VMware vSphere Reviews

The solution is a hypervisor. 

If you're looking at virtualization, it's probably the most stable virtualization platform that I have worked on. 

VMware offers one of the most stable if not the most stable virtualization hypervisor.

The solution makes navigation very easy. 

It makes migration very simple. 

There is a lot of very impressive innovation happening within the product right now.

The integration capabilities are excellent. 

We've found the product to be quite scalable.

The installation is quite straightforward.

You can do so much out of the box with their product, with their built-in technology. In vSphere, you can manage the hardware itself using the same platform.

The licensing costs for the solution are quite high.

I've been using the solution for about seven years now. It's been a good amount of time.

The stability of the solution is excellent. There aren't any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability is very good. You can scale down or scale up provided you have the right licensing. 

There aren't users on the solution per se. Our IT team is mainly involved with it. That's it. We have three engineers that manage it.

I'm not sure if we will expand this product. It depends on what might happen next as one of the things that we will be embarking on is HCI technology. VMware came into HCI, however, there are multiple vendors such as Dell or HPE. It depends on how everything turns out in terms of the IT strategy. They're not that cheap.

I personally have never had to ask for support from VMware's technical team. In the last six to seven years, I have never had to directly ask VMware for anything. Therefore, I can't speak to how knowledgeable or responsive they are.

Previously, we were using mainly the normal Windows hypervisor, Hyper-V. At my previous employer, we used to also have Xen hypervisor.

The installation of the product is straightforward. It's really not too complex. All you do is install and click through. You put in your networking and you're done. Out of the box, it's great. However, if you do need to do some configurations, it can get a bit complex. 

I did not handle the installation process myself, and therefore can't speak to the actual amount of time it took to deploy.

One of the problems with the solution is the pricing. The licenses are not cheap.

We do pay a yearly licensing fee. Originally, it was a five-year package. Now we pay either every 12 or every 24 months.

If I have three hosts, just three hosts, a minimum of three hosts plus the vSphere and Center, I'm almost spending close to $250,000 a year. That's half a million in every two years inside just three hosts. In a serious medium enterprise where we would need at least 20 hosts, it means our annual fee or annual license cost could jump into the million-dollar range which means in three years you're spending three million alone on software.

We're just customers and end-users. 

I would recommend the solution to other organizations, so long as they've got the money. If you don't have the money you probably want to look at things that are open source. It's not a one size fits all kind of product. I say this because of the licenses. The amount of money you spend on licenses annually might be less somewhere else. For a medium enterprise, if you want a cross-platform sort of initial hypervisor I would say yes, VMware is a good option. Of course, there's always something better than VMware as well. For example, Nutanix is way ahead if you are a big enterprise.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. If it was less expensive, it would basically be perfect.

The product is primarily used for my main server for the main business. All the servers are on it.

The interface that the product offers is very easy to navigate. I learned it quite easily. I check the hypervisor interface on it. It's much easier for one who is familiar with the technology. 

The details that I get from the solution are great. It gives a lot of detail.

The product has been pretty easy to use overall.

The stability is okay.

Technical support was helpful and knowledgeable. 

I would prefer it if there was a better connection between the storage and the server. For that reason, I'm going to HCI or dHCI. I want to integrate it all into one interface and I can't do that here. That's why I'm going to HCI or dHCI.

The initial setup is a bit complex. You likely will need some help with the implementation. It's not something just anyone can do.

I've been using the solution for 15 years at this point. it's been a long time. I have a lot of experience with the product as I've worked with it for over a decade now. 

The solution's stability is okay. For us, it's enough. There aren't issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't seem to crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The scalability depends on the hardware. If your hardware allows you to expand, it shouldn't be an issue.

Every year we increase storage, and therefore we regularly increase usage. However, I am planning to replace our current storage.

I have dealt with technical support in the past. It was less with VMware, and more with the vSphere storage. Once or twice I needed help. It was pretty good. I found them to be knowledgeable and responsive. I would say we are satisfied with the level of support on offer.

The initial setup is not really straightforward or simple to execute. 

I didn't do it myself. That would have been a bit much for me. I needed an integrator to do it. It's a bit complex to do.

In terms of the deployment time, when we last did it four years ago, it took about one week to get everything up and running.

We have one technical person on our team that assists with deployment and maintenance. They are an admin.

I enlisted the help of an integrator that mostly did the installation for us.

We do pay for the solution. It's on a yearly basis.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this product. When I started to use it about 15 years ago, it was the only tool option to work with.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

Overall, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. I would say that we are quite happy with its capabilities overall. 

It's the main virtualization solution for our clients.

The HA and DRS are very valuable.

It is a very stable solution.

Integration with other environments was simple to achieve.

The initial setup is simple even for complex environments. The documentation for implementation is very good.

VMware vSphere has great technical support.

The documentation could be improved. It does not help me to show the client the value of going with VMware vSphere rather than an open source or cheaper solution.

If we have extensive documentation that is complete and helps us understand all the features, it will help us to try to propose the solution itself and try to show the value of going with it.

I've been using VMware vSphere for more than twenty years.

When compared to the stability of other solutions, VMware vSphere is by far the most favorable.

Compared to Microsoft's technical support, it's by far the best experience that we've had.

The initial setup is very simple. Even for more complex environments, it's really pretty simple. The available documentation is complete, which helps specialists create more complex solutions in VMware.

This is not the cheapest solution, but when you consider the stability of VMware vSphere, it is a great solution.

My clients evaluated Hyper-V because they use a Microsoft environment.

I recommend that they get familiar with the technology and also with the documentation for implementation. It's really complete. I would also recommend that they obtain the training available online, which is really good.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at ten.

The primary use case is enterprise virtualization for server consolidation, energy conservation, data center space conservation, and overall efficiency and scalability.

The mission-critical apps we use it for are everything from machine-learning to business processing to scientific research and development.

We have absolutely seen a performance boost, in particular with some of our legacy applications. For some of the legacy apps, we have seen at least a 75 percent increase. In addition, some of the newer applications have also seen a boost because they're just more efficient running on VM rather than on bare metal. For the newer apps, depending on how they're optimized, the increase has been at least 10 percent.

Another benefit we have seen is the many-to-one relationship of VMs to hardware, versus one-to-one. It's a real win-win for our data center. It's a win-win for taxpayer dollars. And from a scalability point of view, we're able to rapidly scale workloads where we weren't able to do so before, working with just our pure hardware.

In addition to that, it really fits nicely into our automation efforts, where we can dramatically reduce the deployment times for applications and the services we provide.

The most valuable features for us are DRS, VMotion, and, of course, some of the analytics that we were able to define to quantify our workloads and tell us how we are able to make our data center more efficient.

It's absolutely efficient and simple to manage in general. Set it up, configure it, then monitor, manage, and maintain. That's it. What makes it simple to manage is that we use a flavor of Auto Deploy, storage policies, among other features around policies, where they come online and their policies are in them. Everything conforms to a policy. It's pretty much set up for good.

I'd like to see a little bit more integration for VDI. I think that Composer servers, security servers, broker servers with connections, I'm not sure they are necessary at this point. Perhaps they could have a lot of those functions baked directly into the hypervisor. It seems to me that if the hypervisor is scalable and flexible enough, that the processor and compute can handle all of that. Maybe we eliminate those other components for VDIs and have more mixed workloads: server workloads and desktop workloads all in the same hypervisor.

Having been a customer for a long time, and running this for well over a decade, stability has not been a problem. It has its nuances, it's not perfect, but stability hasn't been an issue.

Scalability has been the goal all along here, to be able to meet in the middle of the scalability, horizontally and vertically. We have over 10,000 users.

We've used technical support in the past. It was "fair" in the beginning, it's certainly better now. We don't necessarily rely too much on support now because there's such a breadth of knowledge in the community and among other customers so that everybody is connected.

I've been involved from the beginning until the end. In the early days, before ESX, we worked with what was called GSX, or Ground Storm X. It wasn't easy, but once you got it configured it worked and it did what it was supposed to do. We didn't have any major issues.

It was all self-installed. A lot of it was a matter of reading the directions, following them, and going to "next".

One of the things I think a lot of people are inherently bad about is assuming ROI and never quantifying it. Where I am, we've done a pretty good job of quantifying over the years. We've not only studied everything down to the number of Velcro ties used but the number of cores, the cost per core for network, even power cords, and including the consumption of water. 

We've been able to quantify virtualizing everything we can, instead of just assuming it, for ROI. We have been able to show quite a bit of good discipline around that. Again, on behalf of tax-payer dollars, I feel confident that with our shift to virtualization over a decade ago, we can definitely quantify our ROI. It's really simple.

Data-centers grow in a different direction now. They grow smaller and they become very dense, very lean, and that, unto itself, shows an ROI. There's really not a whole lot of assuming at this point that needs to be done. It's just there. You can quantify it very easily.

I have recommended VMware over the at least 12 years now that I've been working directly with them and VMware's hypervisor products. I've recommended it to a lot of folks, and this goes back to the days when other players were involved; companies like Virtual Iron and Zen. VMware has always been a leader in that space and I foresee that they always will be.

Although I work in government, we are actively pursuing VMware on Cloud and we are awaiting certain certifications to help drive the initiative. At the moment we're at a standstill with that.

In over a decade, from where we started until where we are today, I would say that this solution is right around a 10 out of 10. And I can confidently say that for any customer. Even for those who are just starting up, you're working with a product that's tried and true. It didn't just come out yesterday. It's been here for a very long time.

The HA and DRS capabilities are great. Right now, we’re able to basically use the ESXi and move all the blades without the users ever knowing anything was different.

Having all the VMs and everything work without the user experience being affected.

That’s a hard question since I don’t know what new features there are in v6 other than single-user sign-on. I’m curious to see the release of v6 here, as I want to see how the client version works. I also want to get an overall view of how it works, as well as how well the mobile management works.

Of course it has room for improvement, but it’s the best in the field as there’s not many better options.

It’s been very stable for us. I’m still on version 5.5, so one of the things I wanted to do is check out if 6 is worth upgrading to.

We don’t have many users, and right now, it’s just me who's running this solution. For the VMs, we’ve been able to get requests from my internal customers to just improve on the sizes, and it works very, very well.

I’ve had mixed results primarily because I’ve had issues that have dragged on for a while, but for the most part in terms of responsiveness and explanation they’ve been very good. Once I articulate my problem to them, they explain the steps to take next very well.

We had lots of servers, and the costs were also huge. The cost was not only in buying hardware, but also looking at, in the data center, the footprint that we were taking up, and having to pay for all of that. Thus, we knew we needed to become more cost effective, and we were able to move from many locations into one server location in a chassis.

The environment that I manage now was set up about six years ago. We had an outsourcer (third-party) set it up since we wanted a professional to setup a new technology. He royally screwed it up, and we had to come back, completely rip it up, and restart. VMware had to help us get it back up to speed since that point.

Capabilities, as we do a bake-off to essentially evaluate options. We look at multiple vendors, and see if they meet X and Y demands, and see who does it best.

I have a list of things that I think I need, but it helps to see what others need and want as well. After seeing their pros and cons, we can reevaluate on what we need in our environment accordingly.

VMWare was the vendor that won last time, nobody wanted Hyper-V. We looked at Hyper-V and VMWare only, and nobody wanted Hyper-V. VMWare delivered far better test results.

Without explicitly saying look at VMWare, understand what functions you need in your products, look at different vendors and what they claim to provide, and then bring them in house to see if they deliver on their claims. They have to pass all of the tests that your company needs.

The most common use case for VMware vSphere is, of course, virtualization, specifically operating system virtualization. We also have containers that are running on them.

Essentially, we have the flexibility for a hybrid cloud. We could easily move workloads from on-premises to the cloud and vice versa if we were running on-premises and cloud, which is one of the most important points in the new releases, in particular.

The quality of support could be better.

We have been using VMware vSphere for six to seven years.

We have dealt with various versions that range from 5.5 to 7.

VMware vSphere is a stable solution.

In our organization, we have at least 60,000 users.

It is being used extensively. It is one of the core products in the infrastructure.

Support has not been as good as it once was. It used to be better, but it appears that the quality of support is declining for some reason. I'm not sure why.

Previously, we were using Hyper-V, but I don't have a lot of experience using it.

The initial setup was quite straightforward. It's very simple.

The time it takes to set up will vary, but it will most likely be within a day. You could set up the environment in a day. It is determined by a variety of factors. If it is done by an experienced engineer, it will be done within a day. If not, it will take longer.

We have a team of three engineers to deploy and maintain this solution.

Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis. The license is a one-time payment. You buy it once and own it forever, but you must pay for support, which is provided by the vendor, on a yearly basis.

We are also using NSX and vSAN. We have been using NSX for three years.

It's not strictly a cloud solution; it can be on-premises as well as in the cloud. It is, in essence, a network virtualization solution. It can be used for virtualizing the network, virtual routers, virtual switches, and virtual firewalls.

Virtualization and on-demand networking are two of the benefits. On-demand networking is the best option if I can memorize it. If you need virtual switches, we can create them as well as routers.

Virtualization would be our area of expertise.

VMware vSphere is, in my opinion, one of the best in its class on the market. However, depending on the use cases, we could certainly recommend it.

I would rate VMware vSphere a nine out of ten.

There are two versions of function more popular in our industry. One is the VMware solution, and one is Hyper-V. We choose VMware. We manage the VMware solutions with the vSphere. If you have a VMware solution, we have to use vSphere. However, if we choose Microsoft we have to use Microsoft management tools.

It is easy to deploy and manage backups for me. That said, I've used it a long time and therefore am quite comfortable with it. Upgrades and restores are simple.

The product is stable as well.

The scalability has been good.

Technical support could be a bit better at assisting. 

The solution should be more secure. Of course, it can depend on the deployment of your system on your side. Sometimes if the system is closed, you don't necessarily need more security. However, since we use different applications and tools, we must use different tools. We don't combine our security tools. However, we need to ensure that products like these are secure, and it would be ideal if more security was baked in.  

I've been using the solution for about 14 years or so. It's been well over a decade. I've used it for a while now.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Scalability is very simple. You can improve or expand it as needed. It's not a problem at all if you want to expand it out. 

vSphere is for managing an organization's solutions management software. The size is not based on the number of users. Only IT, those responsible for managing the system center, or the hardware, or software of the solutions really have access to the product.

Technical support isn't ideal. They are slow to respond. We've had issues previously.

We also have used Microsoft's Hyper-V solution.

I find the solution, based on my long history with the product, very easy to set up. It's a pretty straightforward step-by-step process.

Typically, you just need one person to set it up. It only takes maybe an hour or so. Of course, the first time a person does an implementation, they might go slower.

We have two people on the system side and five people on the software side that are capable of working directly with the product.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need the help of any integrators or consultants. I'm capable of reinstalling it or doing a whole new setup as needed. 

We pay a yearly licensing fee. 

We're using version seven or thereabouts. 

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

I would recommend it to other users and companies. 

We primarily use the solution for virtualization.

The solution offers a very stable performance. 

It's a scalable product. 

The solution is extremely reliable. It's an excellent product.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

Technical support has always been great.

The pricing of the product is reasonable.

The latest version of the solution has a few bugs. This may be due to the fact that they moved to web-based management. There are some problems in that web-based management, however, it's a minimal issue.

I've been using the solution for seven or eight years at this point. I've used it for a while. 

The solution is very stable and very reliable. The performance has been great. In the version we are using, there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is very scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

I'm not sure of the exact number of users, however, we do have the solution installed on 4,000 machines. 

Technical support has been excellent. They are helpful and responsive. We have no complaints. Their level of service is always good. 

The initial setup was straightforward and not overly complex. Although it took us a couple of weeks before we installed it, the deployment only took about one day or one and a half days.

We had three engineers that handled the deployment. 

We handled the initial setup ourselves. We did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant.

There's a yearly licensing fee, however, it isn't overly expensive. 

Up until now, we use the product on-premises, however, currently, we are developing a hybrid cloud. We are moving to the cloud solution and the base, the transition system is, VMware vSphere.

While we use the solution's 6.7 version, the latest version is version 7.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I've been very happy with the capabilities of the product.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations.