From the analytical aspects, we used Horizon 8 Advanced Analytics and most companies switched to another product to gain insights because the insight is not as helpful as other products that are built for it.

What was missing in Horizon 8 to make it a better tool was in analytics, specifically getting the right information and the drill-down process to find out where the problem is. If a user has an issue, it is crucial to determine what the issue is that the user is having and since when they have the issue. For example, if a user reports back that they had an issue yesterday evening, getting that information and ensuring that you have it was hard to find, especially to pinpoint if the issue lies with the network or the Horizon 8 platform.

We utilized the multi-factor authentication, conditional access in Horizon 8, but we are not satisfied with that. It lacks some integration options that make it easy to run with Microsoft Entra, for example, and authenticate using your regular authenticator besides just getting a pop-up that says, 'I'm the one that's trying to log on.' Nowadays, there are many more complex authentication methods, but even a basic confirmation with a number to verify that you are the person connecting is not supported.

I would like to see improvements in Horizon 8, specifically integration with NVIDIA for graphical performance upgrades because it creates many issues such as crashing and black screen systems, causing users to lose access to their current desktop and work. This is a real issue at the moment for many customers worldwide.

We have limited capabilities since we are not using a multi-instance solution, just single instances. The solution underutilizes its capabilities.

Though VMware is supposed to be software as a service, the actual infrastructure sits in the client's data center rather than VMware Cloud. It doesn't really make sense. We should have the front-end services sitting in Azure and not on-premise or the private cloud. The vendor must move the infrastructure into the public cloud.

We should be able to use the tool on different platforms. 

The storage expansion in the product is a bit difficult to manage, especially when I have to modify a storage requirement of a particular area since it comes across as a complex job. I would like the tool to improve the licensing and cost model. The tool does not offer much support if, in a factory, there are other terminal clients or third-party clients. If we have to integrate it with such plants, it is difficult because there is no interoperability feature in the product.

There are some licensing issues in VMware Horizon, but I believe that the vendor will be able to resolve them soon. Our agency is used to traditional licenses, and when Broadcom acquired the product, they made some changes in the licensing. In the long term, the latest product licensing model might be more beneficial. 

I would highlight the challenges related to integrating with Microsoft Azure services. Specifically, there are issues with MDM-managed devices and the necessity for MDM-managed compliant devices. In the non-persistent horizon model, there's a delay before each new desktop becomes compliant. Users can access these desktops before fully onboard into the MDM solution.

The solution must be faster and smoother.

They could incorporate an application library for application learning and licensing. This feature could centralize all software applications within a licensed manager, allowing for efficient categorization and accessibility based on categories. They should improve similar functionality in VDI. It would enable users to access applications directly from their local machines without navigating to the VDI machine.

Addressing the technical aspect, one potential area for improvement lies in the lock-on times. With the introduction of instant clone technology, which is a cost-effective and resource-efficient solution, there has been a slight increase in log-on times, now reaching up to fifteen seconds. While this shift prioritizes security, it's worth considering if there are any adjustments that could further optimize performance without compromising security. A significant concern in Belgium, particularly with its stringent privacy regulations, is the adherence to the global standards for data protection. It would be beneficial if VMware invested in developing a robust reporting engine, providing insights into user activities, locations, and more. This becomes crucial, especially in the context of remote work, where customers often seek detailed reporting to understand how and where their teams are working.

In the latest versions, the deployment of certificates on the console has been implemented. Although it is functional, it is not working as well as I would like. I hope this feature can be improved in the future.

To enhance the user experience, it would be beneficial to have the Unified Access Gateway (UAG) integrated within the console. This would eliminate the need to switch to a different VLAN or access the DMZ separately. With a direct link from the connection server to DMZ, users could easily access the UAG website without leaving the console.

I don't know what needs improvement in the product since it is a standard system, and that is okay.

The product fails to support Mac or Apple workstations. The product should be able to support Mac or Apple workstations, like how it supports Windows and Linux.

The UI of the solution needs improvement, and there is a need to upgrade some of the systems in our environment to ensure better IOPS on our systems. Presently, the IOPS rate is lower than usual for our systems, which might be because of the hardware we use in our company.

With VMware Horizon View, we could deliver it without any issues and meet the current requirements of our company's customers. The integration part and other such areas are present in the solution. If it can manage or if a user can integrate VMware Horizon View with thin clients or zero clients, then a user can have a single pane of glass for managing both the physical and the virtual environment then it could be a good addition since it is one of the only areas where the product lacks.

The technical support offered by VMware is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required.

Along with the high pricing, the profile synchronization mechanism also needs improvement. Citrix has a feature that allows profiles to be stored in a network location and synchronized across multiple desktops, but Horizon doesn't have this. Also, Horizon lacks support for ARM clients and native clients for Windows 11. Adding these features would enhance its functionality.

The product integration on local client machines running Linux needs improvement.

The solution should provide easy configuration.

A simple way to load-balance components has been missing for several years. Because VMware Horizon lacks a load-balancing component, you must always use a third-party solution. VMware recommends that since you have VMware vSphere underneath, you run NSX to get your load balancer from there. However, not every customer can afford to run NSX.

A simple way, particularly for smaller environments, would be to have load balance connection servers and unified access gateways would be extremely beneficial.

The backlog of the development team is extensive. We know the load-balancing is in the roadmap somewhere but it's unknown when it will get addressed.

I would like to see simple load-balancing for smaller environments that lack large solutions like F5, or NSX; it should be redundant or unavailable but in a simple way.

Perhaps limited to only two components; if more are required, a paid load balancing solution can be used.

Load balancing for simple environments, or simple redundancy, is sorely lacking.

We would like to see better performance with the product. 

There is room for improvement in support. The response time could be faster.

Configuration and driver support could be simplified. Integrating profiles with Active Directory [AD] is still complex.

The product has to improve its performance and connectivity. The product should add security features.

The primary concern lies with licensing. There’s confusion regarding licensing terms following the new management’s takeover. Consequently, our resellers and distributors are confused. The SKUs have been altered. We had planned to include budgetary prices in our upcoming budget, which ends in June. However, during the budget repricing process, the resellers faced difficulties due to their inability to obtain responses regarding the budgetary code. The SKUs have changed due to the transition from one principal to another. 

The tool is not future-proof anymore.

VMware Horizon View needs to improve orchestration and integrate additional images. I would also like to see its statistics.

VMware Horizon needs to integrate with Azure, Teams, and Zoom. 

I have not come across many of the product's weaknesses. Considering the tool's weaknesses, the product probably has scope for some improvement in the context of how the applications or Linux operating systems are delivered using VMware Horizon View. In general, I want VMware Horizon View's compatibility with Linux to improve.

Speaking from my perspective, I think they could work on reducing the cost. There is room for improvement in the pricing model. 

I would like to see improvement in the license cost and the availability of perpetual licensing for Horizon. The solution offers a Term and subscription license.

Initially, they had a VMware security server, which they replaced with a UAE server. The reason was to include more security features. They also included a load balancer feature on customers' demand. But, the paging server should have security enhancement features, which we can rely on and configure for small-scale businesses. They should provide high-end security at the initial stage. They are coming up with a hybrid cloud as well. There should be a function where one can connect and work; whenever not required, one can deprovision it. They should add things like voice interfaces. Whenever you need VDI, it should be a seamless experience. So those are the features I would like them to improve.

If I want to do any upgrade, in case of a zero-day vulnerability, I have to log out of every system. Then, it could be CCM, or it could be patching, or some other solution. We need to wait for the user to come online. To tackle this issue, they should include a feature like Golden Image management. So that we can build multiple VMs.

The customer service and support team could be better.

I would like to see more useful monitoring within users and a more useful help desk. 

The most important feature that is missing is the ability to do some remote support on the client itself. For example, if somebody has a Horizon client installed on his machine, there should be a way to support his local machine as well. That's because most of the problems can't be solved very often due to the computer or the setup that someone is using on his personal machine. Because a Horizon client is already installed on the machine to access the environment, it would be nice if the client itself possessed some sort of remote control tool in it so that if needed, we could support both the virtual setup and the actual setup of the machine. It pretty much does everything well. It is mostly the support aspect that can be improved. You have perfect control over your in-house environment. You have a solution that can pretty much be used anywhere, but you have no control over the machine that's being used to access your environment. Definitely, that's where most of the features are lacking. There should be an option for remote control and maybe some options for conformity. For example, if somebody installed the Horizon client on their shared computer, there could be some safety features or safety checks that were implemented in the client itself to make sure that the person using it is not using a compromised machine or something like that.

Its integration with third parties can be improved. Sometimes, there is a lack of integration with third parties. For example, we had issues at some point with Adobe products running in virtualization. I know they have a very hard time running in a virtualized environment and performing correctly. They work, but they're very slow, and they're hard to support.

The issue now with VMware is that we don't know the future of the solution. Because if you follow the news, it was acquired by another company, and they are changing the old product line. 

In VMware Horizon View, app volume is an area of concern where improvements are required. For certain applications, a lot of tremendous effort from my company's end had to be put in to configure the app volume, making it one of the most difficult parts of the product. In VMware Horizon View, for a stateless VDI, the configuration part of app volume is straightforward, as it can be done in a. When a user needs some type of persistent VDI, some more configurations need to be done.

There are some shortcomings in VMware's support team, where improvements are required. My company can only use emails and not directly contact VMware's support engineer. Even if some issues suddenly crop up in the solution, my company is not in a position to contact VMware's support team.

There is room for a more cost-effective pricing structure, as it could be more affordable.

The solution has a lot of issues and bugs. 

The support can be improved because at present, there is some delay in responses even though they improved some Microsoft Team support. The system integration also needs some improvement.

What I would like to see improved is not so much about the product. It's more about how to get information about products. It's always too much sales pitching and fancy works and stuff. This helps you improve this and that but doesn't tell me how. 

It's just hard to find information when you want to set up a system or find what can be good for a specific customer. You want to find something. That's where the documentation comes in, and explains how it will improve. So that's my biggest problem with everybody who makes a product. 

It says this will make your life so much better. Yes, but how would it make it better? That's the hard part to find. That kind of information is hard to find, really. So it makes it hard to find products. 

Therefore, I always have to call the vendor and ask for a meeting, and they have to make a demonstration. The process becomes so lengthy and exhausting sometimes because you have to make notes for everything. "Okay, this works like this," and "You can use it for that." And then you have to talk to the next one, compare. So I would like that to be my opinion. If they could think from the perspective of a technician, he doesn't want to hear all this fancy talk. That's my opinion. 

The product could be improved by correcting how information is provided because we have issues with the client and the backend. The system is not designed to allow the client to log in easily and multiple passwords are required. This could be improved by requiring the client to input only the active directory username and password.

The primary problem we are facing is logging in locally on the SIEM client as a local, then click on the Horizon Seven and then call or connect to the server connection, then use the administrative username and password to log in, which is difficult for the students when we are dealing with the student. This is the most challenging stage because the rest of the backend is okay. We would like to see improvements to this problem and understand why there is no compatibility between the SIEM client and the backend.

Horizon View could be more stable.

The cost of licenses is always a challenge. I would also like the deployment to be simplified and automated to be more streamlined. It would be helpful for managing. For example, if you are deploying 900, it would be nice to automate the management of groups of 30 or 40 or whatever you're doing. Automation and deployment tools would be good.

VMware Horizon 7 could improve by supporting the active-active data center. At this time we are only deploying it in the production environment. Our customer is considered to deploy the VMware Horizon 7 to a secondary data center, but we found out that it cannot fully support the user in the deployment in the active-active data center. Any improvement on this would be beneficial.

Reporting could be improved. We have 200-300 users and it's difficult to know who has logged in and when. We have to do this manually so having a tool that would enable the export of reporting would be useful and save a lot of time.

The multimedia playback is not very good and they could improve it by increasing the quality.

In an upcoming release, there could be more integration support for Linux and better Linux user profile management. This is a feature we use in the universities but most other normal businesses will not be interested in Linux. 

VMware Horizon is best in class product, but they should the improve its connectivity of the agents deployed. They should create their own virtualization infrastructure to host their horizon moving forward.

There is room for improvement in security features. In the next release, perhaps they could add some 3D features to Horizon View, especially considering the concerns around ransomware and security. 

There are certain areas that require improvement, and in my opinion, the most important factor is with some instances where I have experienced limitations, particularly with the printing service. Using a printer with the VDI is not a straightforward process.

Overall, in my opinion, the solution works perfectly.

The standard license does not include certain features. 

Customers do not understand the requirements for VGA solutions so education and marketing are needed. 

The one thing that could be improved would be to implement more robust audio redirections. When we are talking on headphones, using Teams, or any other communicator, there shouldn't be any lag time, voices cutting out, or interrupted connections. It has improved from what it was initially, but there's still a way to go. 

They need to make troubleshooting, diagnostics, and error reporting a little better. There are too many consoles with different error messages to identify a problem and figure out how to fix it

It is a little bit complex. You need a little bit of experience with ESXi installation and VMware before using this solution. You cannot directly jump to this solution. It also requires training. After you get trained, you can do anything with Horizon 7.

In terms of features, it has been sufficient for my needs, but it can always have more features. They can maybe merge the servers. They can give the Horizon 7 server in one package with ESXi.

The solution’s stability and pricing could be improved.

There is room for improvement in the integration with other parts of the suite. For example, you currently need separate windows to manage app volumes and the dynamic environment manager (DEM). So, it's important to integrate all these infrastructure elements into one window.

The solution could be more secure. Horizon is a recent addition in the sense that, due to COVID, we're working from home and those off-network devices also have to get secured. It's not only on-premises and the cloud infrastructure anymore. Your connectivity from the endpoints from the employees who are logged in from home also has to get brought in.

The solution isn't quite mature yet. It needs more time to mature and to get more market recognition.

The solution needs to work on its pricing. Compared to VMware Workspace ONE it should not be more in terms of cost.

The initial setup is a little complicated. 

VMware Horizon View has worked a lot to improve the solutions. There are some issues in the delivery of the applications, such as network problems. You can lose your connection at times.

Horizon 7's performance could be improved. For instance, when I launch the VDI, it takes a very long time to boot.

The remote application features have some room for improvement.

The most valuable feature of this solution has been security.

I believe documentation could be improved. There's a product in the solution called DEM, which is for screening applications or importing settings into a particular app. In VDI machines your profile's replicated or just live-streamed from the supplier server. Things like Google Chrome, with all its different application settings and passwords and whatever, is stored in zip files that are extracted when you log in. Horizon works with this but documentation is lacking. The applications have changed so much, but the company doesn't seem to be keeping up with that. The product needs to be simplified, have more documentation, and some predefined applications so that users don't have to re-engineer things each time.

For an additional feature, it would be great if they had automatic replication of all the stored profiles so we're not having to use third party tools to do the replication of their users' profiles. It would mean that you can use it as a disaster recovery server, as well as just active-active across data centers.

The solution is quite expensive. They should work to lower the costs if possible.

The deployment of the product can sometimes be difficult. It would be ideal if the whole process was more simplistic.

There needs to be more documentation. If there was, it might help make the initial setup a bit easier. They need to provide users with more manuals.

The technical support could be more responsive.

The remote connection, bandwidth usage, and error connection can be improved. Working with the load balancer sites should also be improved. For example, with Horizon, we can use two clients with a one megabit connection, but with Citrix, we can use four or five clients with the same bandwidth through ICA protocol. VMware must improve remote connection, connection stability, and load balancing.

I would love to see so they can actually allow the use of Linux, from a hosting environment as well as from a VDI client environment. If I can actually host Linux instances as VDIs with the same features as what I get on Windows and have all the key components, like the Composer, database, or the connection services, that would be ideal. Often, ransomware and attacks usually target Windows, therefore, if I'm on Linux, at least I'll have some level of comfort or a buffer against danger.

It's difficult to recall any areas that need improvement. 

They are growing now, in particular with this VDI domain. VMware is now introducing new products and features, and they are onboarding new customers.

There are many competitors in the market. All of the Media in Apple products delivery is seamless. 

They need to advertise the product well and focus on their core features. 

They need to market accordingly and they will have a good future and a good experience for the end customers.

I would like to see seamless integration with the cloud because right now, the dependency is on the cloud providers. I would like to see them have their own cloud environment on any public cloud. Right now, it is split between the public cloud and the VMware cloud environment. If they could deliver a solution that integrated all of the components then it would be great. They would not have to manage two different consoles but rather, a single implementation and a single console.

Sometimes when we log on, there are applications that are not visible.

Technical support is only average and can be improved.

In general, there are many things that can be improved.

The solution’s stability and initial setup could be improved.

VMware Horizon's initial setup is fairly complex.

The majority of things in VMware Horizon can be done only in Windows and not in Linux. There are Linux customers who would like to use VMware Horizon's features. 

The support team's technicalities and the pricing of the solution need improvement. 

Areas for improvement in VMware Horizon 7 would be the logging and the troubleshooting, e.g. they could be made clearer.

In the next release, I would like to have more support when optimizing the master templates for PDI. There are tools that are available to be used but they are not supported at the moment and are more, "use at your own risk."

Many improvements to this product are needed.

More ready-to-deploy templates should be available. Because they are not included, a lot of configuration is required.

We are not satisfied with the storage vendor.

I would like to see the VDP or other features for backing up the VMs.

Technical support could be better and faster.

VMware Horizon could be improved with more integration. It is also very costly for Enterprise Plus, which is a drawback. The renewal costs for the license are very, very high. 

One issue we had with this product was that the connection was unstable. Sometimes we had to force values so the end-user could continue working, which caused some information to get lost. 

VMware Horizon View can improve by making it easier to use for first-time users. You should learn the whole concept of VMware to be able to use it.

In a future release, VMware Horizon View could add better integration.

Sometimes, the protocol itself gets a bit laggy. If you have less than optimal switching and routing, it can get kind of laggy.

I don't know if it already has such a feature or whether it is doable, but it would be good to be able to use a thumb drive or something else or map a local directory as a drive to the VM. 

In the area of automation, there are some improvements needed in the solution.

For an upcoming release, I would like to see more content available. There is not much content on the internet that is easily accessible or on the VMware site itself.

User profiles are something that needs to be improved.

There could be some improvement with the automation of the set up. If deployment and configuration were simplified, more companies will choose the product. 

Our customers haven't really experienced any issues with the solution. I'm not sure if there are any features that are missing.

The solution is very expensive.

They have tried to create a solution that is similar to Nutanix Citrix. Nutanix Citrix is the leader with this type of solution, a digital single platform. VMware tried to do the same, it's close but in terms of performance and how they manage a single platform, Nutanix Citrix is much better.

In the next release, the performance, the speed, and the price need to be improved.

Places such as universities are not suitable for this solution.

The initial startup costs for this solution are relatively high.

Almost all VMware products are "designed" for the enterprise and it sometimes takes some wise wrangling to make it financially viable. And VMware doesn't make that easy. I think the SMB market is largely untapped and maybe even ignored.

Integration of app volumes with Horizon View and integration of App Volumes with UEM would be nice additions.

I wish there were more standardized instructions and rules. There are too many gotchas.

View Persona, it’s been pushed to the wayside because they acquired UEM, and I’d prefer to use it, but have no budget for it. View Persona has less features than UEM, and it doesn’t seem updated, which makes a difference for standard edition users.

I think that simplifying cross-platform use on different devices could be better. Different client versions sometimes don’t work quite as well.

For what we are using it for, it's been very good. I see a lot of needs, but because our environment is constricted for now it meets our needs. If we can go into a cloud environment, then I see a lot of things I would need.

Right now, we use a third party product to do the VDI administration, which has been fairly good for us. We’re looking for one vendor to be able to manage all aspects of the stack to make it more efficient and stable.

One thing is I'd like to be able to see I/O acceleration within VMware instead of having to use a third party, like VMTurbo.

Well, one of the features we would like to have (even though it was released last year), was NSX. We’re providing a web portal services so that we can spin out any servers that they need, so those things would help. The NSX is something that we are looking at right now.

The pools and virtual machine management console should be improved, as there is no way to group PCs in different pools, etc.

I think that providing the solution for Linux desktops could be a real improvement as this would deliver desktops for operations and administrative operators without huge licensing costs (Desktops that have LibreOffice, Firefox and Linux client for client-server application). Another enhancement for this product could be a more simplified active directory GPO management through the Horizon Administrator console.

The integration could be improved. For example, there could be more integration and easier integration with products such as Okta and Duo. VMware Horizon View could be a multifactor authentication and authorization product, with more options for workflows, user assignments, and group assignments. Currently, it is complicated to configure a demo, so more integration would be beneficial.

They need to improve the stabilization process of major releases.

There are some issues with RAM in the system. There are also some issues with Windows 10, which is running the platform.

Windows 10 has several applications that are available from the Windows Store, and these applications may not work correctly.

We would like to see some of the features that are offered in the highest edition also included in the Standard Edition.

The higher edition has some tools or functions that are called Horizon Smart Policy. It is a very good function that should be included with the standard edition. 

The licensing models should be improved in some cases.

In the future, I would like to see better support for application virtualization.

It would be beneficial to see improvements in client-side functionalities, especially for some Linux clients. A better in-built multi-factor authentication solution would also be advantageous. While there are ways to achieve this through Microsoft Azure and Google, a more integrated approach within Horizon would be ideal.

The product's initial setup process could be easier.