VMware vSphere Reviews

The level of consolidation that you can implement from a hardware reduction element – it is so valuable to us in our industry. Ease of use and simplicity.

The cost savings in itself from having to buy 15 servers in each hotel. Now we have one server for each hotel. When we release our new applications, we don’t have to invest in new infrastructure, we just scale because its already in place. We're on a five-year lifecycle so we can scale for five years with no further investments.

Centralized management could be better. A server can only be managed by one vCenter. This limits our visibility to remediate, troubleshoot and fix problems efficiently.

It's very reliable. They're is not another product similar, and we've had no major outages for seven to eight years. We have hotels where you can barely reach and because of the stability of the product they can trust the reliability.

It grows beyond belief. In my situation, because Im always dealing with corporate, I have shown that virtual machines can scale to whatever we have asked it to do. If we need to scale we can, and the hardware just needs to be ordered, and setup.

I love them, they are the best in the world. We only call in emergencies, and they are the best in the world. We are changing to v6 and the support model is changing so we to procure the enterprise support even for the basic offices. In the earlier versions, I had it but now we're trying to persuade VMware for that additional 24/7 service.

It's straightforward, and couldn't be any easier. I did training around the world for IT resources, even teams who have never seen it can adopt it, both in terms of administrative and installation.

The ability to aggregate resources.

We have saved money, reducing the number of physical machines. I probably would have had a couple hundred machines and I now have about thirty.

I can't even think of anything – it does everything I need it to.

I love it – over the years its been one of the most stable platforms I've ever dealt with. The platform is more stable than the OS running on it.

I think it’s great. It’s been able to grow even as we care for more and more patients.

I love it. I’ve had great experience with VMware support – they have never failed to resolve an issue or understand how we got there so I don’t get to that issue again.

I wasn’t there for the initial setup, but it's very straightforward.

When choosing a vendor we look at

• Support
• Usability
• Cost

You should also talk to someone knowledgeable not just online research – someone who can help cover questions that wouldn’t normally get covered.

Peer reviews are important but not the highest. There are a few groups I look to specifically, one of which is Spiceworks, but I respect the people I’ve dealt with.

Old school stuff - power savings, ability to consolidate, licensing savings, and ease of management. All the new features are great, but they’re just iterations of an already awesome product.

It provides us a global standardization, ease of management on a global level, and helps our remote sites for those who don’t have a sufficient tech level.

The core savings is huge and allows for quick and deep provisioning. It’s getting harder and harder to remember how physical servers work.

Ditch flash-based web client, make it HTML5. Would like more customization of the web client to make it do what I want. I occasionally flip to the old client because I know it. Web client is a better solution, but it's not done right.

Make training more accessible. Right now very expensive and hard to see the value. Lowering cost would be huge.

Extremely stable. There’s occasional bugs, but very rare.

Very scalable, eventually do run into licensing costs, but the platform itself is scalable, almost infinitely. The business around it limits scalability.

Used tech support on couple of occasions, but no system-down type issues, just minor bugs.

Easy to set up, not difficult, but more difficult to implement it the right way, especially for larger organizations, but that’s just knowing the platform. You have to do homework, and know what you’re doing. If you link vCenter, you must make sure, for example, to do it correctly (like MS SQL, you must know to separate logs and data files, etc.).

It loses points on cost, as there are free solutions, but we don’t want to use them.

Depending on the size and budget, if there's a smaller shop with less money, and you could get by with just a couple VMs, vSphere would be difficult to recommend. But if you're larger with more money, it’s the best platform for virtualization and cloud integration. VMware is further along than anyone else in this regard.

It's flexibility is most valuable, as we're able to move things around without downtime.

We now have 200 virtual machines because building a machine is so easy that anyone can do it. Now, our answer is "yes" for any requests for new VMs.

More automation would be good. You can leverage CLI or vSphere with the API’s so that allows you to do anything, but if you don’t have programming experience you are limited.

Pretty solid, like any technology there are gonna be some pitfalls, nothing is perfect, but there is no clear disadvantage for making it virtual.

Very scalable, I don’t think we’ve hit a limit. Were running 2000 virtual machines on 50 hosts and that’s one data center, and we haven’t nearly hit our ceiling.

I haven’t used it that often – they are responsive. It's pretty standard, not above average.

Pretty straightforward, I've installed vCenter dozens of times, and I've run into a few issues, but other than that its pretty easy.

We've looked at Hyper-V, Citrix, Openstack, but we continue to use vSphere, because it’s a market leader – it’s a stable company, not going anywhere.

25% of the server costs are now going to VMware; it's expensive. The stability of the company is always important to look at though.

• HA - for restarting failed VMs on good hosts
• vMotion - ability to migrate between different hosts
• DRS balances data storage and workload of datacenters

Reporting. If I lose a host, I have to report what was on that host, what was affected, and for how long. We create our own power state report providing info on hosts, and I would like reporting for what VMs were affected and what was the fault, what hosts were affected and restarted by HA. You can get third-party reporting, but it would be great to have it built-in.

Extremely stable, only issue is the type of hardware that we run it on. When we get a vendor image (HP, Dell, Cisco), they inject their own drivers into hypervisors, and it is only time we see issues. It’s so resilient, that these problems aren’t even evident and they can go unnoticted.

Very, very good scalability. Four years ago, we had 300 VMs across 32 hosts, now we have 2000 VMs across 132 hosts.

From time to time, we have relied on them, mostly for troublshooeting specific VMs when a vendor wants to blame resources. Whenever we have bad memories or drivers injected by vendors, they’ve helped us remediate those issues.

I was involved in a redesign, which was very straightforward and easy. We just changed the hardware from rack style to blade, expanding all hosts and underlying virtualization layers. It was seemless and customers didn’t notice anything different.

Even with no reporting, it's near perfect, because reporting would just make things easier, and not having it doesn’t impede performance.

It’s changed my life – I’ve been in IT since 1989 and very few technologies have been life changing and VMware is one of them. It has given me my nights and weekends back. It separates the software from the hardware, and having a hardware failure is not catastrophic, so I don’t have to get up and leave church, whenever I have time. Very few applications can fully utilize the computer hardware but VMware can.

I think room for improvement would be in the site recovery manager. I believe that VMware’s moving more towards using VMware appliances, as opposed to having to load components on Windows servers. I have had some issues with this – I need more tools to allow me to access database features on their appliances. They are sealed at this point.

Very stable.

Very scalable.

Technical support, when I’ve used them, have been very good. Typically, the first person who answers the phone is not very knowledgeable, but afterwards, and once they escalate the case, they are very helpful.

No – I have been using VMware since v3. I choose what I like and I stick with it.

It is somewhat complex – for building an enterprise system, however, you can get the free version, and it's actually the same version you run on your enterprise, it’s the same software.

A quality product is number one, and a strong company is number two, good support. If a company is not going to be around, then I won’t choose to spend millions of dollars on my equipment.

Flexibility and inter-operability with other technologies are valuable features.

• Our ability to attain our 100% virtualization goal
• Being able to consolidate and distribute our infrastructure across multiple data centers

One of the biggest thing is support for non-Windows platforms, especially virtualized desktops which is big across Department of Education. It's only just been released so it's one of their most immature offerings and has room to improve and grow. A lot of the recent improvements have been leaning towards small businesses but in government we don’t have those challenges.

I’ve been a VMWare customer for over a decade and we’ve experience more uptime when we were dependent on physical infrastructure.

Scalability is great – it allows us to be more resilient and more disaster resay organization. We can move workloads across the organization and keep uptime high.

Technical support has always been good – extremely responsive especially in the DC area. They are used across government and we are able to even get onsite support when we need it.

Initial setup was easy and any change we make to the environment has been easy. We have made changes to VMWare based on our discoveries. Government usage can be very different than private sector so were able to communicate different feedback from private sector clients.

VMware has been the hypervisor of choice for a while, now we are seeing off-premise cloud technology like AWS, Azure and others. VMware is trying to allow you to move workloads on premise and off premise to those kind of technologies.

Everything is going in the right track so I would ultimately recommend the product. Peer reviews are 10/10 – extremely important.

We have the ability to run within our block environment with a private cloud capability, enabling us to realize our automation roadmap.

We’ve consolidated over $10 million for licenses, $12.2 million in maintenance, and $10.3 million in labor costs – it's a tremendous cost-saving.

I would like to see non-cloud native apps to be able to run on infrastructure and not be dependent on the underlying VMs for stability.

It improves our stability.

We can dynamically scale within hours to meet our business demand, which use to take months.

We include a mission-critical support model, which gives us a very rapid response. So the response time is very good.

Very complex, as there are a lot of moving parts to get into service. We simplify it for the end users but it is complex.

I would say that the total cost of benefits are not just across virtualization but across general business categories. Don’t cut yourself short from using the solution to drive cost-benefits in multiple financial categories.