Microsoft Virtual Server Reviews

I use the solution for internal applications.

The product is easy to set up.

The interface should be improved. The product should also improve its performance.

I have been using the solution for the last one year.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. Around 125 people are using the solution in our company. It is extensively used. We need a technical staff, a manager, and an IT head to deploy and maintain the tool. The scalability must be improved.

It took more than six months to deploy the solution.

An integrator helped us with the deployment. We must check all the features before deploying the solution.

The pricing must be improved.

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

We use this product for virtualizing all of our environment.

We have between 80 and 85 apps that run our core services. We are an insurance company and we have a lot of internal apps.

This solution helps us because our data center is in another part of the country, and we do not have to travel to work on it. I can do things remotely from my desk.

The most valuable features are monitoring, and the self-service that they have for a customized environment. 

The administration is very good.

The response time from technical support could be faster.

The price of this product could be better.

Our offices began using Microsoft Virtual Server about five years ago.

This is a stable product and we use it on a daily basis. For the most part, it works very quickly.

For our environment, the level of scalability is fine. We have approximately 50 users.

I would rate technical support a nine out of ten. If the response time were quicker then it might be perfect.

The initial setup was really easy.

We hired an integrator to assist us with the implementation and deployment.

It is a one-time cost and there are no licensing fees. 

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to hire external, trained professionals with the correct skills for these specific products.

In summary, this is a good product and although it has issues, they are minimal. From my perspective, I think that everything is going well.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are embarking on a virtual environment for our disaster recovery before embarking on our production. We tested several virtual servers. When they are successful during the DR environment, we plan for our production environment with a very small-scale noncritical production environment.

When everything stabilizes after a few months, we return to the production environment for critical systems. We migrate from the physical to the virtual. It takes about one and a half years to do that with help from our local vendor.

The solution provides easy monitoring and easy troubleshooting.

The solution’s pricing could be improved. When embarking on a virtual environment, the sizing is not done properly. Capacity planning should be comprehensively done before embarking on any virtualized environment.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for 11 years.

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

Around ten users use the solution in our organization.

Microsoft Virtual Server is a scalable solution.

A feasibility study needs to be done properly for the solution's deployment.

Microsoft Virtual Server’s licensing is expensive.

Users must read everything about their virtual environment before they go for any enhancement on the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

The tool's most valuable feature is its workload. Its integration with Microsoft products is good. 

Microsoft Virtual Server needs to improve its patching. It should offer us a review before updates. The solution should also improve its pricing. 

Microsoft Virtual Server is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

The tool's support is prompt. 

Microsoft Virtual Server's deployment is not so complex.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. 

We use it to spin up multiple virtuals that have different operating systems and we do different tests.

I appreciate the ease and speed with which I can set up and manage virtual machines using Microsoft Virtual Server.

The main thing that could be improved is the licensing cost. Additionally, enhancing the backup features would be beneficial.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for 12 years.

I would rate the scalability as a nine out of ten. It is very stable.

I would rate the scalability as a seven out of ten.

Deploying virtual machines with Microsoft's virtualization is quick, taking just two or three minutes with our automation scripts. I can initiate it with a simple PowerShell command, and it is a solo task.

When it comes to ROI, the solution has saved us time and reduced costs by around 15%.

I would rate the costliness at a seven out of ten. It has a yearly licensing model.

For those considering this solution, my advice would be to plan for scalability by ensuring enough resources. Overall, I would rate Microsoft Virtual Server as an eight out of ten.

I use the solution to deploy the server for different use cases.

The product provides flexibility. It is a fast solution.

The tool must provide updates less frequently.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

I do not use the tool daily. More than 100 people use the product in my organization. We need four engineers to maintain the product.

The setup is easy.

The IT team implemented the solution with the help of an integrator.

I recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

The typical use base varies due to the fact that, with our client base, we're here, there, and everywhere across the board. It all depends on what direction they want us to go and that we go, or suggest to go. The only places that we would use a virtual server is in an instance of running an exchange. I have also looked at it for running our managed services server on as well.

The greatest aspect of the solution is its capability to be available from anywhere.

The solution works well for running exchanges and managed services.

It's evolving so fast here now I don't know whether a guy can stay ahead of what the next thing should be. It's extremely difficult to keep up right now.

Support could always be a bit better. It's integral to a product. If it's not good, you end up shying away from the product itself. You want to feel assured that the company can help you if you run into trouble. Microsoft is beginning to lose popularity as it's becoming extremely hard to get a hold of anyone. It's a problem.

I've been using the solution for around five years or so. It's been a while at this point.

Most of our clients are small. I'd say 30 users and below. We do have some that are a little bit larger than that, however, predominantly under 50 is where it's at.

I'm not very familiar with the scalability aspect of the solution. It's not something I've dealt with head-on.

The technical support used to be better. These days, Microsoft support is getting harder and harder to reach. It's turning people off. We're less satisfied with it at the moment. Even if you have the proper licensing for the support it doesn't seem to make it easier to connect with them. Microsoft has lost all credibility on this front.

The initial setup can be a bit difficult, and often it's a time when you need to reach out to support.

It's like anything else that's hung out there on the internet. There's a lot of factors that come into play, and sometimes it's not the actual server that's causing the grief. It's the connection through it and all the rest of it.

We have about six people on staff that can assist with any maintenance.

In terms of licensing costs, it varies depending upon how much you need. It all falls together. What is advertised to get started really, in nine times out of 10, doesn't give you enough to run under for any length of time.

We're resellers.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using at this time. It's likely one of the latest versions.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. Largely, it's a pretty good solution, however, technical support is really lacking right now.

We are an engineering firm, so we're using Microsoft Virtual Server for engineering, drafting, and administration.

We're a pretty small business, so we don't have a large infrastructure. Just a single VM server with network switches and a firewall. That's our infrastructure.

Everything is fine as far as our implementation goes.

 In terms of what could be improved, pricing is always too high of course.

We just implemented a new server a year and a half ago. But prior to that, we were using the same software for about six-seven years.

We are about 35 users using Microsoft Virtual Server at our company. 

We've been running the FortiGate firewall for about a year and a bit now. For the most part, I work with a company not local to us, but they are the ones that look after the backend of our network. They're the ones that look after that firewall, but I've worked with it a little bit. We've got a local ADE firewall.

We just bought the perpetual licensing for the Microsoft Virtual Server.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Microsoft Virtual Server an 8.