It's deployed on-premises. We stopped updating it in 2013 and 2017 because we used Windows 7. 

When COVID-19 started, we organized our call center remotely. The solution allowed our users to work from home.

I like that it updates quickly and allows users to have virtual desktops.

I would like to see more useful monitoring within users and a more useful help desk. 

I have used this solution for about six years.

We haven't had any problems with the infrastructure. There haven't been any bugs, but there have been glitches in the newer versions.

We haven't had any problems with scalability. It works quickly and we can scale up our infrastructure within about 10 minutes.

For technical problems, support has been fast. They were critical for implementation and installation.

I have also used Citrix.

When we started using Horizon, Citrix was more user-friendly and integrate-able. But we've found that the new version of Horizon is more useful and user-friendly with each new feature.

For Horizon and all other VMware products, setup isn't easy, but it isn't hard. Maybe the problem is with the documentation and consultation. After consultation with my colleagues in other companies, they gave me answers to all my questions.

In previous years, the documentation was not a problem. With the latest version,  there's too much documentation compared to their last available version.

It took about two or three weeks to set up. We worked to prepare images and tools for our several user groups, which was used as a test to prepare for switching.

There were two people involved in deployment: me and a network administrator.

There haven't been any maintenance requirements.

I would rate this solution nine out of ten. 

My advice is that users are interested in relevancy, and the version is not important to integration.

We are using it to provide our users with a personalized desktop experience when they're working remotely, especially during the pandemic.

We are using its latest version. We usually deploy it on-prem, but I know that there is a possibility to put it on the cloud.

It is simpler and faster to deploy new versions and updates. It is also easier to make sure that everybody is using a standard image or a standard setup.

One of the most interesting features in the enterprise version is the ability to do some support. There is a feature for remote control and debugging, which is something we didn't have before having Horizon 7 and the enterprise version.

It is safer in terms of viruses and other types of attacks. If a machine ever becomes compromised, you can just destroy it immediately by logging off and having it recomposed.

The most important feature that is missing is the ability to do some remote support on the client itself. For example, if somebody has a Horizon client installed on his machine, there should be a way to support his local machine as well. That's because most of the problems can't be solved very often due to the computer or the setup that someone is using on his personal machine. Because a Horizon client is already installed on the machine to access the environment, it would be nice if the client itself possessed some sort of remote control tool in it so that if needed, we could support both the virtual setup and the actual setup of the machine. It pretty much does everything well. It is mostly the support aspect that can be improved. You have perfect control over your in-house environment. You have a solution that can pretty much be used anywhere, but you have no control over the machine that's being used to access your environment. Definitely, that's where most of the features are lacking. There should be an option for remote control and maybe some options for conformity. For example, if somebody installed the Horizon client on their shared computer, there could be some safety features or safety checks that were implemented in the client itself to make sure that the person using it is not using a compromised machine or something like that.

Its integration with third parties can be improved. Sometimes, there is a lack of integration with third parties. For example, we had issues at some point with Adobe products running in virtualization. I know they have a very hard time running in a virtualized environment and performing correctly. They work, but they're very slow, and they're hard to support.

I have been using this solution for probably close to two years.

The solution is very stable. It is very robust. The most fragile factor is the actual VM or the OS that you run on it. You might have a good virtual desktop solution, but if your VM that is running has an actual bug in it, such as a faulty patch or a problem that has to do more with software, then you're stuck with it anyway. 

Its scalability is very good based on what I have seen so far. It is easy to scale it up or down, and I haven't seen any constraints of any kind.

Usually, at any given time, there are close to a hundred users who are using it. It is used by all departments. We use it everywhere, and it is used extensively. We don't really plan to extend it because it is already fulfilling all of our needs, so we don't need to upscale or downscale it. It is just perfect right now for our needs.

It often depends on who you end up with. I've seen some people who go the extra mile and solve your problems really easily and quickly. If they don't have a solution, they'll make sure that somebody is able to help you. I've also seen the complete opposite at times where you have trouble trying to get follow-ups. It really depends on who's handling your case, and the fact that their support center is in India doesn't always help. I don't know if it's a language barrier or a social barrier or something else, but it's not easy. They are on the better side than the worst, but there is definitely room for improvement.

We were using Horizon 5. Before that, I've used different technologies but not in this environment. I've used a Citrix Metaframe in a different environment and not at this job.

It was very straightforward. It was a lot simpler than previous versions.

It was an in-house job. We were using Horizon 5, so we already had some experience with the product.

For its maintenance, one or two people are enough.

We have definitely got an ROI.

It is hard to know for sure. It is definitely in the $20,000 to $30,000 range. It is quite expensive, but you do save money on desktop power, desktop upgrades, etc. You're able to extend the useful life of your previous desktops. Previously, we used to change desktops regularly, and now we just change them when they break.

If you're currently looking for a solution that's in-house, it's a great solution. If you're looking into something that's more cloud-based, then you should definitely try a successor, which is a Horizon 8 or Horizon Air.

I would rate Horizon 7 an eight out of 10.

Our organization is a national cybersecurity agency in Qatar, and we need virtual machines that automatically erase once the user logs out. The solution also enables access to our organization's secured environment through the Internet. For instance, you can be anywhere in the world and still access the on-premises infrastructure securely. 

Once our organization upgraded to the latest version of VMware Horizon, we eliminated the delayed login times we had faced in the prior version. The USB redirection is one of the valuable features of VMware Horizon.

Using the aforementioned feature, I have allowed access to certain types of USB models, and only these authorized models by the employer are accessible in the VDI environment, therefore any USB outside the whitelisted manufacturers won't function in our organization's environment. 

I also find the solution's Unified Access Gateway (UAG) feature useful as it makes administration tasks easier. For instance, if I want to enable a particular network device to access VMware Horizon, UAG makes such processes quick and easy.

At our organization, we are also using VMware Workspace ONE for endpoint management, which facilitates the employees' ability to bring their own devices, which can be used to access the on-premise infrastructure and the applications present on it. 

There are some licensing issues in VMware Horizon, but I believe that the vendor will be able to resolve them soon. Our agency is used to traditional licenses, and when Broadcom acquired the product, they made some changes in the licensing. In the long term, the latest product licensing model might be more beneficial. 

I have been using VMware Horizon since 2018. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. The solution can be effortlessly scaled unless and until there are issues with the on-premise infrastructure. Presently, our organization has 2,500 VMware Horizon users. 

Our agency has production support from VMware, but there have been very few instances where we needed to reach out to customer support, which were some rare issues that our team couldn't troubleshoot on their own. Only in instances similar to zero-day vulnerabilities did our agency contact customer support. I would rate the customer support a ten out of ten. 

Positive

Previously in our agency we were using SCCM from Microsoft but VMware Horizon is easier to manage. But both aforementioned vendors have some interdependence when deploying either of their products. For instance, when you want to deploy VMware Horizon you need to use some Microsoft products such as Active Directory and DNS. For end users in our agency, we use Microsoft products and for applications, Linux servers are used. 

The initial setup process is extremely simple, you just need to run the domain controller and active directory and the rest of the setup is related to network communication. The clear and concise documentation from VMware Horizon further assists in the seamless setup process. Any professional with a couple of years of experience in system administration can effortlessly deploy the product. 

VMware Horizon and other products from the vendor are not aimed at small businesses; it's rather ideal for mid-scale and enterprise businesses. VMware Horizon can be considered to be slightly expensive. 

The solution's instant clone technology is used in our organization, which facilitates the auto-deletion of machines once the user logs out. Upon logging in again, a new machine with a new hostname is assigned. 

VMware Horizon can be easily integrated with other tools due to the presence of effective documentation that is easy to access and comprehend. The employees and the end-users of our agency are highly satisfied with the product. 

VMware Horizon supports both on-prem and VDI cloud-based deployment models. I would rate the product a ten out of ten. I would definitely recommend the solution to others, especially for every VDI use case. 

The use case is remote access to VMs. It allows us to remote access the VMs and our servers.

It's centralized management, and you have access gateway to enter the VMs from outside.

The issue now with VMware is that we don't know the future of the solution. Because if you follow the news, it was acquired by another company, and they are changing the old product line. 

I have been using VMware Horizon View for 34 years. 

The solution is highly stable. I rate the stability eight out of ten. 

The initial setup is easy. The deployment took a few weeks time. I would rate the setup an eight out of ten. 

The deployment was done in house with two people. One person is required for maintenance.

The solution is expensive. 

Overall I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

My company uses VMware Horizon View for educational institutions and for the student lists maintained. My company also uses the solution in the healthcare industry.

VMware Horizon View offers something called a security gateway, which allows users to get access to VDI without a VPN. The user experience provided by VMware Blast Extreme is also good. The USB redirection from the client to VDI is another good feature of VMware Horizon View.

In VMware Horizon View, app volume is an area of concern where improvements are required. For certain applications, a lot of tremendous effort from my company's end had to be put in to configure the app volume, making it one of the most difficult parts of the product. In VMware Horizon View, for a stateless VDI, the configuration part of app volume is straightforward, as it can be done in a. When a user needs some type of persistent VDI, some more configurations need to be done.

There are some shortcomings in VMware's support team, where improvements are required. My company can only use emails and not directly contact VMware's support engineer. Even if some issues suddenly crop up in the solution, my company is not in a position to contact VMware's support team.

I have been using VMware Horizon View for five years. My company operates as an integrator of the solution.

It is a very stable solution.

It is a very scalable solution.

Owing to the VDI part in VMware Horizon View, my company caters to the requirements of enterprise-sized companies.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have past experience with Citrix. I feel that VMware is better than Citrix. Citrix requires its users to have a bit of technical skill to carry out the deployment process.

The product's deployment phase is difficult as it contains a lot of components, which requires a technician to have a technical understanding of integrations.

The solution can be deployed in a week, but it may vary depending on the requirements of a customer.

One architect and two engineers are required to take care of the deployment part of VMware Horizon View.

VMware Horizon View is an expensive product. My company needs to opt for a subscription-based pricing model when it comes to the licensing costs attached to the product.

The maintenance phase of VMware Horizon View is easy.

Two people are required to take care of the maintenance phase of VMware Horizon View as there are more than 100 VDIs.

I think that VMware Horizon View presently has a SaaS offering, an option with which the maintenance part can be made much easier. VMware and Azure have a partnership to offer a SaaS-based solution. If you are open to a product deployed on the cloud model, you can choose VMware Horizon View.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.