VMware Cloud Foundation Reviews

We use it to deploy different customers on to a single platform. We manage the hardware from the top foundation. We look at the logs and we position the networks. 

In release 4.0 they have features from vSphere and Cloud Suite. It's a complete data center. 

They should let other companies have their management platform. They have their SDDC manager now and other companies that have other products that do the same thing but they should let it connect. 

I would like to be able to connect the APIs. 

I have been using VMware Cloud Foundation for five years. 

It has good stability. 

The scalability is good. 

We have used support for other solutions and they're good. 

The setup complexity will depend on who you are. I think it's pretty easy. It has a spreadsheet. It's fairly easy. Others might think the opposite. Someone who is familiar with VMware would say it's easy. 

The deployment takes around a few days but it depends on the complexity of the setup. We can have the basics up in one day but to have it working will take a few days. 

It takes three employees to manage it. 

I would definitely advise looking at the hardware first and deciding whether you'd prefer performance or storing data. I would use different setups for different VMs. For the network, do your math before you set it up. 

It's complete right now. The new release has just been released. If the container orchestrator isn't there, I would like to see that in the next release. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

Our primary use case is for auto-scaling and automation of VM created automation with some governance and policies.

The ability to auto-scale is the most valuable feature. Auto-scale with automation and business cases is valuable. I also like that VMs can create any cluster via click.

The deployment is clumsy and complex. There are too many things that need to be done in order to deploy. 

I have been using VMware Cloud Foundation for more than five years. 

It is stable and useful. After the deployment, for the user, this solution is very easy. But from an integrator's perspective, the reporting is very complex. It's not simple or easy.

The scalability is very good. Autoscaling, scalability, metering, and metering in any department is good. A department can meter how much they're using, which is very helpful. A business can calculate how many resources are being consumed by each department and how much it's costing. 

We have three companies that use this solution. One of our companies has more than 1,000 users. They have deployed more than 1,000 VMs over there. Another user has 400 VMs and our third company has around 4,000 users. 

VMware technical support is fantastic. They are very good at prioritizing. If it is a critical problem, they respond to us very quickly. 

Previously, I used HPE SimpliVity and Cisco HyperFlex.

The setup is complex. It takes around 21 days to complete the deployment. 

All licensing costs are perpetual. You have to pay for support on a yearly basis.

For our country, we are an under-developed country so the price should be lower. VMware charges too much in our country. If our customer has the option to buy a server for $4,000 or $5,000, but VMware asks for two-person licensing $7,000 to $8,000, that is more than the hardware price. So sometimes, the customer cannot pay for it because it's too expensive.  

They should think about the different price perspective for our country, Bangladesh, since we are a developing country. Our customers have to pay more than any other PC and laptop they are buying which is why customers don't end up buying it. VMware has to consider under-developed countries where a PC is $400 but for VDI their licensing is more than $1,000. Their licensing is more than $1,000 per user and the customer has to buy the hardware separately. Customers don't pick this solution because it's too expensive.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten. 

In the next release, I would like to see better integration with NSX.

We were working with versions 5, 5.5, 6, then upgraded to 6.7.

The most valuable feature is the clustering load. We have high availability for this product.  

The DSR feature is valuable because we have internal clustering, and these features are good for us.

I would enhance vSphere as an infrastructure service. Also to include the new vRealize automation and products that are related to automation.

The pricing could be reduced.

The interface is good, but there are compatibility issues or issues with the certificate for the VCenter. Many times when you access the link you are told to go to a trusted certificate.

I have three to four years of experience with this solution.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable and easy.

We have 50 hosts.

The technical support is very good.

We started with Hyper V, then we went to VMware.

The decision was made by the owner to change to VMware.

The initial setup is straightforward at times and complex at other times.

We started the installation with the help of the partners then we created the clusters and other services ourselves.

The licensing is expensive compared with Hyper V and Unitech's platform.

I would recommend this solution, but some of my colleagues have concerns regarding the pricing.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are service providers and therefore we only sell this program to our customers. So we don't use it ourselves. Our customers use it for all kinds of purposes like VDI environments, private clouds, connection to public clouds, office automation purposes and applications running on top of this. They use it to consolidate their environment of servers and it provides them a migration path towards cloud environment or private cloud environments.

Because I don't use the program myself, I can't answer this.

Perhaps the pricing can be more competitive.

I have been working on VMware Cloud Foundation for four to five years.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy. It's not so complex that you need to have experience with it.

I believe it is a good product and our customers are satisfied with it, so I will rate it a seven out of ten. 

We use the product for servicing infrastructure and as a platform for various databases.

We are able to use the product to create virtual machines. We can automate everything. We automate implementation. When a customer has their own self-service portal, they can edit their services to do whatever they want. It is a really awesome and flexible feature.

This product can be improved by allowing better integration with other systems. Better integration with systems and even as common as something like Oracle or IBM virtualization platforms. I think the integration potential is very weak with other systems. We need better integration for most products and most importantly on the cloud. Centralized management for everything will make this a much better product.

I would estimate that the product is about 80% stable. It could be much better in this department.

I think only virtualization is easy to scale up. You need to add hardware for physical scalability. We have about 10 administrators and 300 normal users. Scalability has been ok so far, but we may meet some limitations.

I have had interaction with technical support and they are okay. So far they have been able to address my issues and do not take a long time to do so.

The first time I installed it, it was complex. But after that, it became easy for me. The level of difficulty depends on your experience.

I did not require assistance from a vendor or other resources. I did the implementation by myself, and now I do it for customers as well.

For enterprise companies and huge data centers, you need a new cloud for each system. It's not acceptable so we try to work with everything centralized on-premises.

Telecommunication companies must have a cloud solution and on-premises. For everyday work, they will want to implement virtual machines. To maintain all those systems they need to have centralized management. A huge company must have these products. But it will be very costly for a small company or medium enterprise company.

The complexity depends on the size of the company. You need to enhance the workflows. Some things are difficult to incorporate as a new workflow. It is difficult but the end result is good. So, I recommend enhancing workflows first. 

On a scale from one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate VMware Cloud Foundation as a seven.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the solutions that we provide to our clients.

The primary use of this solution is data center consolidation.

This solution gives you the option to have a second copy of your data center for disaster recovery. For VMware, you can achieve asynchronous replication, which means that you have active and passive replication between two sites. Active means that the production is up, but the disaster recovery is read-only. When you bring up the mirror, the other site becomes active and the production site becomes read-only.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the disaster recovery software.

The GUI makes this solution very easy to use.

We would like the ability to write to both sites at the same time, in a synchronous fashion.

This solution is very, very stable.

The scalability depends on your licensing.

The technical support for this solution used to be excellent. When you had a problem they would look at it and send you an action plan. The plan included steps on how to repair the problem, and the same information is available if you were to encounter the same problem again in the future. You didn't have to log a new support ticket. Right now, they no longer follow this procedure. Now, the first thing they do is look at your SLA to see if it covers the problem. Next, you are left to whoever might be able to help you.

They do have a good knowledge base that includes a lot of problems and issues that have been resolved. There are steps that lead you through to resolution. You start by typing the error that you are getting, and then you will either get answers you need, or it will point you to something that gives you an idea of how to solve the problem. It doesn't always happen if you are running a beta version since it is still in the test phase.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward for me, although I have been using it for many years. If one of our customers is not tech-savvy then we don't expect them to handle the deployment on their own.

If you have had VMware training, I believe you should be able to perform the deployment. Normally, if a customer purchases a new IT infrastructure, we expect that they will go for training in order to support it.

It is always a good idea to go for training. I would not recommend this solution for somebody who has no idea at all. It is simple, but not so simple that you can't do it without training.

Over time, VMware has improved a lot in terms of the interface and it's getting easier to use with a cleaner dashboard.

One of the biggest things that I have learned from using this solution is how much I appreciate the GUI. I come from a background where I used the command line often. When I started using this solution, I loved the GUI. It is excellent to use and to troubleshoot.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The mission aspect of the solution is the most valuable feature.

Typically, the ABA in comparison to other products needs improvement, but it depends on the customer.

They need to offer more support for Mac.

I would like to have IT virtualization options similar to a Raspberry PI, if that's possible.

The solution is very stable.

I believe the solution is scalable. We haven't had any problems with scalability yet.

I've only used technical support a few times and they usually get back to me within the same day or the next day if it's a difficult issue. However, I haven't used technical support in a few years. I've mostly focused on utilizing more of their professional services for guidance related to configuration examples.

The initial setup is straightforward. Usually there are a few conflicts. You're typically always adapting an old infrastructure.

The pricing is expensive, but you pay for what you get. The price ultimately could be more competitive in my opinion.

We use various deployment models; it's dependant on the client. We're a VMware partner.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.