VMware Aria Operations Reviews

Capacity planning:

• Being able to see what's being used.
• What's forecasted to run out of space.
• What's the most constrained resource at any time.

When I get asked questions on how our infrastructure is doing (by management), I can give an accurate answer.

The advanced version could be more affordable, therefore giving us access to more advance features.

Five years.

I have never had any problems with it.

No issues. When I made it to capacity, it's been built pretty seamless to do that.

We've got an account manager. We also have an SE from VMware to help if I get stuck with support, but I haven't had that problem.

I don't know if you're gonna receive better support with another vendor than you do from VMware themselves.

They are very knowledgeable. I feel like I am getting the getting the right person when I contact them.

I wasn't involved with the initial setup, but I have done upgrades (by myself) and they have been very straightforward. Upgrades take about an hour to an hour and a half to complete.

We didn't really evaluate anyone else.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Brand name reputation
• Support, how good is it (according to other customers and community forums).

The ability to take a look inside my environment and tell me, not only how I'm using my resources, but also to help me better plan and reallocate resources or plan for increasing the amount of the resources that I may need.

It allows us to do future capacity planning. It also has the ability to go in and do some health monitoring and some preventive type maintenance without us having to get involved with the use of the Python strip. So it actually frees up additional resources on our team with the use of the automated scripts. We don't have to do certain tasks based on certain triggers and alarms that happen inside, that it actually catches inside of vROps.

Right now, it pretty much handles itself so it's hard to say. I can't really speak to anything that I would want to change in it right now. One of my operation guys might have a different aspect take on it.

I won't give VMware a 10 out of 10 because we don't want them to stop innovating.

The only thing I would say, and it has nothing to do with the product, it has more to do with the releases. If we could get the release of the reports when we do our assessments to also coincide with the release of the next product. That might be a little something that we could do. For example, 6.5 is out with the list of canned reports. 6.6 comes out but we have to wait on the reports for that. It's minor but it would be nice to have. That would kick it up to a 9.2 out of 10.

It's solid. I love it. It's a great product. No issues. Everything from the install to the actual day-to-day operational aspects of it. It's been really good.

We have two datacenters. One in Pleasanton, California another one in Fremont, California. We had no issues with the sizing of our vROps and, in fact, we have it monitoring and doing maintenance at both our datacenters.

We really haven't had too many issues so I can't speak to the tech support piece of it.

No, we didn't have anything. We needed something to tell us how we were using our resources. We needed to make a purchase but we wanted to make sure that we made the purchase in the right way and sized the right way. We looked at some other tools, but vROps just made more sense because it's VMware and that's our infrastructure.

For us, the most important vendor criteria are availability, knowledge, as well as how solid their product is and their reputation. And make sure that they've been around for a while.

It was pretty straightforward. We downloaded the appliance, installed it, and it was really pretty painless. One thing that we did do, we consulted our VMware TAM to assist us with the initial setup, and understanding which reports we wanted to see and that type of customization.

If you're looking to size your physical hardware or you're looking to rightsize your virtual infrastructure, then definitely take a look at vROps. It's a great tool for it. One of the easiest on the market to use and it'll provide you with a lot of good information.

The ability to project our workload and determine what kind of hardware needs we have into the future.

For example, we recently made a large purchase of servers and blades, and the solution told us exactly how many we needed to get through in X amount of time.

It has made it much easier to approve purchases.

We are upgrading the solution now, so we would like the alerting piece to be a little bit easier in the next version.

Some of the metrics of their recordings are a little confusing and hard to figure out (what exactly what they're telling you).

We started our PoC with the solution a year ago (June) and went live with it in September 2016.

It's very stable.

Right now, it scales up well beyond where we're at and where I think we would ever be.

Whenever I need help, I contact my local SE (sales engineer). He is very knowledgeable. When he can't answer me, he gets other guys who can assist.

At the time, we did not have anything besides vCenter, so we were looking for a new solution because we really didn't have anything which could tell us what our workloads were doing to our hosts or provide us with anything else we really needed to know.

I was involved in the initial setup. It was very easy. I had assistance from our SE and our sales rep on a call, and we set it up as a PoC. Then, we just roll out that PoC and licensed it after.

VMware and VMturbo.

We were already heavily into VMware. We looked at other operations and the projection planning and we went with VMware. The projection planning and budgeting wallets are a major piece and there are only once a year. The VM Operations Manager gave us more the rest of the year than the other solution did.

It's a very good product. You can't go wrong.

The UI is great, and it's fairly intuitive to use.

The most valuable thing it has is the depth of historical data. You can dig in really deep. If there was a problem at any point in time in the past, we can use it to get an idea where it might have come from.

Unfortunately, it hasn't done a whole lot in that regard. It's taken a lot of setup time to kind of keep it in tune. So, for us, it hasn't given us quite the data we were hoping for. We came from LogicMonitor. We got the data a lot faster and easier from there.

More globalized templates would be much better. Templates for different applications, for example, "this is a web server, so these are the things you're gonna want to monitor on the web server." You would just build from a template and it would apply nicely. The product should already come with 50-100; templates for a desktop, for an active directory server, and other generic server templates, so that you can just apply what you're probably going to want to monitor on any given server.

Also, it doesn't answer any question without you asking it first. I want it to say when it sees something out of whack. It should bring that up higher into the stack and let 99% of the stuff sit out and be ignored.

Stability wise, it's been good. I can't think of any crashes we've had with it yet. It's had some issues connecting to Horizon View, and keeping the connections alive, but other than that it's been good.

We don't have enough scale for it to matter.

I don't think we've used it on that product.

We needed some way to be able to see performance issues, particularly in the VDI environment. We had played around with using LogicMonitor, and we switched because it was cheaper.

Also important for us when considering a vendor is that it's a "set-and-forget" system. Just something that tells us when there's a problem and doesn't bother us when there's not.

It's pretty complex. There's a lot of tweaking to get it to either report on something, or not report on something. There isn't a good set of templates built into the system to really make it go fast. You can install it quickly, you can get it logging quickly, but then it's just a glorified log system.

Try to get it to actually install and run.

We can check the capacity management, then tell customers their usage on the machine compared to what they're asking for and right-size the VM's based off that information. This is valuable because we are overcapacity in their environments, by far.

This improves organizations through monitoring, and showing customers the data that their BEAM is not actually using what it is saying that it is.

The UI needs to be made more user-friendly.

It's been pretty stable.

Scale is pretty low. We're a big environment.

I have not used technical support for vROps.

If you are looking at vROps, take your time researching it. Make sure you get with vROps. Make sure you do all the recommended settings and don't rush it.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor (for our company):

• Discount prices
• If they can handle the scale of our business, because we are a large scale.
• The support behind it. That we can access it 24/7.

Big things. Scale is the biggest, usually because handling our scale is hard.

Analytics, reporting, and visibility into the expansive virtual datacenter. We get a lot of data that normally you wouldn't be able to see without it.

Gives you a single pane of glass for your virtual infrastructure, as far as capacity planning, analytics, and even custom dashboards are available.

It's helped a lot with our capacity planning and it helps a lot with our "what if" scenarios.

I would like to see a larger online library and a more expansive YouTube presence of how-to's. A lot of the stuff you have to look up, to go to multiple third-party sites on how to do it. VirtuallyGhetto.com is a really popular one but it should be one-stop shopping. If I want to know how to do something inside a VMware tool, I should be able to find that inside a VMware community on a VMware website.

It's very stable.

It scales incredibly well. At the initial installation we put "large" because we just didn't know how large it was going to be. But from all the documentation, what we did is big enough to support the most expansive enterprises.

Six out of 10.

First-call resolution is low. You have to call back a lot and get another tech agent who is a little bit more knowledgeable and, unfortunately, at the enterprise we don't have the time to be calling back.

I was using Excel. We switched because I had no idea what was going on in my data center. I couldn't get any key metrics to anyone.

It was very complex. That were a lot of the calls to tech support. A lot of the documentation wasn't accurate or it was outdated. And a lot of dead-ends, so we ended up calling support to get the installation complete.

We had a third-party on site to help us with the installation.

Turbonomic, VMTurbo, and Splunk. But I don't think Splunk does the same thing, so, the first two. We chose VMware because they gave us the best price and because of the enterprise association we already have with them.

When selecting a vendor, stability is one of the big things for us. Also, cost is another big thing. We don't do a lot of bleeding edge companies, we're more conservative so stability is important.

Regarding cost, it's especially important to look at forecasting the cost in the future. The per-socket model's okay but SNS services and solutions or maintenance is what really drives up your budget.

I would suggest going to the VMware website, downloading that 30-day key, and kick the tires on it. Check it out.

And for implementation, bring in a third-party vendor to help your internal team. But allow your internal team to actually do the implementation.

The dashboard: Create your own dashboard and it will give you the right result that you want to see. It's very usable. It shows you many tricks that you can use. It provides you with what you are trying to search for.

Saves us lots of money.

Monitoring:

• Regular stuff, such as if machines are up or down.
• The CPU and how it is working.

I didn't scale it.

I haven't used it.

If you have enough money to go to an enterprise company, don't go to another company. Use VMware. Other companies make a similar solution, but not as great.

I don't think there is another company that makes cables better than VMware.

The most important criteria for choosing a vendor:

• Support
• Reputation of the vendor.

• Alerts
• The insight as to what is going on in the environment.

If there is something wrong with a particular VM, we can see what's going on. It alerts on disk space, memory, etc. to what is going on. Then we also use it for our Horizon View environment. It gives us more details which we can't get on the dashboard from the canned Horizon View Administration consult.

It's mostly from the administrative side for us. It has helped us stay on top of issues in our environment, less downtime, etc.

It is somewhat hard to manage the alerts. Granted, that is probably training on my side. But I would like to actually do more custom alerts for our environment. I know you can do it. It is just hard to intuitively figure it out. You've got to dig into it. It would be nice for VMware to simplify it.

Last six to 12 months.

I haven't had any issues with it.

It's been fine.

We haven't used it.

I was not involved with the initial setup for this organization, but I have set it up in other organizations.

It is really easy to set up. You just deploy the OVA, and it's done. Give them an IP address, point it at your environment, and you're good.

I really like the new version. Better interface.

If you are looking at the solution, I say, "Go for it." It has been good for us.