VMware NSX Reviews

NSX is under the platform. NSX is used on a cloud-only platform for clients.

The solution works well overall and we are happy with it.

We enjoy the micro-segmentation and the ability to extend the network on Layer Two.

It is stable. 

The solution can scale well. 

We have found the UI to be very good. The interface is intuitive enough.

It offers good documentation. 

I'm not sure where the solution can be improved. 

We did recently need a patch to deal with an outage on NSX.

The price is rather high.

We've been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. We have just had an issue that caused an outage of some of our NSX. However, now it's okay. VMware gave us a patch to correct it.

It is a scalable product. It's not a problem.

There are about 3,000 VMs on our data center. There are a lot of customers.

When we had an issue recently, VMware asked to upgrade to a high level of support to correct the problem.

The initial setup offers an average level of complexity. It's neither too difficult or too hard. 

I'm a system engineer, so I don't know exactly what the price is. However, I am aware that it's high. It's better suited to larger enterprises.

We are service providers and partners.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten.

It is for internal networking. Basically, we will be migrating the workloads to the cloud vCenter, and to manage those workloads, networking is required, which is called NSX in the VMware environment.

It provides a single pane of glass. You can do the switching, routing, load balancing, IPS, IDS, etc. Everything is under one umbrella. So, there is no vendor dependency over there.

They have some limitations in the firewall features as compared to the on-prem or dedicated hardware appliance. They can add more features, such as IPS and IDS, to the cloud firewall.

I have been using this solution for the last seven to eight months.

As per my last seven to eight months of experience, it is a stable solution.

It can be scaled.

I'm not technically involved with technical support. I'm not from the operational part where the day-to-day activities are performed. I'm from the project team, and my job is to deploy something on the product. Untill now, I haven't used VMware support for any issues. So, I'm not aware of the quality of their support.

It was easy to set up. It hardly took a week.

It provides all the networking features under a single umbrella. So, you can go with it. It is cost-effective because you don't have to spend money on different vendors.

I would rate it a seven out of ten because some of the features are missing.

The solution is mainly used for rolling virtual environments and private clouds. I use the product for my company and for other customers.

It's important to have whenever I need to segment or control the traffic from virtual machine to virtual machine. This was not the case without the NSX.

NSX is good in managing security or controlling the security and the access control for each single VM. 

It is essential and it can be useful up to a certain level of access control. That said, if we need further detailed or further security features, we should use another product like Palo Alto or Fortinet or other competitors.

It integrates with certain vendors like Palo Alto seamlessly.

The product is stable. 

We can scale the solution. 

It's just access controlled. It should be leveraged by adding more detailed, deep security products to facilitate the NXS. The security needs improvement. 

It's not feature-rich. It's not doing many tasks like a Next Generation Firewall such as Palo Alto for VM or other vendors like Fortinet for virtualized environments. 

It has to have the features from next-generation firewalls, and it needs to complement other features, as in the unified security gateway, to be a good competitor against other solutions.

It does not integrate well with many platforms. 

I've been using the solution for a couple of years now. 

Stability is not an issue. It's not buggy. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is good. 

It is a scalable product. 

We have around 1000 or more people on the solution. Our customers use the solution. We do not use it internally. 

We didn't have experience with VMware technical support. Mainly, the issues we need are covered via assistance from Palo Alto. I've never directly communicated with VMware support. 

We didn't use any solution for the virtualized environment.

That said, for other solutions in the market that have the same feature, we have experience. This includes Juniper, Cisco, and Palo Alto. These all have next-generation firewall features, which have been standard for 20 years now.

It's intermediate in terms of ease of setup. It is not so straightforward, and it's not also complex.

 It integrates with certain vendors like Palo Alto very well. That said, other vendors, like Fortinet or others, do not have the same level of integration.

I'd rate the process a there out of five in terms of ease of setup. 

The deployment took three weeks the first time we did it. The strategy is mainly segmenting between operational virtual machines which have, for example, the database and the application front end on the same VLAN. If I need to segment this traffic, it wouldn't be possible without NSX.

We have two people that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. We need someone who understands the schema of the solution itself, the software itself, the front end and the database, and so on. Then, we also need one person from the security team.

We had a consultation and fielded recommendations from a Palo Alto engineer.

From a security point of view, the ROI you would see would be based on making things secure. The risk is at the lowest possible levels. However, the level of security that would be improved using this solution alone isn't so good. I'd rate the ROI a two out of five as it doesn't do much on its own. 

I'm not sure about licensing, as this is out of my scope as a technical engineer.

We did look into other options before choosing this solution. 

We are a partner. I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

It has good features for tagging and auto-tagging and so on. That said, without another complementary solution like Palo Alto or other micro-segmentation firewall vendors, it would not be of that much use. It needs the support of other software.

I'd rate the solution five out of ten. It lacks standard security features, which is why I rate it so low. 

The stability or the high availability in connecting two or more servers has been pretty good. This is to maintain the operations in the possible highest stability. That was a very important part of this project since you have to move all virtual machines to the new infrastructure. It took a very, very long time to understand how the old architecture was arranged and how to migrate to our new architecture.

There were some issues in finance and other accounting. The applications there are very old. To move these applications, we had to use some controls or web services for programming in a new program, for example, in Python or visual C#. You have to move these applications to new programming software. It was very, very complex to move them. However, we ended up doing it very well.

ESX servers are a part that they don't implement. The client that this part of the VMware is important. You can implement more virtual machines using ESX server infrastructure. However, they couldn't complete this part since, for some arrangements in the contract, they don't put it in the contract. They need to buy new licenses to complete the project.

I’ve been using the solution for six to eight months.

The solution is very stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn’t crash or freeze. The performance is good.

We have maybe 2,000 users using the solution. We use them to move to new infrastructure.

I have experience using help desk support to understand all the users' needs. We were in the area of quality control, so all the requirements that the users or the managers were indicating to me, we had to transfer to the area of programming and they would say, “okay, I'll let you know if I can do it or not.” I was the go-between. It worked very well. Support was offering quality service.

I am able to help clients set up the solution. I’m an integrator.

The original cost started at $1,500. The solution is paid monthly. All the institutions have to pay monthly for the services in the cloud. They have to pay $30,000 every month for this service every three years.

I am not a reseller. I am an integration company. More prominent companies contract us and we work for them.

I’d rate the solution nine out of ten.

VMware is a very, very good product. It's used a lot here in Ecuador in a lot of enterprises and institutions.

It is helping me get an entire blueprint done of the source and the target. I was able to make it into a catalog and can set up anything on the cloud quickly. 

The best part is the blueprint creation where I can create their things and then move on to the target environment.

The price is pretty high and their product stack forces me to use the feature set compared to all the others out there in the market from India. They could do more with cloud management, I need some third-party tools.

I have been using VMware NSX for the past four years.

VMware NSX is a stable solution.

The scalability is not a problem.

It was complex, but we worked on all the templates and now it is easy.

I would recommend getting your case worked out well before you get into any customer environment. When it comes to an out-of-the-box feature set on the website, it is not how it really works. Do the POC before you go into a real-time production implementation. I would rate VMware NSX an eight out of ten.

We use VMware NSX for application service deployments.

VMware NSX is a very good solution. It's also a scalable solution.

It could be more user-friendly, but it's manageable. When we add a specific node to this particular NSX and the configuration changes, it won't push through the errors where required, but it'll accept it. However, while using it, we will have issues. It can also be more stable. 

It could be more stable.

VMware NSX is a scalable solution. We have about 10,000 people using it at our company.

Technical support is good.

We are still in the process of completing the migration from the physical servers to NSX.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward, but it takes a long time to implement this solution. You need hundreds of people to deploy and maintain this solution.

VMware NSX isn't cheap. 

I would tell potential users that they need to do a high-level review of their entire data center architecture, and should not leave any specific configurations related to connectivity that would lead them to more challenges. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give VMware NSX a seven.

We use VMware NSX for micro-segmentation.

The most valuable features of VMware NSX are the tight integration with the VMware Hypervisor natively and the management console. We have a lot of other integrations where you are able to see the virtual machine's end-to-end visibility.

VMware NSX can improve the migration tools from the older environments to the new environment. For example, the NSX-V has become a legacy solution, it's out of support, but customers are able to keep using it. For migration purposes, it's better for them to provide a proper tool. It will be easy to migrate from an old environment to a new one.

I have used VMware NSX within the last 12 months.

The stability of VMware NSX is very high.

VMware NSX can scale to any sized organization, small or large.

Our recent clients had approximately 1,000 users using this solution.

I have not had any problems with the support from VMware NSX.

I rate the support from VMware NSX a four out of five.

I have used other network virtualization tools and the main difference is VMware NSX is tightly integrated with the Hypervisor layer. We've been able to have end-to-end visibility of the virtual machine traffic, and we have been able to see the flow. The other solution will be agent-based.

The setup of VMware NSX is very easy.

I rate the setup of VMware NSX a four out of five.

The price of VMware NSX is very good compared to other solutions.

I rate the price of VMware NSX a five out of five.

I rate VMware NSX an eight out of ten.

We use NSX as a security solution. The solution is deployed on-premise. We are using version 6.4 of NSX. 

The solution is easy to use and is good for management control.

It isn't easy to deploy.

I have been using VMware NSX for almost 10 years.

We currently have 2,000 users.

The solution is scalable.

I haven't used technical support. If I have a problem, I find out what the best practice is.

We previously used a different solution for server virtualization, but we switched to NSX.

The solution was easy to install but not easy to deploy. 

We have a technical team. The time it takes and the amount of people needed for maintenance depends on the solution that is deployed. Sometimes it is easy, and sometimes it takes more than one day.

The subscription is on a yearly basis.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

This product is a software-defined data center with a cloud-native approach. We mainly use it for application migration of some of the architecture to containerized solutions.

The management platform is great. I really like the management dashboard, the tailor-made assurance, the telemetry, and the ease of integration with all other solutions of VMware, such as vSphere. They also integrate well with other third-party security platforms. It's very easy to give an integration of the cloud tenant of NSX. It's very easy to build and migrate a cloud project.

It's very complex. However, I don't work directly with it typically.

We had started two projects for integration with OpenShift and OpenStack with NSX. It was declared by VMware that this is possible, however, the process is very tricky. The full integration was delayed to wait for a new official release. I don't know the actual stage, as this is something that happened more than a year or two ago. It was the beginning of the pandemic. In any case, the integration with OpenShift, the open-source cloud platform, at the time was in need of work and was (and remains) something required from our customers. 

They have to work more and more on the integration for public cloud services and have cyber security platform integration.

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

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It seems to scale. However, we don't have enough data in order to say how much clients scale out or the performance when a company is trying to scale out an NSX-T environment. We are not a cloud provider. We don't have a cloud environment to test it.

In terms of who is using it on our side, we have about five to seven people who have the operational capability on NSX-T. 

In our organization, we use only a small NSX-T cluster. We have a bigger one for our lab. I can't speak to the usage of our customers where we deployed it.

We're pretty satisfied with technical support.

We previously used OpenShift together with OpenStack. It's a different platform. One is open-source and the other is a commercial platform with vendor support and established customers.

The initial setup is very simple. It's not overly complex.

All the VMware platforms are really easy to implement. They require knowledge, of course. However, if you follow the procedure, the output is good.

The deployment itself doesn't take more than two or three days. 

That said, we have knowledgeable workers that have done NSX and the previous release (not the NSX-T). They have done deployments several times. That's why, each time, it's really easy to do. If you have to do that in a customer production environment, it will take say no more than one week including both the deployment in production and the training for the customer.

We have three people that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. 

I can handle the implementation myself. We also have trained people inside our organization. We don't need the assistance of integrators or consultants.

I can't speak to the exact licensing costs of the solution.

Most deployments are on-premises or via a private cloud in the case of enterprise clients.

We started several deployments with NSX-T version 3. I can't speak to which version we are on currently.

It works and it is powerful in terms of governance, telemetry, ease of use, and ease of deployment. The operation is very simple. Of course, you have to train someone in order to use it effectively. It's very easy to find training. For us, it's good to have a third party with enough experience in order to support other projects where we don't have enough people in order to do that.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Have used this solution to implement PAS (PCF) and have also used it for Native Datacenter networking as part of DC refresh.

Have worked on multiple organizations with VMware NSX. It heavily depends on the use case of the solution and how well you are able to use all the features of the product. When using for K8s container platforms or a networking backed for on premises cloud using a CMP(VRA, VIO) then VMware NSX is the best SDN solution but If an organization is not able to use NSX to its full potential (Switching, Routing, Load-balancing, Firewall, IDS, IPS etc.) then its not worth it.

Logical routing, switching are  overall good feature of this SDN solution especially when using CMP's and distributed firewall is very attractive features for micro-segmentation.

In rare situation there are  mismatch in the control plane data and dataplane data i.e. the details and what you actually see on the transport note. This is rare but time consuming to troubleshoot . Additionally, there could be better integration between VMware Cloud Federation (VCF) and NSX-T. Currently, there are some limitations, for example, VCF allows just one overlay transport zone. Also there is not upgrade path from VCF 3(NSX-T 2.5.x) to VCF 4 (NSX-T 3.x)

I have been using the solution for approximately five years.

The stability is good and is getter better after each new release.

The solution is scalable. In the 2.4 version, the controller got merged to create the cluster manager, it now is even better.

The technical support was pretty good, but recently I have had quite a few bad experiences with the support. But that really depends on the account and geographic location and multiple other factors

We have using Cisco ACI  and it is a strong competitor. When you are not using NSX NCP then everything that you need from SDN prospective can be done in Cisco ACI except for the distributed firewall at the vnic level.

The initial installation feels at first a little complex because there are a lot of components, but when you get the understanding after a short time, it is fine.

I was not involved in the purchase of the solution but I hear it is on the expensive side. That is why quite a few companies are moving towards open source because there are multiple solutions such as NginX, that can do the load balancing, and Calico and Flannel can do your logical switching routing.

If there is already VMware environment then it makes sense to use NSX-V, NSX-T as it can be integrated with other VMware automation products. But if approach it towards opensource then other SDN solutions like flannel, Nginx etc. can be evaluated depending on the use case.

If you are wanting to implement this solution I would advise if your project supports it then definitely. You should have a solid use case, the solution is rich in feature sets and you should use all of them. Then only is it worth the money, if you are just buying it for your logical switching and routing, then it is not worth it.

I rate VMware NSX a seven out of ten.