vCenter Configuration Manager Reviews

We primarily use the solution to manage the virtual machines.

The solution overall is very good.

The online configuration, especially in the latest version, is very good.

It's worked well for us so far and hasn't disappointed on any level.

I can't think of an aspect that needs improvement, as it's work so well for us so far.

The solution could be more integrated with the Microsoft environment.

I've used the solution for ten years now. It's been a decade.

The solution is very stable. It's reliable. We don't have issues like crashes. It doesn't freeze. there aren't bugs or glitches.

The scalability of the solution is very high because it can scale in or out, so it's very good. If a company needs a solution that can size up or down to fit their needs, this is it.

We've never directly contacted the solution's technical support. We have a partner that assists us if we run into issues of any kind. Therefore, I can't speak to their level of service.

The initial setup happened about a decade ago, therefore I don't recall all of the details. However, I don't remember it being complex or difficult. It was pretty straightforward.

The deployment didn't take too long. It might have been an hour and a half or so.

We have a two-man engineering team that handles maintenance.

We're VMware partners.

I'd recommend the solution. It's very good. A company wouldn't have any trouble implementing it. It doesn't disappoint, and I don't see an area where it is lacking.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

vCenter makes it easy to manipulate the clusters between machines so that there is no downtime that we can observe on any machine we host on our VMware.

The stability and reliability are great.

The initial setup is quick and easy.

It's a product that can scale.

The solution could provide even more capacity.

We'd like to see more integration capabilities.

I've been using the solution for almost two years. 

The stability has been very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It never crashes or freezes.

We've never contacted technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are.

Previously we dealt with VMware only.

The installation is very simple and straightforward. It is not difficult to get everything up and running. 

The initial implementation takes about one hour.

We have two or three people that can handle deployment and maintenance. 

At this point, we can handle the integration ourselves without the help of an integrator.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

I do not recall the exact version number we are using.

I would rate the solution at a perfect ten out of ten. I've been very happy with its capabilities.

I would recommend the solution to others. It's quite good.

We use the product as a loan management system for a financial organization.

There could be an option for clients to manage the tool as well. Sometimes, it is challenging to solve the issues from our side. In that case, we have to contact VMware for login purposes. Instead, they could provide proper training and guidelines for the clients.

We have been using vCenter Configuration Manager for a few years.

I rate the platform's stability an eleven out of ten.

It is a scalable and reliable platform. It can accommodate a substantial infrastructure, including 600 servers, full NVMe storage, and 32 units of servers for larger businesses.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

We used Nutanix before. They didn't upgrade their licenses. In comparison, vCenter Configuration Manager is the best product in the market.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The product is highly-priced. However, they offer different types of pricing strategies. We have to purchase a bundled license.

The product is easy to integrate with third-party tools. We have deployed the solution in different locations, streamlining server provisioning and management. It helps us solve hardware-level issues in terms of critical logs.

I rate it a ten out of ten.

The client I'm working with is basically a national ISP, and they are hosting multiple services and a couple of mail servers and hosting servers. So, basically, clusters are made with multiple hardware and things are running on them.

The clustering part and the load balancing part are most valuable.

Error reporting should be more precise and descriptive, and there is no way to filter the logs. It would be helpful if its logs analysis can be more detailed, and the logs can be filtered.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

Its stability is good. It is stable and very traditional.

It is indeed scalable. In terms of the number of users, we have three or four admin users. 

In this company, presently, there is not much scope for increasing the usage. It is currently able to meet their requirements. They're using it on a small scale, and they don't need all of its features. Whatever is there at the moment is sufficient for them. I'm not sure if there is an immediate requirement for expansion. They might scale up, but it is going to take time. 

I never needed any support.

Previously, I used to use Hypervisor and OpenStack, but a lot of involvement was there, so we slowly switched to VMware vCenter.

It was quite easy. It didn't take a long time. Anyone with basic networking knowledge can do it.

We didn't use an integrator or a consultant.

It is on a yearly basis.

I would rate vCenter Configuration Manager a nine out of 10.

Our clients use it to get real, in-depth information about how the environment is being used; to see if they have to scale up, scale down, scale out.

Our clients have better knowledge of how they have to provision hardware and when they will need to provision hardware. It makes for more predictable environments. It prevents future problems.

The most valuable feature is the ability to see which virtual machines need more resources or are over-committed.

It can take a long time for the first information to become available. On the other hand, that's normal. It has to collect a lot of information before it can predict future needs. But it would be nice if there was some kind of base level to get started.

Stability is great, in my experience.

The scalability is also great. It can scale out as far as you want to go.

My clients already have VMware. In terms of investing in a new solution, most of the time my clients already have problems that they're not aware of, or they feel like they don't have control. That's when I get hired, to see if I have the knowledge, along with the knowledge of the VMware products, that can help them in the future. They don't have the internal knowledge for deploying and configuring all their VMware.

The initial setup is pretty much straightforward. You just implement an OVA, answer some questions for IP settings and how large the environment is that you want to monitor, and then the install configures itself. You have to configure some plug-ins, but there's no rush on that.

ROI depends on the size of the environment. If you have more than 1,000 virtual machines, you should definitely install this type of software. The time to ROI depends on whether you configured a new cluster. In that case, you probably have enough resources, but we want to know how far you can go in your cluster, how many virtual machines you have left, given the space.

It's a large application. It consumes a lot of resources. Sometimes the price is too high for our customers. If they buy it directly from VMware, its hard to convince the customer that we will bring down the total cost of ownership, in the end.

If they have an SLA, most of the time the solution is included in the license, and it's easier to get it deployed to the customer.

Some of our clients evaluate Nutanix. They go with VMware because it's an enterprise company, and most of my customers are enterprise. They want the full support of an enterprise company. It's supported through all the specs, not only the hardware but all the applications.

You should definitely go for this solution. Without this type of tooling, you're not aware of how your environment is functioning. You don't know if you are over-committed, or if you need to downsize. You get more inside information, and that's always useful.

My primary use case is for migration, to manage my host, if you have three ESXi, more than one ESXi, you need to manage all of them by vCenter.  The jobs that I do with vCenter is the emission and the migration with VMware ESXi.

It's a management tool.

It's a very nice solution for our needs. I like the function in vCenter, you can use it and its mission. You can manage your VMs and use, and move VMs from host to another host, without a long time. It's a nice function for me, if I needed to update a host.

The functions are not running in HTML 5, this is a problem. In addition, the interface itself is not very user-friendly. 

There are no issues with the stability of the product. 

I do not necessarily use technical support. If I have a problem in vCenter, I use tertial line and then how to absorb it and then VMware has many curtains about this.

It is a very easy setup. The first time I used it, I set it up in Windows. I have deployed it in a prior employment, too. It was just as easy there, too. 

I am not knowledgeable with the pricing of the product. 

It's the best definition for our virtual environments, especially if you're using a VMware product.

We use vCenter Configuration Manager for the Virtualization use case to template our workload on a cluster and use virtualization methods.

vCenter Configuration Manager is a very good product, it works well.

The price could be reduced.

I have been working with vCenter Configuration Manager for five years.

We are using version 7.

vCenter Configuration Manager is a stable product.

vCenter Configuration Manager is a scalable solution.

In our company, we have 100 users.

I have contacted technical support and they are good.

We have occupation delivery switches. We use Ruckus and Juniper.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment took two hours.

We require four engineers to maintain this solution.

I have a license to cover four hosts.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate vCenter Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

I provide services to our customers. We largely use it for automation.

It's allowed us to automate most of the processes that we have in place. All the controls can now update positioning solutions. All of that is done through this software. For the company it's quite valuable, in that it saves resources, however, it also allows the IT team to be concentrated on different tasks. The company is growing and the need to focus on adding more systems etc. is very important. There are a lot of new systems being implemented. By taking manual tasks and automating them, it provides a great value for the customer.

The solution is excellent at automating processes.

Overall, it's a great tool.

There are some complexities within the system center. For example, we use two different applications for updates and the deployment of the machine. We also have another third party solution. 

However, a third-party solution is dedicated to vulnerability management. And all the updates that have to be deployed to a specific product. You spend a lot of time in configuration due to the fact that you need to make sure all of your machines are compliant. Compliance is complicated.

I've been using the solution for about four years.

The stability of the solution is good. We haven't run into any issues with the solution. There aren't sudden crashes. There aren't bugs or glitches. It's reliable.

We haven't had any issues with scalability. If a company needs to expand the solution's services, they can do so easily. From a technical perspective, it's possible.

I've personally contacted technical support in the past.

They were able to assist us with no problem. A few times we managed to sort out the issue ourselves. Still, mainly they do support us. We're quite happy with their services. 

One of the things that puts us at an advantage is the fact that we are not yet running the latest versions. The older versions have less issues that need to be ironed out and patched. Therefore, we're working with versions that have already been pretty much perfected. It means there's less reason to contact technical support.

There's a bit of complexity in the initial setup. There are compliance issues you'll need to sort through. Configuration can take a while because of this.

There may be better ways to do things with System Center that we're not aware of. We always try to look at audits before we try a deployment. How long it takes tends to be decided by what a user wants the solution to do and how the company is set up.

If you want to do something relatively simple like automate updates, however, the deployment is quite straightforward. It doesn't take a lot of time.

Also, if you sorted out configurations and taken the time to fix items and iron out details, the solution will deploy fairly easily and deliver its services well.

For example, a deployment that, if done with some center, may require a workaround to sort out any problem beforehand, but once that's done, everything starts working perfectly.

We're a customer. We don't have a special relationship with the company.

I would recommend System Center. We are going through a technological era where everything is done using technology, and security measures are important. With this solution, security is already in place.

With this solution, a lot of the items are automated, including a lot of administrative work. You can minimize so many things, including security vulnerabilities, simply by using the solution. It's great.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. They lose a few marks due to their general complexity, which takes a lot of time. Users need to take into consideration bandwidth and network usage when they set things up. While the solution does try to minimize resources, it takes a lot of time to get things where you need them to be. It's not straightforward. You'll need to go through many processes before you get there.