VMware vSphere Reviews

We primarily use the solution for everything Microsoft-related for the most part. I would say our visualization platform is about 99.5% of all our workload from a Microsoft point of view

The solution has high availability. 

The on the fly changing of the resources on a VM is very helpful. 

You've got the underlying capacity, that's greater than what the actual server has, and therefore you have the ability to do on the fly add capacity. I would say that's by far the thing we use the most. 

The VRS, to a lesser degree, is also quite useful to us. It does work in the environment. 

The solution is very good from a recoverability point of view. Everything can be stored much easier on a virtual server than on a physical box. 

The biggest pain point is probably the firmware management of the underlying hardware. It could be a lot better.

We use HP hardware. The biggest thing is the firmware upgrades and other items at the backend. You have to take down the system. It's an in-memory database and that can sometimes cause issues. If you have to do firmware upgrades, it's organizing downtime and all sorts of things, which normally in a VMS space isn't an issue. They have embedded some of this in 7.1, however, I haven't tested it or seen it in action as yet. 

That said, one of the problems is that when we're sort of behind big memory servers and the databases in them if you migrate it, it potentially breaks the system off. That's a big pain point that the firmware management of the underlying hardware should handle. VMware doesn't really cater to it, however, Nutanix to some degree does cater for. It gets pretty expensive, however.

We are always sort of one or two versions behind. We never test the latest version. I would say for me personally, the management aspect with large memory and in-memory databases for the motions and stuff like that is what it needs. That's one of the key things that I need really, from a support perspective. That's caused a number of issues already. 

You do get something called host profiles, which they've also improved slightly, however, I still think it's a bit clunky in terms of the way you can manage it. They can produce something to improve that aspect slightly.

I've been using the solution for more than 12 years. It's been over a decade at this point.

The solution is mostly stable.

We've had issues, however, if you think about it, it's quite complex if you look at stuff like a three-tier architecture with different stories, subsystems, and things like that. It's not really VMware if it's unstable perhaps. 

VMware itself isn't necessarily unstable, however, they might present as a VM-ware issue due to the fact of the storage latency or a driver issue. We did a firmware update and VMware itself I think is quite stable. Every now and again, there's an issue that creeps in, however, it's because we use different vendors for storage and a different vendor for computing. Overall, by and large, VMware is very stable.

From the way we set it up, it is relatively easy to scale as long as you've got the planning in place for where you're going to. We use something called blade technology, and that is relatively easy to scale.

There's a total of ten people that are actually on the solution at any given time.

I've used technical support a couple of times. I'm quite happy with it. We've got an agreement with HP. We offer our support via HP or via Data Centrix with HP. Durin the couple of times I've used it has been quite fast and thorough.

I've never used a different solution. I started using VMware or VMware server, about 20 years ago. vSphere ESX is probably the first visualization tool I've used. Subsequently, yes, we've tested one or two other options, for example, Hyper-V and what used to be called Acropolis. We've also used Oracle VM. However, for production and for everything else we've done, we pretty much speak to VMware. It's tried and tested and we're quite happy with the stability. Therefore, we stick with it.

If all your hardware requirements are met, it is a relatively simple implementation. However, you have to have the boxes ticked in terms of connectivity, capacity, and all that sort of stuff. The actual VMware part of it is not the biggest complication of everything now.

We handle maintenance ourselves. My team consists of five people, and of those, only one of them really works on the maintenance of the hardware and the software. It doesn't take a lot of personnel.

Initially, we did use a vendor for the initial setup. That's even before I started at this company. The company uses their local vendors to output the hardware deployment and with the software deployment, however, it's my understanding that it's been done in-house mostly.

It's not a cheap solution. The maintenance specifically is quite expensive. I also find that it's more expensive than the higher tier products. 

We've looked at buying into something like a vROPS or whatever they call it today. However, when you look at the cost and the benefits, although there is great benefit in the product, it's just never been a cost discussion that we've been able to entertain with management. 

Similar to vSAN, we looked at that a couple of times. It's a great product and it has proven itself. It's brilliant. It's stable. However, as soon as you look at any peripheral products, it becomes quite expensive, as it's licensed per socket or per blade or per server or whatever. 

We're just customers.

We are a little behind the latest version, which I believe is 7.1. We're using 6.5 for the most part. We still have a little bit of a legacy in 5.5, however, that is just hardware related. It doesn't support the newer version. We trying to rectify that as soon as possible.

I would recommend the solution to other companies.

Overall, I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We primarily use VMware vSphere for virtualization.

We use it mostly on-premise, but for the last year on cloud.

It has facilitated the adoption of DevOps practices and technology.

The feature that I find very valuable is the ability to move images of virtual machines from different workspaces to other workspaces between different installations.

An area for improvement is that when comparing VMware to Nutanix, Nutanix has higher availability, like clustering for virtual machines. That is a good idea and VMware could profit from something like that for higher availability installations.

I have been using VMware vSphere for the last eight to 10 years using different scopes for different projects.

It is pretty stable.

I haven't had a chance to do any scalability exercises, just some tests, but not on real-time or on real production. Probably later I will get a chance to test scalability.

There are about 10 or 15 people using it directly in the environments and between 500 and 600 people that are enabled with the VMware.

We require just another engineer and myself for the deployment of VMware.

We probably will not increase the licensing for the VMware, but we will increase the load on the installation that is being handled by VMware.

I haven't had a chance yet to use technical support, but from past experience I would say that it's very good. For this project we have not had a chance to use direct technical support, but for previous projects it has been good. So hopefully it stays like that.

The initial setup is relatively simple. Between one and 10, I would give it a six.

For the product that I'm working on right now it took about three weeks because it had several different virtual machines and inside the virtual machines there were a lot of containers. So there were certain complexities that extended the complexity of the VMware installation itself. But for just the VMware only it took about a week and a half or something like that.

We did not use consultants or resellers for deployment, just the documentation.

Our license is on a yearly basis.

My advice to anyone considering using VMware vSphere is you have to find out the requirements. You have to do a very good job finding the requirements so that the scoping and provisioning of the resources are okay. That way you don't have  later have to be constantly changing the configuration. It is good to spend some time doing requirements and finding out the loads, etc... that you are going to have to handle.

Generally, VMware vSphere is not perfect, but it's okay. On a scale of one to ten, I will give it an eight.

You get used to the interface. The pricing is getting cheaper, but it depends. Anyway, it is a good product.

We use VMware vSphere for the virtualization of environments.

The solution is easy to use, user-friendly interface and has high availability features. When comparing it to other solutions it is more robust.

I have been using this solution for approximately 10 years.

This solution is more stable than competitors.

VMware vSphere is scalable.

The technical support could improve by being a little faster.

Positive

I have previously use Hyper-V.

The installation is easy and can be done in one day.

I did the implementation myself.

The solution requires a license and it could be cheaper.

We previously evaluated Hyper-V and RHEV.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate VMware vSphere a ten out of ten.

I use it for my infrastructure, and we can also use it for our simulation environment and training. We can use VMware in a simulation environment to test the environment we need.

It makes my environment very reliable.

It is a very dependable solution. Its performance is very good, and it is also easy to manage and implement.

They can lower the price of its license.

I have been working with this solution for more than six months.

Its stability is very good.

It is scalable. In my organization, we have about 2,000 users. Its usage is very extensive. We use it daily.

Their technical support has been very good.

I have used Microsoft Hyper-V.

It is easy to implement. It is a very good solution.

I can implement it myself. On one server, it takes a maximum of one hour. We have a technical team of three people for deployment and maintenance. We have one manager and two engineers.

Its price could be lower. There is the cost of one license, and then there is the subscription cost for support.

It is a very fine and reliable solution. I would rate it a nine out of 10.

A lot of people use the VMware vSphere solutions because most operations are virtualized. Small and mid-range companies are using VMware vSphere for all their infrastructure virtualizing applications, this is what the solution is mainly used for.

VMware vSphere has a lot of features that are valuable, such as multiple clusters, VM mobility, VDI, and virtual desktop.

I have been using VMware vSphere for many years.

The stability of VMware vSphere is great. It has high availability. 

VMware vSphere is scalable.

I am in Lithuania and we have approximately 100 customers. Most companies use some kind of virtualization. It can be VMware or Citrix, or something else. Our clients mostly use VMware vSphere.

The support for VMware vSphere can be fast or it can be slow. Recently it has been slow, they need to decrease the wait time and quality of their support.

The initial setup of VMware vSphere is simple. However, I have been using similar solutions for 15 years making the process simple.

The installation took approximately 15 minutes. However, the installation itself is very easy but you need to do the configurations and integrations which can be more difficult depending on the customer's needs and their infrastructure.

We use one person for the implementation of VMware vSphere. For the maintenance and support of the solution, the amount of people needed depends on the infrastructure and size of the customer.

Our customers typically use permanent licenses, not subscription-based. However, there are subscript-based licenses.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate VMware vSphere a nine out of ten.

It is used for some databases to the application server and any load that you can think about.

There are many features that are valuable and that excites me. However, it totally depends upon the customer. I'm working on the behalf of a service provider, who supports a customer. How useful it depends on what kind of licensing the customer carries.

The initial setup is straightforward and not overly complex.

Its scalability potential is good.

The solution is quite stable. 

Technical support has been good.

I can't speak to any missing features. It has everything I need.

I've been using the solution for ten years.

We have found the solution to be stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution can scale and expands well. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

The solution offers helpful and responsive technical support. We're quite satisfied with eh level of service on offer. 

We have found the setup process to be simple and straightforward. There wasn't too much complexity or difficulty.

We are with one of the service providers. I'm managing VMware.

We are not working with the latest version of the solution. We're working with, for example, N-1.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We are very happy with its capabilities and don't have anything negative to say.

We are using VMware vSphere to manage the virtual environment. We use it for visibility and for managing the host.

What I want to see, I can get easily from VMware vSphere, because I know how to navigate it, as I've been using it for years. I also don't have issues with its operation, stability, and security. I also find the VMware support team diligent when they assisted me with the issues I raised.

Before the latest versions of this software, we used to work with versions 5.5 and below. We used VMware vSphere as a client, as an application, e.g. it was not web-based. Now that has changed, because they've moved it from the application to the web-based version. It's the only change I've seen which I found very difficult because it was challenging to connect to the web, particularly because it can be very slow. It freezes, unlike the app version which was absolutely perfect.

The performance was better with VMware vSphere as an app, but not with the web-based client. The web-based client could be improved, in terms of its speed. It could be faster, but I also just learned that since everything is moving to cloud, there's a reason why there's a web-based client now.

I have been using VMware vSphere for almost 10 years.

I don't have any problems with the stability and security of VMware vSphere.

I had to engage with the VMware technical support team once or twice last year because we had a disaster, and they were able to assist me diligently.

The installation for VMware vSphere was a one-time installation. You do it once,  and that's it.

I had a consultant do the VMware vSphere installation for me.

We pay for the license of VMware vSphere yearly.

We are using VMware solutions. We are running the VMware standard edition. We also have VMware vSphere and VMware ESXi.

We are running the latest version of VMware vSphere: 7.0. We started with version four of this software.

I wouldn't say that there are features that I like the most about VMware vSphere, because it's just a normal management console. It's a default client management software for the virtual environment. It's just a console that we use.

We have been using the software since we enrolled into the virtual CRR, so we are used to it. I can't say whether it's easy to use or not, because I've been using it forever. I can't do any comparison. To say it's easy to use or it's not easy to use would not suffice, because I've been using it for years, so I know how to navigate the platform. What I want to see, I can get easily from VMware vSphere.

I don't recall the last time we installed the software, and even if it was a difficult process, I wouldn't know, because that would best be answered by the technical team, who keeps installing it for different lines. For me it was something that was done once.

We only have one engineer who takes care of the deployment and maintenance of VMware vSphere. The software is only used by fewer than five people, e.g. just the administrators. We're not increasing the number of users, because there are only just a few people needed to man the environment.

I would recommend VMware vSphere to others, particularly because when I contacted them about some issues, they assisted me diligently.

From one to ten, I'm rating VMware vSphere an eight.

When you talk about performance improvement of VMware vSphere, you have to look at other factors. You look at the whole infrastructure. You can't look at the software alone, because when it comes to performance, you also have to look at your hardware. You have to look at your storage. It isn't just the software, e.g. VMware vSphere, that you are using. For example, the last time we had an issue, it wasn't only because of the VMware side. It was also because of our storage, e.g. Our storage capacity was full, so we had to engage VMware. To improve performance, the VMware infrastructure as a whole should be improved, which means changing the storage, storage accessories, etc. VMware vSphere is only connected, and it's only a software that is running on the hardware, so to improve performance, we also need to talk about and look into the hardware aspects of the solution.

We use vSphere for virtualization in the IT center. It's the solution we use for publishing our server which supports up to 1,000 users currently. With vSphere, stability comes easily; it's nothing like physical hardware.

In terms of overall features, vSphere's stability stands out on top. Not only is it highly stable, but we're also able to have a quick backup server on standby.

Without a lot of physical RAM on the hardware, it's not very effective. The stability could be improved in cases like this. In addition, I would like to see easier and more widely available integration options.

I've been using VMware vSphere for three years. 

It's a stable product and we have a backup server in case anything goes wrong with the virtual server we have running. 

For our business case, the scalability is good enough. 

The technical support is all right. 

Installation is very easy when it comes to virtualization of machines by the hypervisor. It only takes about 20 minutes.

We have three members that handle deployment and ongoing maintenance. These are two administrators plus a senior staff member.

In order to maintain stability, you should ensure that your physical machine is equipped with enough RAM, else it becomes ineffective. 

I can recommend vSphere without hesitation. I would rate it an eight out of ten.