Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

VMware vSphere OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

VMware vSphere is #1 ranked solution in best Server Virtualization Software. PeerSpot users give VMware vSphere an average rating of 8.8 out of 10. VMware vSphere is most commonly compared to Hyper-V: VMware vSphere vs Hyper-V. VMware vSphere is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 60% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 19% of all views.
VMware vSphere Buyer's Guide

Download the VMware vSphere Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is VMware vSphere?

VMware vSphere is the leading server virtualization platform with consistent management for virtual data centers.

Deliver business value from day one with powerful server virtualization, breakthrough availability, safe automated management and intelligent operational insight that adapts to your environment. Automate workload placement and resource optimization based on preset customizable templates.

VMware vSphere Customers

Abu Dhabi Ports Company, ACS, AIA New Zealand, Consona, Corporate Express, CS Energy, and Digiweb.

VMware vSphere Video

VMware vSphere Pricing Advice

What users are saying about VMware vSphere pricing:
  • "I think it's a fair price. We are using it on the production side, and everything is good from our experience. That's why I would say that the cost isn't too high. However, it would always be nice if it was cheaper."
  • "This solution is quite expensive, but it provides the same functionality as its competitors."
  • "It is a perpetual licensing but there is also an annual maintenance cost."
  • "We pay for the license of VMware vSphere yearly."
  • "Container support is the last great addition for VMware and it is worth the money you spend on it."
  • "The licensing cost is strictly based on the number of CPUs that your hosts have."
  • VMware vSphere Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Owner at a transportation company with 1-10 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    An easy way of providing near-zero downtime services
    Pros and Cons
    • "An easy way of providing near-zero downtime services, the operation of the instances between clustered services, and providing the projected SLA for our customers."
    • "Monitoring information could always be improved."

    What is our primary use case?

    Firstly, we use it to provide an infrastructure for a development environment. Secondly, we use it to provide services to end-users. A kind of clustered services, where underneath, there are plenty of virtual machines. Thirdly, these solutions were chosen because of the easy way of providing backups and zero downtime between accidents and issues. 

    What is most valuable?

    VMware vSphere provides an easy way of providing near-zero downtime services, the operation of the instances between clustered services, and providing the projected SLA for our customers. 

    Mostly, we use a gap solution for PaaS and IaaS levels of solutions. We also use Kubernetes on the application layer and downtime to move to a different layer of workloads. 

    However, we still use plain virtual machine platform environments because we are leveraging just on-premise servers. We can't, or we don't want to fully move into clouds. That's why it's important for us to use a solution like VMware vSphere. 

    What needs improvement?

    I'm not aware of every option that our solution provides, but I see mostly two things. Provide a better solution for hybrid clouds and migration to the cloud. That could be one thing. The second one is providing some integration with different solutions at the application level, such as Kubernetes.

    There is always a problem that the application level solutions are not aware of lower levels of infrastructure, of architecture. Some bundled applications with a stack of new VMs with better templates, including the deployment of such things. Monitoring could also be improved.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using VMware vSphere for more than 10 years.

    Buyer's Guide
    VMware vSphere
    September 2022
    Learn what your peers think about VMware vSphere. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
    633,572 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    I think it's stable. We have encountered a major issue twice during the last four or five years. But it was not related only to vSphere but solutions like extensions to the software we use. 

    However, there was no downtime, there was some issue, but I would say that the solution is quite stable. We have been using it for a few years without any major incidents that I am aware of.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    To my knowledge, it's quite scalable and elastic in terms of providing bigger throughputs and managing higher volumes of requests at the end, but our cases currently are not like the biggest. 

    I think most of the solutions available right now are set up for the infrastructure. The hardware is enough for the performance level we want to have. It's enough, and if we wanted to improve it, there is space for that. 

    However, I can tell you that this solution was stable in my first project. Between 2010 and 2014, at a different company, the solution provided everything that I needed at that moment. There were no problems with scaling this solution.

    However, we had problems with the hardware limits. We reached the limit, but it was quite good with vSphere solutions because even if we reached the point of having no hardware, like memory and computers, we managed to provide stable workloads for our customers. We gained the level of performance we wanted to have.

    We were dealing with a complex situation dynamically, and the solution provided us with the tools, and the scalability was not an issue. However, we had problems with the hardware limits.

    How are customer service and support?

    The support could be better when it comes to opening and responding to a ticket. But it was within a reasonable time. However, I'm don't have direct contact with the support, and my team's not giving me information about any issues.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    My experience was with the public sector. That was rather complex from the start. In my previous experiences, if we wanted to use vSphere, that was after we tried some different techniques, and we had reached the limit of it or the complexity of the setup. 

    That's why we wanted to move to simplify it. The setup was immature, and we needed to provide better service for customers. That's why we choose to use vSphere. The complex one was the other option.

    How was the initial setup?

    The setup takes about one or two days or something in-between.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    VMware vSphere is a top enterprise solution, so we pay the price for a major product.  We use vSphere because when we get the project, the customers were already using it. But currently, for example, if we have a new project and we are setting up our environment, and we have no constraints about the technology, like using vSphere, we rather go for Proxmox.

    We are using it because it was already there before. The cost of migration, for example, is too high to move into different solutions, and the cost of keeping it is enough, and so we accept it. 

    Overall, I would like to have cheaper licensing costs and maybe a different policy for licensing. However, we don't see that as a big issue because we are paying for a good solution. 

    That's why I think it's a fair price. We are using it on the production side, and everything is good from our experience. That's why I would say that the cost isn't too high. However, it would always be nice if it was cheaper.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Proxmox is cost-effective and good. For example, if we have some projects where the hardware is provided by our customers, and we can use any technology we want.

    Proxmox, in most cases, is good for creating some development and staging environment. Because it's cost-effective, we can afford to have a solution based on that technology. 

    In most cases, I know that it's not limiting us in terms of the operating systems we use, and my team is quite happy when using such solutions. But it's not the production solution that we use at the end. It's mostly temporary for a few months, and we are using it because of the cost and because there will be an easy way to deploy. We can start to use it and move our environment between the projects. It's quite easy and quite quick.

    With different technologies like Grafana, we gain information from infrastructure and application-level from different sources, and we integrate it into a different solution.

    However, monitoring information could always be improved. Integrating with the application level could be improved, and monitoring could also be extended to that. Providing us with a more complex and just a one-click solution for seeing everything, how the infrastructure and how integrations are behaving, and the levels of infrastructure and application services would be a nice solution to have.

    What other advice do I have?

    I think the decision needs to be made by the architects of the solution. They need to be aware of the cost of such solutions, their requirements, and the constraints of such technologies. From a technological point, it's always a good solution. However, it might not be the best solution in terms of the total cost of ownership, and maybe there are better solutions like Proxmox.

    I would give VMware vSphere a solid eight out of ten. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    PeerSpot user
    Server Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Good high availability, easy to scale, and pretty stable overall
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution has high availability."
    • "The biggest pain point is probably the firmware management of the underlying hardware. It could be a lot better."

    What is our primary use case?

    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

    What is most valuable?

    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. 

    What needs improvement?

    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.

    For how long have I used the solution?

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

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    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.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    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.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    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.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    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.

    How was the initial setup?

    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.

    What about the implementation team?

    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.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    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. 

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    VMware vSphere
    September 2022
    Learn what your peers think about VMware vSphere. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
    633,572 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Head of Service and Storage Infrastructure at GS2E
    Real User
    Top 20
    Strong performance, works well with large infrastructures but it is quite expensive
    Pros and Cons
    • "We primarily use vRealize to troubleshoot any issues that may arise with our virtual machines, which is the main reason why we believe this solution is excellent."
    • "They must work on the price, as well as the technical support."

    What is our primary use case?

    It is primarily our server virtualization solution. We have approximately 2,000 servers, all of which are running VMware vSphere.

    How has it helped my organization?

    In terms of the benefits, I'll take you back to 2010, when we first implemented this solution. We only have physical servers, and we have a lot of projects because my company works in the energy industry.

    We have many projects that could not be completed on physical servers because we have 2,000 servers.

    If we were to do all of these projects on a physical server and our data center, we would have to travel all over the country. As a result, VMware aided us in server consolidation.

    It aided us in server consolidation, and with VMware, we were able to provision applications for our customers very quickly. As a result, the time to manage was extremely short. So that is the advantage that we can find with VMware.

    What is most valuable?

    The product is extremely powerful.

    We have had a module called vRealize for three years. We primarily use vRealize to troubleshoot any issues that may arise with our virtual machines, which is the main reason why we believe this solution is excellent. When a user has a problem, it does not have to be that his application is very slow or that it can't work. Using vRealize, we can determine which part of the solution is causing the problem and resolve it.

    What needs improvement?

    The cost is an area that could be improved. Today, there are many hypervisor solutions on the market that are less expensive and provide the same functionality. They share the same characteristics. I believe that one area where VMware can improve is in pricing, as we have found VMware products to be on the expensive side at times.

    I'm only considering the VMware solution, with the cloud solution. I would like to see cloud integration, such as cloud service and cloud feature, in the vSphere license. That's exactly what I'm looking for.

    In terms of cost, I believe there is room for improvement. They must work on the price, as well as the technical support.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using VMware vSphere for approximately 12 years.

    Last year, we made some upgrades, and are now using the most recent version.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    In terms of stability, we don't have any major issues with that product.

    It is very reliable, and the product is very stable. 

    It is a strong product, and it is dependable. Most of the time we have not had any problems with this product. It doesn't happen very often, I believe the product is very good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    VMware vSphere is a scalable product. We had about five host servers, we gradually increased to 10, and now we have approximately 40 host servers running long VMware vSphere. It is simple to add a new server to the clusters.

    We are a group of four administrators who are working on a solution. However, with VMware vSphere, we place software for the company, such as customers.

    When I refer to the company, it's not the outside customers, I am referring to employees in company fields such as HR and accounting. We have 5,000 people working in our company, and they are all using the VMware vSphere software that we provide to them.

    It is used on a daily basis because we are constantly confronted with the extension of results such as CPU, RAM, and storage. We use vSphere on a daily basis.

    How are customer service and support?

    We are pleased with VMware's vSphere global support.

    If you give me a notation, on 10, 20, or something like that where the scale is set at 20, I will give them a 14 out of 20, because I believe they are no longer as good as they once were. The VMware support is now of lower quality. I will give them a 14 out of 20.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We started with VMware. 

    I already have VMware and Nutanix in my infrastructure.

    How was the initial setup?

    It wasn't difficult. I think I learned it about a month after I started, and I was able to deploy VMware vSphere.

    This solution is being maintained by four administrators. We have 2,000 virtual machines, also known as VMs, and 40 host servers. We are a group of four people who do all of the patching and maintenance work.

    What about the implementation team?

    We had a consultant to help us with the initial setup.

    What was our ROI?

    Yes, I have seen a return on investment, but I am not the appropriate person to tell you about it. Our company is large in size. There are people working on it, doing economic studies to see if we can get a return on investment. What I can tell you is that there is a return on investment. But I can't tell you the specifics right now.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    This solution is quite expensive, but it provides the same functionality as its competitors.

    Today, you have the Nutanix Hypervisor, which I believe is AHV and is also very good. However, because our infrastructure is so large, we have Nutanix servers that are similar to Hyperconverged, but we run VMware on them. However, we have some other sites where we have installed the Nutanix Hypervisor, which is AHV. And it is effective. And it's free if you buy the Nutanix bundle.

    The license is expensive. It is powered by the CPU. The more CPU' you have, the more you have to buy.

    What other advice do I have?

    I'll say that if you want the vSphere solution for all virtualization, you should first look at the size of your infrastructure. If it is small, you don't have to go to, as I previously stated, Hyper-V or another solution. However, if you are starting with a medium or large size, you should use a solution like VMware because its performance is very strong. And, because we have a large infrastructure, we can see that it works very well. This is my advice to anyone looking for server virtualization software.

    I would rate VMware vSphere a seven out of ten. It has been difficult for me to find a VMware engineer to work on my project. They don't seem to be very close to the customers, in my opinion. That is the main reason I gave this score of seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Bilal Aslam - PeerSpot reviewer
    Founder & Technology Advisor at EUC Solutions
    Real User
    Top 20
    Easy to set up and maintain, feature-rich, professional support
    Pros and Cons
    • "It is the number one virtualization-layer platform available, and a lot of people trust it."
    • "To manage it properly, you have to know this product really well."

    What is our primary use case?

    The primary reason our customers use vSphere is to consolidate their workloads and realize the other benefits that virtualization provides. For example, they create HA or VM-level HA to facilitate DR.

    Essentially, our clients use vSphere for all of the reasons that people use a virtualization layer.

    I am a virtualization technician, doing software technology consulting for virtualization and VDI. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    This is a solution that is normally very straightforward. It doesn't give you many surprises. It's very stable. However, one should have good knowledge when it comes to it because sometimes, you have to use the command line for troubleshooting. For unseen problems, you sometimes need to dig deep to troubleshoot.

    What is most valuable?

    vSphere is a robust and feature-rich virtualization platform. It is the number one virtualization-layer platform available, and a lot of people trust it.

    Many other platforms now provide similar features but VMware was the first to provide enhanced recorders, DRS, fault tolerance, vMotion, and others. They pioneered these features and they are very stable.

    VMware also provides software-defined storage, vSAN, which is built into the kernel. This is a plus point.

    Other good features include DRS, HA, fault tolerance, vSAN, and vCenter is a very good management interface.

    This platform is easy to maintain. 

    What needs improvement?

    To manage it properly, you have to know this product really well. For the most part, it is very easy to use.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I began working with VMware vSphere in 2007 or 2008 when it was version 3.x. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This is the most stable virtualization platform available.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    In the three years that I have been running my consultancy, I've found that VMware is always part of a large project. Most of the time, I have had a good experience with it.

    We have done multiple enterprise services projects using this solution. For example, we were working on a Horizon View PoC for a client.

    vSphere is scalable; you just have to add to your cluster and it will increase. You can scale up or scale-out, like any other software. Basically, you can add to it as much as you want to.

    I trust VMware products and I definitely want our installed base to increase. I want to enhance my own knowledge and skillset, as well. As we move forward and expand, I am equipping myself with more cloud knowledge and focusing on new technologies. One new product that I am looking at is Carbon Black. Throughout this, I will continue to promote VMware because they are a vendor that I trust.

    How are customer service and support?

    The VMware support is very professional. Most of the time we've used them, they were very good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    As a technology consultant working for customers with varying requirements, I work with other virtualization platforms. Two of these are Microsoft Hyper-V and Citrix XenServer.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is very easy and there is nothing difficult about it. Initially, some people get stuck when they are setting up the supporting services, like DNS, but other than that, the setup is plain and simple.

    The length of time required for deployment depends on whether your disk is an SSD. If so, then the copying will be fast. Also, if you have more memory then it will install quicker. 

    Regardless of how it is set up, you have to build the basic infrastructure to put in most of your workloads. Sometimes, you manage an existing one but most of the time, we have to deploy a VMware infrastructure.

    A single person can basically manage it, although this depends upon the deployment size. If it's a huge deployment, then it requires a good design and it requires proper planning. You need to know your capacity requirements, for example.

    If you understand the environment and the design then maybe you can segregate the work into two or three people. Sometimes if it's a small project, a single person can do it. It all depends on the files and complexity of the solution you are providing to the customer.

    What about the implementation team?

    We deploy this product ourselves.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The licensing model is not complex.

    It is a perpetual licensing but there is also an annual maintenance cost. The price of the solution depends on the features that you want. You can have a very basic setup or you can choose a more advanced set of features. The more features that you want and the more extensive your requirement is, the more you have to pay.

    What other advice do I have?

    In Pakistan, for the most part, organizations are still catching up in terms of the cloud. There are no large data centers because cloud providers do not exist locally. Neither AWS nor Azure has a presence.

    The closest data centers to us are Singapore and Dubai. As such, the cloud is not very popular yet and most of our customers have on-premises deployments. We do expect this to change.

    My advice for anybody who is implementing this product, or any piece of software, is to have a reasonable level of knowledge in advance of the deployment. That is key in IT.

    If you are a consultant, as opposed to an end-user, then you need to have a deep knowledge of the product because there are circumstances where you have to go beyond the normal configuration. Sometimes you have issues that can only be resolved if you are well-equipped with the knowledge.

    I also recommend that people plan their deployment. VMware is a wonderful product and it will definitely provide you with the functionality to meet your technical requirements. You will be a very satisfied customer while using it, but the key is to know the product and plan things properly.

    Overall, this is a good product and I do not feel that there is much missing. It is the best virtualization platform available.

    I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Assitant Director - IT at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Makes it easy to create virtual machines and very stable but could be more user-friendly
    Pros and Cons
    • "It's not a particular feature, really, however, I can say that the solution is just easy to maintain, and makes it easy to backup all those VMs. We can easily save our data and we can deploy VM machines very fast and create the delivery of the server in a pretty simple, dynamic way."
    • "The solution could be a bit more user-friendly."

    What is our primary use case?

    I'm always sort of working with the servers, therefore, whenever there is a requirement for a different kind of server, I deal with it. For example, one of my departments asked me to provide one server where they can store some files. Instead of getting a full physical server, we created some virtual machines on vSphere and gave it to the department so they could store their data there. That is one where we are using the server. Sometimes we buy software from outside, and there are specific requirements on hardware - for example, X amount much of RAM is required, Y amount of CPU is required, etc., so we try to use the vSphere to create the virtual machines for that.

    What is most valuable?

    It's not a particular feature, really, however, I can say that the solution is just easy to maintain, and makes it easy to backup all those VMs. We can easily save our data and we can deploy VM machines very fast and create the delivery of the server in a pretty simple, dynamic way.

    Our company has very limited requirements. We just create VMs and deploy VMs on the machine and give the users access. It's solving our problems perfectly. I'm not using any advanced features right now, however, it is sufficient. 

    It's very simple and I really like it overall. 

    What needs improvement?

    I can't think of any features that are missing. I'm not really using any advanced options and don't have complex requirements.

    The solution could be a bit more user-friendly.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for eight years now. It's been quite a while.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is very stable. We've never had any issues. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand it out, they can do so with relative ease.

    There are four or five users that work directly with the solution, however, we have it deployed to many departments, so it's used quite a bit in the company. We have about 10-20 servers that are running on the machines.

    Right now, we're happy with it, however, we may move to a different product that is even more scalable in the future, That's yet to be decided.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I've dealt with technical support in the past. Whenever we've logged a ticket, it's resolved very well. Everyone is quite knowledgeable, and whenever there is a requirement to follow a query, their tech team resolves those queries very efficiently and our problems were always resolved. We're pretty satisfied with their level of service.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We didn't previously use a different product.

    We're considering moving to a different product in the future that could potentially scale even better than this. The reason we haven't moved yet is the fact that it's not easy for us to deploy and migrate all the machines from VMware to any other product.

    How was the initial setup?

    We didn't actually handle the installation, and therefore I can't really talk about the process, as I wasn't involved directly.

    The company that we bought had installed the vSphere for us and that server is still running from last year. We haven't touched it.

    What about the implementation team?

    The solution was actually installed by the company that we ended up buying, and therefore we didn't directly handle any aspect of the implementation.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We have the licensing for the solution and the perpetual license which we have allows us to choose whether we want a support license separate or not. It's not an overly expensive solution. The pricing is average.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We're currently in the process of evaluating other options on the market to see if there are open-source options that could work for us or products that scale even better than vSphere.

    What other advice do I have?

    We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with vSphere.

    We aren't using the latest version of the solution. The near version is sufficient for us and it's solving our requirements.

    Overall, I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

    While I would recommend it due to the fact that it's solving my problems, I am evaluating other products that may be better. There may be an open-source option that could also work for us.  That said, this product is great in that we are using it hassle-free.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    IT Support Officer at a non-profit with 501-1,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Secure and stable platform for managing virtual environments; has a support team that provides diligent assistance
    Pros and Cons
    • "Stable and secure management console for virtual environments, with a diligent technical support team."
    • "The VMware vSphere app is faster, compared to its web-based client. The web-based client is very slow, freezes, and is challenging to use."

    What is our primary use case?

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

    What is most valuable?

    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.

    What needs improvement?

    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.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using VMware vSphere for almost 10 years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

    How are customer service and support?

    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.

    How was the initial setup?

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

    What about the implementation team?

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

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We pay for the license of VMware vSphere yearly.

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    AllanTrambouze - PeerSpot reviewer
    Consultant senior en technologie de l'information at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    Integrates well with containers, easy to scale, and certificate management has improved
    Pros and Cons
    • "VMware Tanzu (container) is the most valuable addition because you get an efficient solution to manage the VM and container in a single pane of glass."
    • "The HR proxy is actually a little bit tricky to install and setup."

    What is our primary use case?

    I use vSphere 7.0.1 for a few reasons. My primary use case is for my lab, as vSphere offers a great versatility to use VDI, containers, distributed Storage, and SDN on the same hardware. I also use vSphere for non-production tasks on Rasberry Pie 4, and it offers a great deal for working with Docker on cheap hardware with a single management interface, vSphere. 

    My lab is composed of three white-box servers with vSAN, a 10 gig network, a local SAN, and all storage with SSD to deliver fast VM.

    I also have vRealize operating to monitor all the VMware components. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    The new version of vSphere now integrates with containers and offers some new improvements inside vSAN, like file sharing. So, with VDI there is no need to add a VM to build a file server.

    With containers, NSX is no longer mandatory and with the VMware operation manager, you can get an integrated monitored platform that can scale easily.

    You will get both hands on the wheel because all of the products are fully interconnected.

    vSphere 7 also adds better certificate management than before (less certificate) and vSAN is also improved in terms of the space management for reconstruction, so you will need less reserved space for this kind of operation. 

    What is most valuable?

    VMware Tanzu (container) is the most valuable addition because you get an efficient solution to manage the VM and container in a single pane of glass.

    The integration of Tanzu inside the base version of vSphere, without the need to install NSX-T, is a great addition. Many IT people don't know NSX-T and NSX can cost a lot, so it could save a lot of money. However, you will not get the enhanced network function due to the lack of NSX-T. 

    The improvements to vSAN with a file server service is also a very valuable feature for many companies because they will be saving with the management of an NFS storage or a file server.

    What needs improvement?

    The HR proxy is actually a little bit harder to install and setup than other vmware products. So, direct integration with a vSphere distributed switch would be great addition, but you can bypass this setup if you chose an NSX-T switch.

    The distributed switch, which is the networking part of vSphere, should have more functions. It should be like VMware NSX-T so that network management with VMware Tanzu will be better, although it is already good.

    vSphere 7.0.1 is not available on ARM computers for production loads. I hope that it will become available soon so that we can run our production web server container on it, for example.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using VMware vSphere for a few months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This product is very stable and reliable. Now certificate management is also improved, the new version of vsphere has only 2 or 3 certificates so it is easier to manage.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    vSpshere 7, like the previous version, is easy to scale up and down. vSAN is the same, and Tanzu as well. vSan need less space for is own management and it is integrating some features like a virtual witness node that improve the scalability. Other new functions inside vsan like file sharing is also a great addition for vsan scalability.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I always get great support from VMware technical team.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I did use the previous version of vSphere and I upgraded for the Tanzu support and VSAN improvement.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial installation of vSphere 7 is straightforward. If you try the ARM version, it is a little more complex but just follow the step-by-step process and it will work.

    For Tanzu, the HR proxy is more complex because you will need to do some network design. For vSAN, VMware gives you a great tool to set your solution up easily.

    What about the implementation team?

    I'm a VM expert so my level of expertise is great. My solution is an in-house one.

    What was our ROI?

    The ROI is very fast due to virtualization, perhaps a couple of months.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    vSphere 7.0.1 offers a lot more than the previous version. Container support is the last great addition for VMware and it is worth the money you spend on it.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I did not evaluate other container solutions. For storage, I also use FreeNAS.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Systems Engineer/Systems Administrator at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    The most feature rich and reliable hypervisor on the market today
    Pros and Cons
    • "Their command-line tools integrate well with other Microsoft products like PowerShell, so I can manipulate VMs using it."
    • "The web user interface can be a bit clunky from time to time, so there may be some room for improvement in that regard."

    What is our primary use case?

    I use vSphere for general server virtualization. I am not doing anything spectacular with it.

    How has it helped my organization?

    vSphere has absolutely improved the way our organization functions. This is because of the ease of management and the number of servers that we are able to virtualize. When we first went to VMware, we took 200 physical servers and converted them to virtual. Instead of running on 200 pieces of hardware, they were running on 8.

    Obviously, this is much easier to manage from a hardware perspective, power perspective, and reliability perspective.

    What is most valuable?

    The vSphere is very good at advanced things like memory sharing between VMs, and CPU scheduling between VMs.

    I use the automation tools that they have today.

    Their command-line tools integrate well with other Microsoft products like PowerShell, so I can manipulate VMs using it.

    The capability to add on new features like site recovery and monitoring is helpful.

    What needs improvement?

    The web user interface can be a bit clunky from time to time, so there may be some room for improvement in that regard.  I was a fan of the C# client for as long as I could use it.  The move from flash to HTML5 for the web interface is an improvement but still not a good as C# was.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with VMware vSphere for approximately 12 years.  Since VI 3.5 days.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    In 12 years, I can think of one time that we've had a server crash. It was one of our host servers and the problem was hardware-related. It was attributed to bad memory on the physical host server, itself.

    The VMware operating system is stable and I've never had it crash.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scaling is very easy. Just build it, acquire a license from them and add it to vCenter.

    We have about 2,000 people in our organization, and everybody has some server on there that they do something with. It may be file services, file servers, or Citrix XenApp servers.  Most of our VMware environment is our legacy servers because they still support older operating systems that I can't put on Hyper-V or AHV. For example, we have a couple of Windows 2000 and Windows 2003 servers. VMware is the only hypervisor that I can run those on.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    It has probably been 10 years since I've had to call support for anything but from what I can remember, they were helpful and they solved our problems. It has been so long that I've had to use them that I would hesitate to give them a perfect rating, since I don't know what they're like today, so I think that rating them a nine out of ten is appropriate.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    vSphere was our first hypervisor.

    Since then we have added additional hypervisors in our environment. We have AHV from Nutanix and Hyper-V from Microsoft.

    AHV doesn't support things like memory sharing, at all, and Hyper-V is just not very good at it.

    How was the initial setup?

    I knew what I was doing, so I found that the initial setup was very straightforward. If an inexperienced user's initial setup involves a little bit of searching in Google then I would think that it wouldn't be very difficult.

    What about the implementation team?

    We did use a vendor for our initial implementation, 12 years ago.  Since then we have done multiple upgrades and I have done several new implementations for other orgs.  They were competent at their work and I learned a lot from them that I used in my future implementations.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Basic vSphere, without centralized management, is free. When you get into the centralized management vCenter server, it starts adding cost. Then, it's license-based upon the number of CPUs in your host servers.

    What other advice do I have?

    VMware vSphere is my preferred hypervisor. It always has been, and always will be. I suggest using it, and not hesitating. I'm sure that they're working on great stuff to enhance this product that I can't even think of, but from my perspective, everything that they do today is great. I don't know what they could possibly do to make my life easier, but I'm sure they'll come up with something.

    I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free VMware vSphere Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: September 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free VMware vSphere Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.