VMware Cloud Director Reviews

The main use case for VMware Cloud Director is primarily that for the customer, we are supporting the infrastructure and the VMware Cloud Director deployment, and customers are leveraging VMware Cloud Director for multi-tenancy purposes for their end customers. This means the customer we are supporting then further gives their environment to the next customer, segregating them. In a nutshell, we could say for multi-tenancy purposes, they are leveraging VMware Cloud Director and configuring separate kinds of VM image libraries, VM images, ISOs, and all. They keep separate templates for them, and for the final end customers who are leveraging them, they are using separate portals.

The primary use case is the multi-tenancy and segregating the underlying infrastructure leveraging the VMware Cloud Director layer and keeping separate tenants or creating separate organizations for each of the end users by using VMware Cloud Director.

The most valuable feature of VMware Cloud Director is segregating the underlying infrastructure for the end user. The second feature is keeping separate boxes; boxes in the sense of separate logical segregation to leverage their separate VM images such as gold, silver, and platinum kinds of images customers are using, and they are isolated from each other. The primary thing is the isolation of resources.

I have experience with the self-service portal feature of VMware Cloud Director because, being an end user, my end customer uses the SSP, Self-Service Portal, and the rights have been defined on the basis of user requirements.

VMware is not going further with VMware Cloud Director. They are integrating the VMware Cloud Director feature with Aria Automation only for the upcoming versions, primarily with the VCF 9, and slowly they are integrating some of the parts they have already integrated, and they might not continue with VMware Cloud Director in the future. They can make it more granular to ensure hardware-level segregation, the underlying infrastructure level of segregation for the end user, and a separate security boundary where users can access the end-to-end layer. End-to-end layer means my software layer along with the hardware layer. If they want to do a certain level of troubleshooting primarily on the ESXi part, that is what I feel is lacking for now because for an end user accessing the SSP, the underlying infrastructure is a kind of black box for them.

For VMware Cloud Director, it can be more comprehensive if we enable public cloud integration as well. In today's date, customers are adopting a multi-cloud environment where VMware Cloud Director is much feasible to leverage the underlying VMware backend architecture. If VMware Cloud Director could be made to have more integration with the public cloud and do the day one, day two jobs for public cloud interface as well, that would be beneficial. Additionally, I recommend leveraging the VMware Cloud Director layer if a customer has a multi-cloud environment and is planning some cross-cloud migration capability. Cross-cloud migration refers to if a customer has something on Azure, wanting to bring it up on VMware or maybe from VMware to AWS, vice versa. In that case, VMware Cloud Director should provide some cross-cloud migration capability as well.

I have been working with VMware Cloud Director for more than 10 years.

For VMware Cloud Director, we have done some Terraform integration and Ansible as well for a few of the customers. Ansible, especially for configuration management, is where the end user is looking for some day-two configuration needs to be changed. Sometimes, it needs to implement some automated software where we have integrated Ansible, leveraging the APIs available with VMware Cloud Director.

We have integrated NSX being an SDN solution for the end user, where we have defined certain roles for the end user so they can make their own logical segments, certain levels of routing. They can perform routing between the segments they are creating, referred to as horizontal routing. We have given that access while integrating the NSX.

I would rate the stability of VMware Cloud Director from the on-prem private cloud perspective as 8 out of 10.

I would rate scalability for VMware Cloud Director as 8, especially from the on-premises environment. If we do some day-two scalability actions, that is pretty straightforward that we can achieve it. I would rate it 8 out of 10.

I would rate technical support from VMware as 9 because compared to other providers in the market, VMware support is always good. Around 70-80% of issues can be easily troubleshot by public documentation and KB articles, whereas with other providers, we need to do it differently. Most of the time, we have to raise the case with the vendors such as HPE or other providers, but in case of VMware Cloud Director or any other VMware product, 70-80% of problems we can easily troubleshoot by leveraging public documentation and the available KB articles.

Positive

Based on my experience, HPE ProLiant is a main competitor in the market for VMware Cloud Director, but ProLiant is more inclined towards the public cloud as well as the private cloud. HPE ProLiant works in a similar way we do with VMware Cloud Director, but when considering multi-cloud integration for an SSP, that is more granular compared to VMware Cloud Director.

For the setup process for VMware Cloud Director, if it is an on-prem multi-cloud solution, I would say it is not very complicated. It is moderate, not very simple, not very complicated.

From a pricing perspective, I would rate VMware Cloud Director as 7 because being the available feature set, Broadcom always offered more price compared to another product.

I would rate VMware Cloud Director an 8 out of 10 because I have long experience with the product and feel very comfortable while I offer VMware Cloud Director to the end customer.

I deployed VMware Cloud Director for the first time and managed this technology. Currently, I work in Licenses Online across the majority of technologies, and in my job, I sell this technology.

I believe the best feature of VMware Cloud Director is the multitenant capability because I use only one deployment and can configure many clients. The multitenant layer is the most important feature of this technology.

I think that clients have the possibility to access more quickly with the self-service portal and deploy their virtual machines or networking.

We can test the advanced workload balancing feature, but we work with other balancing technology. At Layer 7, the load balancing does not have many features compared to other technologies such as NetScaler from Citrix or F5. This technology is good, but it is incomplete.

I would prefer if my clients and I could speak in Spanish for support because many applicants do not speak English. This is the unique improvement I can mention.

I have five years of experience with VMware Cloud Director.

VMware and all its solutions are very expensive for the Ecuadorian market because you can use other hyperscalers and virtual machines and servers in the cloud are much cheaper than VMware because VMware is so expensive. When VMware was sold by Broadcom, all prices increased significantly.

NSX is very good technology because I can configure security and networking functions. We have deployed NSX.

VMware Cloud Director is very easy to manage. The final user or the tenant can learn the deployments and manage the virtual data center. The virtual data center is very straightforward.

Our main partners are service providers of technology such as Telconet. This service provider deploys this technology for their clients. The clients are very varied, including education, financial, and medical sectors.

I rate this product a 10.

Neutral

The main use case for vCloud Director is to segregate tenants, as we have multiple customers.

This segregation allows them to use their own networking and manage the AVMs.

The main valuable feature of vCloud Director is its ability to segregate tenants, as we have multiple customers.

This segregation allows them to use their own networking and manage the AVMs.

From my experience so far, I am not sure about where vCloud Director may need room for improvement, as it is too early to answer this.

I have only been using vCloud Director for the last year and I am not entirely confident in my assessment yet.

I have started using vCloud Director recently, approximately one year ago.

The stability of vCloud Director has some hiccups, as there are compatibility issues.

Scalability-wise, vCloud Director is scalable.

Regarding the technical support team of VMware for vCloud Director, I would rate them as good and I would give them a nine out of ten.

The initial setup of vCloud Director was easy.

If you want to use vCloud Director for the first time, I would recommend first checking how compatible it is, because it does not support all versions of VMware.

I would rate this review a seven out of ten.

VMware Cloud Director is the same as VMware Cloud Foundation, so it is almost the same product that we are using across our use cases. One of the tools is used for the public cloud, while the other one is for the private cloud. Overall, my company is happy with this product. VMware Cloud Director is used for the public cloud.

It is a good product when dealing in a multi-tenancy environment.

It lacks some of the capabilities offered by storage tools like Amazon S3, making it an area that needs improvement. Having features related to Amazon S3 in VMware Cloud Director is one of the areas our company desires.

The tool's price is one of the challenges we faced with the solution, making it an area requiring improvement.

I have two years of experience working with VMware Cloud Director.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is an easily scalable solution, and it is a feature that is present in the tool by default. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

The tool is easy to install.

The solution can be deployed in a maximum of two days with two people.

The tool's ROI is not more than five to ten percent.

If ten is very expensive, I rate the tool's price as a four out of ten. The tool's new pricing is really bad, considering the way the product's cost has changed, resulting in an increase in the cost by five to ten times from what it was previously.

The use cases and the advantages of VMware Cloud Director and VMware Cloud Foundation are the same, but the only thing is our users are different. We are using the tool for our customers.

In our company, we are using it to create our multi-tenancy environment, as it is easy to use and can easily integrate with other solutions.

We don't use any security features of the tool.

Around 50 people are required to maintain the tool. We have a big team, which is a common one managing both,

VMware Cloud Foundation and VMware Cloud Director. The tool's maintenance is easy.

The tool's GUI is good and easy to use.

When it comes to reporting, documentation, and analytics, the tool is good. Overall, from the product perspective, it is a good product, so you can keep a high rating for everything related to the solution, including the support area.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for private clouds. 

The tool has a self-provisioning feature, which helps us manage projects easily. The solution is easy to use, secure, and reliable. 

vCloud Director's pricing is high. Its integration with open-source technologies is limited. 

The tool is stable. VMware is famous for its stability, and vCloud Director is no different. It is stable as long as there are no hardware and software issues. 

vCloud Director's scalability is enough to satisfy business requirements. My company has 20 customers. 

We don't need tech support much. Our company uses community and premium support. 

vCloud Director's deployment is straightforward. We assess business requirements, plan, deploy, migrate, and deliver. 

Based on our experience, the return on investment with VMware is unfavorable. It requires a very long time to see a return. Other products available in the market can be purchased with perpetual licensing and are about five times cheaper. So, there are better alternatives out there.

We don't think VMware is a good choice for budget-sensitive projects. The total cost of ownership is about five times more than it used to be.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. Subscription model licensing can get expensive, so I recommend looking for alternatives, including open-source options. However, as a solution, I can highly recommend it because it's stable and scalable. Customers can resolve their own issues. 

As a telecom company, we use vCloud Director exclusively for providing services to our customers, making it a multi-tenant platform. We provide Infrastructure as a Service, allowing our customers to construct their own solutions within a virtual data center using vCloud Director. Our platform supports a diverse range of applications, including IP infrastructure, engineering solutions, consulting services, and various other functionalities tailored to their needs.

Our customers leverage vCloud Director for cloud provisioning and management tasks, accessing it through the portal we provide. Within our platform, they operate as tenants, utilizing the portal to handle all aspects of their virtual services. They exclusively interact with CloudDirect, as our platform seamlessly integrates their control over virtual services with vCloud Director.

The specific features of vCloud Director that are most valuable for orchestrating data center services lie in its capabilities for multi-tenancy and self-service provisioning within a single cloud environment. While our focus is primarily on automating tasks within our VMware-based infrastructure, vCloud Director offers extensive flexibility, allowing customers to manage their virtual data centers autonomously. This aspect of empowering tenants to self-service within their designated environments stands out as the greatest benefit for our operations.

Configuring and deploying vApps using vCloud Director presented challenges, particularly regarding their integration into our infrastructure. While vApps are an integral part of the product, our utilization may not align precisely with its intended purpose. Our customers often view vApps as individual environments or subsets of their overall tenant space, incorporating various servers and applications. This approach sometimes complicates matters, especially when integrating third-party solutions like Rubrik for data backup.

Initially, vCloud Director appeared less flexible than its predecessor, v3, facing bugs and synchronization issues with virtualization. However, recent updates have significantly improved stability and functionality. Key enhancements include better synchronization with vCenter and increased reliability, ensuring stability during extensive usage and various actions.

Over the past two years, VMware transitioned from vSphere 6.3 to 2016, which presented challenges for us. The migration from VTT was particularly difficult, prompting us to reconsider the solution's architecture. VMware occasionally makes decisions that impact customers and alter workflow, necessitating adjustments to features and processes. 

It would be beneficial if VMware maintained greater backward compatibility in their technology upgrades, ensuring smoother transitions and minimizing disruptions for users. It would be beneficial to have enhanced integration capabilities with third-party solutions within vCloud Director, especially in networking and data security. While such options exist, they are inadequately documented, requiring experimentation with uncertain outcomes. We seek clearer documentation and smoother integration processes to minimize risks and ensure functionality when incorporating third-party solutions.

I have been working with it for approximately six years.

Initially, stability was an issue. However, over the past two to three years, the platform has significantly improved in stability. Both our team and our customers now experience consistent stability and reliability.

It provides high scalability, accommodating several hundred users with ease.

I'm satisfied with the technical support provided. While the support teams do a commendable job assisting us, we also benefit from the expertise of local teams in Israel.

Apart from our limited experience with Global Cloud, AWS, and Azure, we primarily focus on implementing vCloud platforms within our company's premises, specifically within our data center.

The initial setup was notably complex and challenging. We encountered difficulties in both initiating and operating the platform initially. We utilized vCenter for storage, but its performance was subpar, leading us to transition to a third-party storage solution. Since then, stability and performance have significantly improved. Although there may have been some initial setbacks, the platform has since caught up, providing satisfactory performance.

During the initial implementation of vCloud Director, our core team consisted of just two to three individuals. Despite our small team size, we received significant external assistance from specialized VMware services and expert teams within VMware. This collaborative effort enabled us to successfully deploy the product and leverage external support effectively. The deployment of vCloud Director took approximately six months, with ongoing maintenance being a continuous aspect of our operations. Given the complexity of the product, we often encounter maintenance issues that require resolution, including challenges with equipment, infrastructure, or implementation. However, we receive valuable assistance from VMware technical support, enabling us to address these issues effectively. Despite incorporating third-party components such as storage and backup solutions, we've managed to overcome challenges and maintain the platform satisfactorily.

I believe the pricing is reasonable.

After experiencing significant improvement in stability over the past two years, I am inclined to recommend the product. Our positive experiences with it support this recommendation. While overall it's a good product, there are areas where it could have performed better. For example, considering its classification as an orchestrator, one would expect smoother synchronization and orchestration within its own platform, particularly with VMware and vCenter. Nonetheless, it functions adequately, and given the limited competition at its level, it deserves recognition with a high rating. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for our customers' cloud environments.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that VMware Cloud Director 10.5 has a feature known as IP space.

The product's UI has certain shortcomings that require improvement. The mouse pointer displays some pop-ups instead of covering the content I want to click and actually see.

I have been using vCloud Director for two years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is an easily scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

In my company's customers' environments, almost 1,000 people use the tool.

I had to communicate with the solution's technical support team many times, especially in the past, before Broadcom took over VMware. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase is easy.

The product's installation phase can be completed in minutes, but the configuration and integration with other infrastructure, including areas like load balancers or backup, can take a couple of hours.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. It is good for those users using the on-premises model who want to migrate to the cloud version.

If one means a very bad price, and ten means a very good price, I rate the price as a five on a scale of one to ten.

The tool's networking enhances our cloud operations in an okay manner for every customer.

I don't know if there has been a cost reduction in my company from the tool's usage.

With the tool, the speed of operations has neither been too bad nor too good.

Only for some special customers, my company implements the tool, and GPU is required.

My company recommends the tool for customers using on-premises data centers or hosting services.

My company offers support to our customers who use vCloud Director.

It is not just our company but another corporation with whom we deploy the system or the cloud. Our company has around 50 engineers on the technical team.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I am satisfied with the use of the product in my company.

As my company started off with the product a few months ago, we have not faced any issues and are still exploring the tool's functionalities.

The interface of the product is okay. Sometimes, there is a disconnection that happens between vCloud Director and its underlying VMware vCenter, where the actions are supposed to be taking place, making it an area where improvements are required. My company is still exploring the aforementioned area of the product. I feel the product is continuously evolving.

I can't comment on whether VMware needs to focus on marketing efforts to promote its products since it is in the transition phase after Broadcom purchased it. My company is waiting to see what is going to happen next. VMware purchases Broadcom, and I don't know if, under the new management, the changes that will be made are going to be beneficial to customers or not, so it depends on how Broadcom is going to play the game.

I have been using vCloud Director for several months now. I don't remember the version of the solution. My company is an end user of the product.

I have faced no stability issues with the product.

My company has faced no issues with the technical support offered by VMware.

I use VMware vCenter and VMware vSphere 7.0, as they provide another level of management.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

My company has no problems with the pricing of the product as we got good discounts from VMware.

My company did not evaluate other options in the market since we mostly use VMware-based products.

I have not encountered any issues, difficulties, or weaknesses with the product.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

In the beginning, we were using VMware, also combined with AirWatch and Boxer. We configured corporate emails on mobiles and used them for MDM applications on tablets, like the launcher.

We are not using AirWatch for mobiles anymore. We are using it only for MDM for tablets with the launcher so we can control the applications our users use.

The reason we moved to Microsoft Intune was because of the license cost of VMware. It's very expensive.

So, there is room for improvement in terms of pricing. 

Another thing that could be improved is the support. Sometimes, the response takes a long time, and the advice they provide could be better.

We have been using it for ten years. 

We do use the cloud, and we also have the console—the CN 504.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. We don't have many issues related to the software. It's more on the hardware side.  

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. It's a good solution. And I wish that we could stay on AirWatch because I was more familiar with it than Microsoft Intune. But because of the pandemic, we had to cut costs, and Intune was part of our O365 package. So, we had to leverage Intune. And because the license of VMware was very expensive, we had to move.

We used to have a thousand users, but now we have moved the users to the Internet. So what we left was just the hardware, the tablets.

We're just using AirWatch now for the tablets for hotel rooms. So, there are around 3000 end users.

There is room for improvement in customer service and support. In the past, I've had some issues with some tickets.

This is because the support engineer wasn't able to resolve the issue, and they just kept wasting my time. Sometimes, the support engineer would leave the chat and another one would come in, and I had to repeat everything all over again. I had a couple of tickets that are still pending. 

Negative

We use vCloud and Microsoft.

One thing I like about AirWatch is that we can create different profiles and assign them to the devices. And when some application is not being deployed from the console, we can select and manually push for it. 

In Intune, we don't have these options. So, we create a profile, and then we hope that the other profiles are landing on the devices. And if there are some devices not running, then we are not able to force or reinstall. This is one of the big differences that I see between one and another.

Intune is more complex than AirWatch. AirWatch is more accessible. It's easier than than Intune.

The initial setup is not that simple. One of the issues we faced in the beginning was that most of our devices were enrolled on legacy profiles, and we were advised to migrate to the enterprise. 

However, because we have templates that are used in the hotel rooms and we have around 3000 tablets, it's not convenient for us to go into each room and reenroll the tablets to Android Enterprise. So, we have a lot of tablets still on legacy mode.

Usually, when there's an issue, the first thing that the engineers tell me is that legacy support is no longer in end-of-life and that I should move to enterprise. However, support for legacy mode is very limited.

We use SaaS, managed by VMware.

I manage this product in our company. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.