VMware vSphere OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

VMware vSphere is the #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 61% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 18% of all views.
VMware vSphere Buyer's Guide

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

What is VMware vSphere?

VMware vSphere is a powerful and complete server virtualization platform that allows its users to create and manage virtual data centers and machines. VMware vSphere is designed to help IT departments set up and run applications using the most cost-effective computer resources. By using vSphere, organizations save the time and energy necessary for purchasing infrastructure and software and reduce ongoing maintenance and operational burdens on IT teams.

Infrastructure administrators and network operators can access and manage the vSphere server by using a web-based cross-platform client application or via the vSphere client tool provided with vSphere. 

VMware vSphere provides visibility into VMs and enables its users to carry out operations to manage VMs. This includes tasks such as:

  • Powering VMs on and off
  • Launching the VM console
  • Shutting down guest operating systems
  • Settings configurations
  • Taking system snapshots

VMware vSphere Benefits

Some of the benefits of using VMware vSphere include: 

  • Reduced costs: Since VMware applications are run on a server, it is not necessary to spend large amounts of your organization’s money on hardware, software, and infrastructure.
  • Increased productivity and customer satisfaction: VMware is able to operate multiple complex processes simultaneously. With all your applications being managed and run on the cloud, downtime, failures, and application errors are rare. VMware easily scales up and down to meet your computing needs. The high availability that VMware provides allows your IT staff to focus on other issues and keeps your customers satisfied with the service they receive.
  • Unlimited access to your VMs: VMware’s user-friendly cloud-based interface allows any employee to work from any location at any time.
  • Enhanced security: VMware’s security tools deliver full visibility into your entire system. This keeps your applications and data more secure, in any type of environment. VMware provides multiple protective tools including antiviruses and anti-malware, as well as backup and recovery services.

VMware vSphere Features

Below is a list of some of VMware vSphere’s key features:

  • Transferable virtual machine images: Export and import virtual machine images from your local environment. This gives users the ability to set up and configure their systems locally and only upload them to the server once everything is working properly. VM images can be moved back and forth between vendors, ensuring that your company is never tied up to a specific cloud vendor.
  • User-friendly interface: Using VMware’s intuitive console, you can easily create, manage, share, and deploy virtual machines.
  • API integration: VMware’s APIs support integration with third-party applications for data protection, multipathing, and disk array solutions.
  • Distributed power management: Automate efficiency by continuously optimizing server power consumption within each cluster.

Reviews from Real Users

VMware vSphere stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. A few major ones are its virtualization abilities, its flexibility and availability, and its user-friendly interface.

Felix D., an Automation project administrator, DCS, I&E at Centennial Cayman Corp, writes, “The connectivity is fantastic, and many functions can run together in one server. If you need to scale, we can continue to add components or modules. It's a beautiful virtual solution that has many advantages over physical hardware, where you have to use devices and wiring to connect all your projects.”

VMware vSphere Customers

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

VMware vSphere Video

Archived VMware vSphere Reviews (more than two years old)

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
Enterprise Architect at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Good integration and virtualization but a bit expensive
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution allows for very good virtualization."
  • "There are certain tools the can't run in parallel and occasionally, in those instances, we have trouble migrating customers from one source to our data center."

What is our primary use case?

We have a variety of customers with different use cases. Many can't go to a public cloud, and so we give the option of a private cloud. If they can go to a public cloud, may use a hyperscaler such as AWS or Azure on their applications. 

How has it helped my organization?

vSphere is easy to integrate with multiple third-party tools. We're using Carbonite, for example, for migration. We are also using vSphere and vCenter for integrating with a CA product. 

What is most valuable?

The solution allows for very good virtualization.

It makes migration processes easy.

The product offers a lot of functionality. It helps use manage everything for the client.

The solution can be integrated with multiple other technologies. If you have Cisco CSA solution, for example, it integrates well. 

If you want to use third-party tools, you are able to do so. 

With respect to the Windows environment, it's very, very easy to use.

What needs improvement?

Commercially, you see other products, like Nutanix, which offers a free hypervisor. It would be ideal if this solution was the same in that regard.

There are certain tools the can't run in parallel and occasionally, in those instances, we have trouble migrating customers from one source to our data center.

If I'm replicating workload from the data center and, I have to migrate some of the workload to my location, I have to stop that application. Only then I can run vSphere. That is the biggest challenge. If both the tools cannot run in parallel, it becomes a problem. There should be some sort of way to run these two products in parallel.

Buyer's Guide
VMware vSphere
November 2022
Learn what your peers think about VMware vSphere. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
653,584 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for a number of years. It may be about eight at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability has been very good. We haven't had any issues thus far with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is quite good. You can scale it horizontally and vertically if you need to. It's quite flexible in that sense. A company that needs to expand it shouldn't run into any issues.

The solution can have ten to 15 nodes. 

Currently, we use the solution quite extensively in our organization. We do plan to continue to increase the usage of the product in the future.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support is okay. We're pretty satisfied with the level of service we are provided. They seem to be pretty knowledgeable and responsive. 

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

We also use Nutanix, however, we don't use that solution quite as extensively.

VMware has much better functionalities. They have integrated IDs and some functionalities. as well as load-balancing which Nutanix doesn't have right now. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex. It's rather straightforward.

We can deploy the solution in three to four days, typically. We deploy multiple clusters and we take three to four days in terms of grid installing. 

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

In terms of pricing, a little bit of improvement is required. There is a lot of competition in the market. If you talk about Nutanix, Nutanix is much cheaper than this product. Very recently, we lost out on a contract due to the pricing.

What other advice do I have?

We're a partner with VMware.

We are a data center service provider. We sell these services to customers. We are not using it for ourselves only. We are also selling the solution to our customers. In that sense, there's always a plan to increase vSphere.

Overall, we're pretty satisfied with the solution. I'd rate it a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
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
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
November 2022
Learn what your peers think about VMware vSphere. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
653,584 professionals have used our research since 2012.
AllanTrambouze - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant senior en technologie de l'information at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
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
Network and Systems Administrator at Ishango-it
Real User
Good for virtualization, stable, and offers visibility into local hardware and workloads

What is most valuable?

VMware is good for virtualization.

What needs improvement?

The licensing costs are expensive and most of the important features require a license. 

For example, we would like to use DRS but there is an additional license for that. If it were free then it would be very helpful. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with VMware vSphere for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This product is very stable. It gives you good visibility of your hardware and the loads on it.

How are customer service and technical support?

Up to now, I haven't had a problem that caused me to contact the technical support team.

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

I have experience with using Proxmox on a single host for about two months, with Hyper-V. This setup is only in a lab and not for production.

How was the initial setup?

For my initial setup, I am not using the entire functionality. We are using vMotion, storage, and clustering.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution an eight 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
Director Global Security at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Flexible, good scalability, and it brings stability to our workloads
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are stability and support."
  • "I would like to see support for endpoint virtualization."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case is server virtualization and it brings stability to our workloads.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are stability and support. The stability of this product is very good, and I have not seen an issue for many years. It is very stable for all of the features that are available today.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see support for endpoint virtualization.

Another thing that I would like to see are improvements with respect to performance.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using VMware vSphere for at least seven or eight years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is very good and should be a top priority for choosing this product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This is definitely a scalable product and it is used in a virtualized environment.

How are customer service and technical support?

The support is very good and we have had no issues with them.

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

Compared to other products, vSphere is number one in terms of flexibility and scalability.

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

Pricing is a little bit on the higher side, compared to other products.

What other advice do I have?

Basically, this is a good solution and most of the features are already there. I can recommend it to others. That said, I would like to see better performance.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
System Administrator at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Straightforward to install and allows us to cut down on hardware costs
Pros and Cons
  • "It cuts down on hardware costs by being able to virtualize multiple hardware and multiple machines on a single piece of hardware."
  • "The user interface could use some improvement."

What is our primary use case?

It's virtualization software. We are using it to virtualize virtual machines.

How has it helped my organization?

It cuts down on hardware costs by being able to virtualize multiple hardware and multiple machines on a single piece of hardware.

What is most valuable?

The primary use is the most valuable feature. Being able to virtualize virtual machines on one set of hardware is essentially what it does.

What needs improvement?

The user interface could use some improvement.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using VMware vSphere for approximately five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This product has been very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The version that I have is not very scalable, although overall, the product is. I bought a limited version. We do not plan to increase our usage within the next year. There may be, later on.

How are customer service and technical support?

I really haven't had much need for technical support.

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

Prior to using vSphere, I was working strictly with individual machines.

How was the initial setup?

I thought that the initial setup was very straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

We deployed with our in-house team.

I and another person are in charge of administration and maintenance. There is routine maintenance needed for virtual machines. This includes maintaining existing virtual machines, as well as creating new ones when required.

What was our ROI?

Considering that this solution has cut down on the number of real machines that I have, I would expect there to have been cost savings.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is looking into using vSphere is that there are a lot more options out there now, but this product has worked well for me.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this product is that it's too easy to create new machines.

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
Jeroen De Jonge - PeerSpot reviewer
Autodidact Quantum Physics- Quantum mechanics. at IC Consultancy
Real User
Best way to have a non-host based fixed solution
Pros and Cons
  • "The virtualization is set by itself. vSphere is the best way to have a non-host based fixed solution. We always try to find an agnostic environment where we can restore agnostics or just say, "I need resources, capacity." That's why VMware vSphere in particular, has been the best in the past but now also with the evolution of their product. Nowadays, you don't have to use any STEM infrastructure anymore because the bandwidth and the land speeds are getting steeper."
  • "The only way for it to be a complete product is if you integrate all the functionalities. Then you don't need any backup solution anymore and you can do it by yourself. Integration needs improvement. They should improve a lot of the functionality because normally it's half of a product. You're only protecting yourself against technical failures but not against any cyber threats or any other stuff."

What is most valuable?

The virtualization is set by itself. vSphere is the best way to have a non-host based fixed solution. We always try to find an agnostic environment where we can restore agnostics or just say, "I need resources capacity." That's why VMware vSphere in particular, has been the best in the past but now also with the evolution of their product. Nowadays, you don't have to use any STEM infrastructure anymore because the bandwidth and the LAN speeds are getting steeper. 

If you look at the interconnection if you have a dark fiber connection, you can have data sent between locations. It's getting much cheaper.

If you use Zerto on top of that, then you are protected against any cyber threats or attacks. If you do it right, if you configure it from the hypervisor layer to external storage and then you have always a way back. It's blocked by the application of the journal. You can always go back to a point in time if you want to restore. If the point in time is as short as possible then you have the best solution. You can leave any additional solutions like CrowdStrike.

What needs improvement?

The only way for it to be a complete product is if you integrate all the functionalities. Then you don't need any backup solution anymore and you can do it by yourself. Integration needs improvement. They should improve a lot of the functionality because normally it's half of a product. You're only protecting yourself against technical failures but not against any cyber threats or any other stuff. It's not about prevention, it's about time to recovery because it's going to happen anyway. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using vSphere for twelve years. 

How was the initial setup?

It was very easy to install. If you have the right piece of hardware or blade server in place, you can use it in a VM where you try XYZ and then install it. You go forward with that and it's ready to install, so it's not a big problem.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate vSphere and 9.5 out of ten. 

I really like it because it's a storage restoration additional add-on but it's really expensive now. 

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
PeerSpot user
Owner at a transportation company with 1-10 employees
Real User
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.

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 technical 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
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 Director at a manufacturing company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Stable with an easy initial setup and good VMotion features
Pros and Cons
  • "The initial setup is easy."
  • "The container management could be improved. It's far from perfect right now."

What is our primary use case?

We use it mainly to host virtual machines. We have the standard version, so we do VMotion. Sometimes it's easier when you need to do some maintenance on a whole server to be able to move the virtual machine from one host to another, so there is no downtime for the users. For virtual machine management, it's more fluent to dynamically set the resources on the servers, for example, if we need to increase the storage volume on a virtual machine or increase the RAM or adjust the CPU cores. It's easier to handle this on vSphere or any other hypervisor than on bare metal.

What is most valuable?

The VMotion feature is the solution's most valuable aspect. The fact that you can move the load without service interruption to the users is great.

The initial setup is easy.

What needs improvement?

The container management could be improved. It's far from perfect right now.

For how long have I used the solution?

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

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. It's quite mature. There used to be a more pink screen of this in version five, however, since then, since maybe version 5.5 or version six, it's very stable and it's very rare that the application hangs.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution should be scalable. However, I've never managed one of the node clusters, so it's hard for me to comment. It's easy from a small cluster to add nodes. How well they behave when you go beyond the 20, 30 nodes, I don't know.

How are customer service and technical support?

It's been too long since I've contacted them, so I don't have any meaningful comment on this.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex at all. It's relatively easy. It's a fairly basic process for pretty much any network administrator.

In terms of deployment, the environment we have is not that big. We have less than 10 physical servers, so we tend to still do it manually instead of automating everything. This will change eventually, however, right now we set up everything manually. In regards to the time it takes to set up a vSphere cluster, you're looking at maybe two hours overall if you include all the hosts and the license configuration and the cluster configuration.

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

Everything is always too expensive. Of course, they could improve on that side and then probably they will have to. I know they revisited the licensing costs of the user charge. Now they charge per core instead of per socket. 

This will make them more expensive than they were and maybe it will make them also less price competitive with some other solution on the market. On a Windows environment, Hyper-V is pretty much free, however, you need to license all the cores anyway if you're going to install any Windows on the physical server. Therefore, when you use Windows servers and virtual machines, you have to pay an additional tax, let's say, for vSphere if you want to use vSphere for the hypervisor. That's something that you don't need to do with Microsoft Hyper-V. Of course, there are other hypervisors that are free - like KVM. On the cost, right now, they pretty much are the most expensive solution Ion the market.

What other advice do I have?

We don't have a business relationship with the product. We're just customers.

If we speak about version five or plus five, I'm pretty knowledgeable about those as I was a network administrator back then. However, version six, version seven, I deal with these versions maybe two times per year, so I'm not very good on them.

Overall, I'd rate them at an eight out of ten, mostly due to the high pricing and container management.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Fernando Tamariz - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Specialist at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
A resilient solution that is easy to scale
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are the resilience of the solution and vMotion."
  • "Support for the product is not good enough."

What is our primary use case?

We are using vSphere to virtualize our workloads.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the resilience of the solution and vMotion.

What needs improvement?

I would like to have replication between sites available in the standard version.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using vSphere for more than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We use it on a daily basis and it seems stable most of the time.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

All of our servers and products run using vSphere. It is easy to scale.

How are customer service and technical support?

Support for the product is not good enough. It should be faster and more efficient.

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

This is the only solution of this type that we have used.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was simple, but you have to develop it before you begin to install it.

The deployment took us approximately one week.

What about the implementation team?

We shared the implementation with a partner.

We do the maintenance, although we did have a problem one time that we escalated to the vendor.

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

The price of this solution is mid-range. There are additional features that can be purchased for an extra charge. For example, if you want replication between sites then you have to pay more.

What other advice do I have?

In summary, this is a good product and I recommend it because it's resilient and you do not have many products to install.

I would rate this solution an eight 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
Luca Olivotto - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Reseller
Highly-available, feature-rich, priced-well, and easy to set up

What is our primary use case?

We are resellers and consultants who provide solutions for our clients.

They manage the virtual machines, such as CPU usage, or memory usage, or disk space.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the vMotion, the storage vMotion, the DRS, and the high availability function.

What needs improvement?

The way that vSphere manages the alerts on the data machine is not easy to configure.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with vSphere for approximately 15 years.

We started with version 4.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a stable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

VMware vSphere is scalable.

Our clients are medium size companies.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not used technical support.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was easy.

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

In my opinion, the essential version is a good price.

What other advice do I have?

This is a good solution and I will recommend it. They are choosing a good product.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
PeerSpot user
Director at OPEOPL LISTEN TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.
Reseller
A good virtual machine that is stable and easy to set up
Pros and Cons
  • "The product offers good stability."
  • "It would be ideal if they could integrate billing software so that clients can customize it directly on the virtual machine."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use VMware vSphere just for hosting purposes. We are data center. We create virtual machines and give them to our clients. We deal mostly in gaming.

What is most valuable?

We only have one virtual machine and we're still exploring it. Overall, it's a super product.

The initial setup is easy.

The product offers good stability.

What needs improvement?

The solution is too expensive for us and we don't have any funds to direct towards it. We just started the company, which makes it hard to explore the solution the way we want to with the amount of cost involved to do so. They should work to make the licensing more affordable.

I want to be able to use OpenStack, however, I can't do that without vCenter, and it's so cost-prohibitive for us, it's become a problem.

We've only faced one technical issue. That is downloading the virtual machines and uploading the virtual machines. It takes a lot of time and we cannot transfer the VMware from one machine or directly from one server to another. That action requires vCenter. That may only be an issue on the free version and not the pro version. On the pro version, you have much better features. 

It would be ideal if they could integrate billing software so that clients can customize it directly on the virtual machine. Billing should also be done automatically. Perhaps this is already the case, however, I haven't really had a chance to explore it fully.

While I'm currently on the free version, I'd like to have the ability to explore the pro version to see what is on offer there.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with the solution for the last three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The product is very stable. We don't have issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't fail or crash. It's reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution may be scalable. However, we haven't personally attempted to scale anything due to our general lack of funds and the expansiveness of the product. Therefore, I can't really speak to scalability so much.

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

I'm currently also working with another product called KVM. It's much more affordable than vSphere.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not difficult or complex. We found it to be straightforward and easy.

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

The solution is extremely expensive, especially for startups such as ours, who don't have the capacity to invest so much in such a product.

What other advice do I have?

Overall, I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. Everything it does, it does very well, even among all of the competition that exists in India. However, price-wise, for us, it's not ideal.

I haven't explored much, however, from what I have seen, they really do cover everything.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
PeerSpot user
CEO at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Consultant
Top 5Leaderboard
An easy-to-use and stable solution that can reduce the manual cost of your infrastructure

What is our primary use case?

We have co-located our servers in different data centers, and these co-located servers are in a cluster. For storage, we are using vSAN, and for compute, we are using vSphere 6.7. We will be upgrading to version 7 in due course.

What is most valuable?

It is very easy to use and very stable.

What needs improvement?

The cost can be better.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for almost eight to nine years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable. You can use a cluster with 216 nodes. I believe it can be scaled much more.

We use vSphere to create virtual machines and give them to our customers. Most of the applications are on it, so we have around 8,000 to 10,000 users on five different clusters. In terms of our plans to use this product in the future, we are currently thinking about whether to continue using this solution or not.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their support could definitely be better. They can put more experienced and more intelligent people on support. I would rate them a seven out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

I won't say it is straightforward, but it is also not complex. If the hardware and net securities are there and you have the hardware configuration, then the installation takes 24 to 48 hours.

What about the implementation team?

We have a team of infrastructure users who are experts in VMware. They do the installation. Two persons can do the deployment.

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

It is expensive. 

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this solution to others. It is a very good product. It is very stable, so your infrastructure uptime can be better. The manual cost of your infrastructure can be less if you use vSphere.

I would rate VMware vSphere an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Implementer
PeerSpot user
Directeur Production, Infrastructure et Architecture IT at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Best for private clouds and big enterprises

What is our primary use case?

I use VMware vSphere to run all my applications in a private cloud. I had all the applications in the standalone mode. I migrated them to the cloud. 

What is most valuable?

VMware vSphere is the best private-cloud solution.

What needs improvement?

It is expensive. They can improve the licensing cost for Cloud Director.

They can also improve the integration with other applications and the metering feature, which is currently not flexible.

For how long have I used the solution?

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

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable. We have 100 users, and we plan to increase the usage.

How are customer service and technical support?

The price is very high for professional services. I don't know why.

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

It is expensive in terms of cost, licensing, and professional services.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend it for big enterprises. I would rate VMware vSphere a nine out of ten. It is the best solution. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
PeerSpot user
Walmik Wankhede - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager IT at a healthcare company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 10
Very beneficial with low space and easy manageability
Pros and Cons
  • "Its DR facility is good. Within a moment, data can be retrieve from another physical location over the Internet. The speed to recover data is good."
  • "OS templates should be readily available, so there is no need to get an OS separately. Only the activation part should be different, which is not presently available due to the need to get the OS from a different location, then create VMs."

What is our primary use case?

  • Implemented private cloud.
  • Created different OS VMs
  • Implemented backup policies.  
  • Implemented network solutions.

Due to clustering, if any VM or server goes down, then within a moment it can be back. Even if a node goes down, then automatically all the VMs shift to another node. That is thr beauty of the product. It supports different platforms: Windows, Linux, Unix, Ubuntu, and many more. 

How has it helped my organization?

It is very beneficial with low space and easy manageability. Due to this product, we have saved space, energy, and durability. We have a lot of VLANs for different floors and services. This requires different VMs all implemented in one place. 

Users get tremendous speed. As an admin, I found it's usable to manage all services from a single location or point. We have already implemented private cloud, so in an emergency users can work from home. It's suitable for all users. 

What is most valuable?

SimpliVity backup and restoration is more suitable and its best feature. If any file or folder is missing and needs to be restored, then within a moment you can recover it. Simplivity has its own backup system, so there is no need to purchase separate backup software. 

All data has security. 

Multiple OSs can be created on a single platform. 

Its DR facility is good. Within a moment, data can be retrieve from another physical location over the Internet. The speed to recover data is good.

HPE uses flash drive, so its working speed is also better. Its node has 2U rack space, so it saves space.

What needs improvement?

OS templates should be readily available, so there is no need to get an OS separately. Only the activation part should be different, which is not presently available due to the need to get the OS from a different location, then create VMs. If it connect with Internet, it should ask this during VM creation with the help of selection. It should auto download the OS so it will be beneficial only at time of activation by entering a valid key. If a key is not valid, then it should start with a trial version. 

For how long have I used the solution?

More than three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It requires proper maintenance and attention to work smoothly.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The product is expandable, as per requirements.

How are customer service and technical support?

My experience is really good.

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

No, we only selected this solution at the start.

How was the initial setup?

The concept is new. We found it a little complex at the start but the operational part was normal.

What about the implementation team?

Our vendor supported the implementation. After that, we did it in-house.

What was our ROI?

As per our requirements and usability, the product is good.

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

After getting a headache, you will find the cost is reasonably cheaper.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We compared with Nutanix, IBM, and HPE. We got all the technical details, benefits, and functionality.   

What other advice do I have?

Before selection of any product, first determine your own requirements, study them, and then present solutions.

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
PatrickBenson - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Architect, Business Continuity at Sayers
MSP
Has Distributed vSwitches to better manage networking across large infrastructures
Pros and Cons
  • "The ability of a running VM to be quickly relocated to another hypervisor or launched at another site via replicated storage greatly reduces downtime."
  • "The ability to run ARM based VMs on an x86 platform for testing purposes. With the growing use of SBCs running on ARM architectures for IoT devices, it would be very useful if developers could build and deploy VMs running operating systems like Raspbian used on Raspberry Pi devices on their existing x86 ESXi environments. Even if this is not possible through some form of emulation, the ability to add ARM hypervisors to vSphere environments would be very useful. This will enable more rapid development cycles for customers just getting started with IoT but already existing vSphere users."

What is our primary use case?

I'm a Solutions Architect. I advise clients on how to leverage VMware products to provide resiliency in the face of disruptive events. VMware's platform is the most robust for running VMs upon, and it also has the most mature technology. Therefore, it is much more reliable and predictable, and those are the key characteristics needed to ensure a successful business continuity solution. Bleeding edge newcomers have yet to prove themselves production worthy compared to VMware's long history of success.

How has it helped my organization?

Portability of infrastructure is the greatest asset of any virtualization platform. By using VMware solutions, there is no lock-in with a particular hardware vendor for compute, network, or storage needs. Likewise, the ability to run various guest operating systems further amplifies that flexibility. The overwhelming majority of my clients are able to use VMware's solutions for 100 percent of their software application needs. Finally, the ability of a running VM to be quickly relocated to another hypervisor or launched at another site via replicated storage greatly reduces downtime.

What is most valuable?

  • Storage vMotion to safely migrate VMs to other hypervisors, storage solutions and sites while the VM is still running. 
  • Distributed vSwitches to better manage networking across large infrastructures. 
  • vRealize for operations management and automation to remove human error from complex tasks and enable more efficient processes and business activities. 
  • The VCSA appliance provides a great interface for most management tasks. 

In general, the combination of VMware products that compose or plug into vSphere enable most organizations to better prepare for disruptive events.

What needs improvement?

The ability to run ARM based VMs on an x86 platform for testing purposes. With the growing use of SBCs running on ARM architectures for IoT devices, it would be very useful if developers could build and deploy VMs running operating systems like Raspbian used on Raspberry Pi devices on their existing x86 ESXi environments. Even if this is not possible through some form of emulation, the ability to add ARM hypervisors to vSphere environments would be very useful. This will enable more rapid development cycles for customers just getting started with IoT but already existing vSphere users. 

For how long have I used the solution?

Since 1999 when they only made Workstation.

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

I've used Hyper-V, AHV, VirtualBox and KVM solutions. Each of these solutions has merits, but none of them are as flexible and reliable as VMware solutions. They are all rapidly improving, but are not being adopted widely enough to rival vSphere's dominance. I rarely advise clients to switch away from a VMware based solution, because of the long history of success and reliability that comes with it.

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

Do not buy based on price alone. Many of my customers chose the lowest cost option only to discover that the additional funds needed to access even a few more features would have been money well spent. Likewise, if you are going to spend more money on additional features, then have a plan to actually deploy and integrate those features into your infrastructure. Many customers never take full advantage of the many features that they are paying for and that can be avoided by being proactive in developing your overall vision for the infrastructure.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I am constantly evaluating many solutions. I also regularly re-evaluate other solutions. The competition is improving, and VMware has done a great job improving as well.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We are a VMware reseller.
PeerSpot user
Chief Technology Officer at Motor City Stamping Inc
Real User
Good backup capability and easy to implement disaster recovery

What is our primary use case?

Using this solution, we have virtualized 90% of servers used by a tier-one automotive supplier.

How has it helped my organization?

We have reduced maintenance and power consumption, as well as the recovery time that is required for any failures.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the VDP Backup solution. It just works.

The Disaster Recovery solution is easy to implement.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see better fault and performance reporting in the GUI. I should not have to resort to using the command line to see what is going on.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using VMware vSphere for five years.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Ricky Santos - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at ON Semiconductor Phils. Inc.
Real User
Top 10
Provides robust and highly available development and production environments
Pros and Cons
  • "The vMotion in particular I think is the most valuable because this feature provides migrations of virtual machines in case you want to run do maintenance."
  • "I would like to see VMware vSphere provide a centralized patch service on the VMware level, regardless of your operating systems."

What is our primary use case?

The entire production and development environments are running on VMware vSphere using the 6.0 and 6.5 versions with twelve-node clustered configurations. Two data centers were deployed to separate the production side virtual machines from those of test and development.

How has it helped my organization?

The deployment of Enterprise VMware vSphere architecture helps us provide a robust and high availability infrastructure because of the combined features of VMware vSphere and VMware vCenter such as HA, DRS and Fault Tolerance. This base metal virtualization is highly compatible with almost all of the IT hardware.

What is most valuable?

The vMotion in particular I think is the most valuable because this feature provides migrations of virtual machines in case you want to run do maintenance. This his feature comes hand-in-hand with other features of VMware like the DRS, which automatically load-balances the whole VMware farm based on the usage and recommendation.

What needs improvement?

Improve the patch and updates online and remove mandatory reboot, or move the virtual machine onto a physical host that needs patching/maintenance.

I would like to see VMware vSphere provide a centralized patch service on the VMware level, regardless of your operating systems.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for eleven years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In my long experience, I have a single incident where our whole VMware farm went down. I can say it is very stable as long as the hardware is healthy.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is great. This solution is highly scalable and compatible with almost all IT hardware on the market.

How are customer service and technical support?

The support is very responsive and highly knowledgeable.

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

Prior to this solution, we used Oracle Virtual Machine and Xen Virtualizations.

How was the initial setup?

I  used the profiling feature.

What about the implementation team?

I set up the system myself.

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

The license of VMware is a one-time payment and you can continue to enroll in support for troubleshooting and also administer the licenses.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Marcus Hall - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Automation Specialist at Federal Reserve Bank Of San Francisco
Real User
Consolidate hardware, balance workloads, and improve post-failure recovery time

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution for hardware consolidation and improved infrastructure resiliency.

How has it helped my organization?

It has allowed us to be more resilient to infrastructure and hardware failure, reduced hardware costs, and decreased recovery time from failures.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are cloning, snapshots, vMotion, and replication. All of these have increased our ability to recover from failure and balance workloads.

What needs improvement?

Reducing the cost of vSphere would be an improvement.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using VMware vSphere for five years.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
sedson52 - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead System Engineer at MITRE Corporation
Real User
Improves efficiency, reduces costs, and eases the management of resources

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is infrastructure as a service (IaaS).

How has it helped my organization?

It provides more efficient use of compute resources through virtualization, making our infrastructure more cost-effective. It makes deployment and management of resources easier so that we can be more agile in our projects.  

What is most valuable?

The free ESXi hypervisor was a great way to get started, as it allowed us to introduce virtual machines so that users could start to experience the advantages.

What needs improvement?

It would be great if the free version included a management tool that was a scaled-down vCenter Manager.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using VMware vSphere since 2005.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Allan Trambouze - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at Cofomo
Video Review
Consultant
Production people can quickly reboot the server with ESXi Quick Boot
Pros and Cons
  • "Production people can quickly reboot the server with ESXi Quick Boot."
  • "I would like more Amazon stuff inside of VMware."

What is our primary use case?

We are an IT consulting company who serves and sells IT services.

I am using the last version to understand the new features. Also, we are using it to improve our code for our VMware clients.

We are also using on VMware cloud on AWS inside POC.

How has it helped my organization?

It is very simple to manage.

Some of the benefits that we have seen are:

  • HTML5
  • Web Client
  • It is fast and available.
  • It works well and is reliable.
  • The ESXi Quick Book is a good new feature because production people can quickly reboot the server, where previously it took a long time.
  • There is no need to have an iSCSI client. Some people use it, but the industry is moving to HTML5 clients.

I am testing more products and advising my clients about what they should do and implement with the newest version of VMware.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are:

  • ESXi Quick Boot
  • VM encryption
  • New security features.

The new feature announced today with vSphere Update 1 inside vSan is impressive. I did not have a chance to test Update 1 yet. We shall see how it performs in the next few days.

Because my server is too old, I am using my own lab for TPM. I did not have a good chance to test everything. VM encryption is quite simple to implement: Just check two boxes and it is done. It is very easy to do. If you want to move from on-premise to cloud, it is quite easy.

What needs improvement?

I put information on my blog stating that I would like more Amazon stuff inside of VMware. They have announced many thing that I am looking for today, so I am happy.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is very impressive. VMware develops many stable products. That is why we participate in the beta product testing to make things better.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is very impressive. As usual, VMware is able to scale out and up all their solutions.

How are customer service and technical support?

I do use the technical support, and so do my clients who receive good support. 

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

I did use in the past Hyper-V, KVM and XEN. I do prefer VMware for the maturity of their  solutions. VMware is also available inside all big cloud provider like Azure, AWS, Alibaba and IBM.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very straightforward. There isn't any complexity unless you have very old servers, then you won't be able to install the latest version of VMware 6.7 because of TPM.

What about the implementation team?

VMWare is one of the most used solution all around the world, it is easy to found some expertise on the market. Ask for a VMware certified person like VCP ou VCAP this will garanty a good knowledge of your tech support.

What was our ROI?

Our ROI is good. 

There is an average performance boost, especially if you use VM encryption inside the VMware with another product, like McAfee. You will see great improvement in these cases.

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

The price is high, but you get a lot functionnality included with the product. You can also start with the free version of ESXi.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I am using many solutions: IBM PowerVM, Hyper-V, Acropolis, and VMware.

VMware is the most natural product on the market at the moment, especially in virtualization. The other products are quite good too. I am not saying you can use them, because you can. They are stable now. However, with VMware, you receive more feature than with the others.

What other advice do I have?

Think about your business needs, afterwards choose the product. Write down your needs on paper in bullets, then the solution will be clear and you can justify choosing VMware, not Hyper-V.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of 10. There is always space for improvement. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: It depends on the business's need. That is all. I am a consultant and must know what my client needs. If they want a Rolls Royce, I give them a Rolls Royce. If they want a Honda Civic, I give them a Honda Civic. I must know the products to fit them to the customer's needs. I don't sell too much, just what the customer wants.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Infrastructure Manager at Petrolink
Real User
Increases uptime and reduces storage costs, but the reporting needs improvement

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution for production workloads.

How has it helped my organization?

This solution provides production uptime with its DRS and failover features.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is vSAN, as it reduces the cost of SAN storage and maintenance. 

What needs improvement?

Reporting on vCenter needs to be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution for five years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Stephen Murcott - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at j5 Software South Africa
Real User
Makes VM backups for fast recovery options but it entails more work

What is our primary use case?

I have used VMware products at five different software companies, and it was mainly used for the following functions: development environments, QA systems, internal infrastructures like wikis or ticketing. 

How has it helped my organization?

It was brilliant to consolidate systems, and it provided the best way of doing it at the time, as far as I was aware.

What is most valuable?

Snapshot and clone: make VM backups for fast recovery options, build systems and reduced setup times.

What needs improvement?

When I needed to equip a new startup, I was unable to get the budget for vSphere past finance, so I ended up adopting a cheaper alternative even though it meant more work.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Depends on your budget

How are customer service and technical support?

Good

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

I also used Citrix Xen which was really great, but ended up mainly using Qemu and Libvirt with KVM because of costs.

How was the initial setup?

Simple

What about the implementation team?

In house

What was our ROI?

Great flexible infrastructure 

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

Depends on your budget and skill set.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Virtualbox, Xen Server and KVM

What other advice do I have?

Linode, AWS and Digital Ocean now use KVM

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Muhammad Tanvir Ashraf - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems and Network Administrator at Gulf Precast Concrete Co. LLC at Gulf Precast Concrete Co. LLC
Real User
A stable way of controlling our VMs and moving them between hosts
Pros and Cons
  • "We are able to create virtual machines and move them from one host to another, controlling the resources."
  • "Generally, the user interface needs to be improved for non-technical people."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is controlling our virtual machines, as well as our host machines.

How has it helped my organization?

We are able to create virtual machines and move them from one host to another, controlling the resources.

What is most valuable?

I love all of the features in this solution, but moving VMs between host machines is one that stands out.

What needs improvement?

The solution should be more user-friendly for upgrading host ESXi units, bringing them into the control unit of vSphere.

Generally, the user interface needs to be improved for non-technical people. A technical person can hover around and find the right tool or task that needs to be done. But, for people who are new, they require guidance because it is not intuitive. They have to ask for help from here and there to get it right.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution has been very stable up to now, and we are very happy with that.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I cannot make a prediction about the scalability, but I can tell you that we have close to five hundred users at this time. We must keep up with technology so we do plan on expanding the use of this solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

Until now, I have not used their technical support.

How was the initial setup?

The deployment of this solution was completed before I joined the company, although I don't think that it was complex.

In terms of maintenance, it depends on the task that you are doing. Normally, it doesn't take too much time. There are two of us that handle the maintenance.

What about the implementation team?

There were consultants who assisted with the deployment.

What was our ROI?

It took quite a long time, but in the end, I think that it benefits us in terms of ROI.

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

The licensing fees are on a yearly basis.

What other advice do I have?

When I hear that somebody is willing to deploy a similar solution, I suggest this product to them and even help with the deployment. I love this product.

Once this solution is deployed, only fine tuning needs to be done. Once complete and everything is in place, you don't have to do much. From the technical end, the product is great.

I would rate this product a ten out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Real User
Offers an easy OS upgrade and safe migration in a live environment, where downtime is extremely costly

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case for this solution is High Availability Industrial Control Operator Interfaces, and Historian & Regulatory Compliance Data.

How has it helped my organization?

This solution offers an easy OS upgrade and safe migration in a live environment, where downtime is extremely costly.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is its ability to revert to previous snapshots during testing of various guest and application deployments.

What needs improvement?

Two improvements that I would like to see are higher resolution console modes for guests and easier switching between consoles.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Muljo Witono - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO and Owner at PT Solusindo Total Teknikatama
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Helps to automate data replication and disaster recovery

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is to implement a high availability server environment.

How has it helped my organization?

It helps to automate the data replication and DR.

What is most valuable?

The feature that I have found most valuable is the auto recovery during failure.

What needs improvement?

The scalability of the solution should be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability needs improvement.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Orhangazi Yıldırım - PeerSpot reviewer
System Architect at KT Bank
Real User
High availability feature allows for automatic recovery of failed hosts

What is our primary use case?

We are virtualizing our x86 server infrastructure with VMware vSphere. It consolidates our environment dramatically. Our virtualization ratio is over 92%.

How has it helped my organization?

Using vSphere we have virtualized over one thousand servers and this gave us management, cost and datacenter space advantages.

What is most valuable?

vSphere offers the High Availability feature which serves automatic recovery of failed host's virtual machines on another host or hosts in the cluster. Also, DRS makes the cluster balanced.

What needs improvement?

Although vSphere is a nearly perfect product, it does need a little improvement. Datacenter and Cluster structure should be mixed so that the management of clusters would be easier.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Bunmi-Sadiq - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Supervisor at WACT
Real User
Makes Resources Available & Services More Reliable
Pros and Cons
  • "The features in VMware vSphere data recovery are excellent. Sometimes I've deleted an entire server before and was able to recover the deleted VM. I just used some command line tools and I was able to restore the deleted VM."
  • "We want to see improvement from VMware with security. We want minimal downtime. We want automation. We want to deploy more efficiently."

What is our primary use case?

The company I work for is a global company and has many data inflection issues. Quality control decisions are not actually made at the local level. It is made at the headquarter level in Europe. 

We have our cloud site solution, our production environment, and our data recovery environment. We use VMware solutions integrated with HP solutions for hardware replication and storage-to-replication facilities. We use vSphere with ESXi 6.0, primarily for VM migration. We have an HP storage replication system in place for our first storage requirements with the VMs. Every other one is managed by VMware vMotion. vSphere and ESXi 6.0 are used to host our application servers, operational applications, and additional HR applications.

For extensions, we have vMotion to manage the virtual machines so that we can watch the network. For all of our backup requirements currently, we use the HP Data Protector. 

How has it helped my organization?

We have some downtime, but we can quickly recover from a disaster depending on the magnitude or the extent of the disaster using vSphere. The software will recover from any disaster that happens. We have also reduced our cost of production as well. vSphere has also improved our operational productivity. We have isolated servers that we couldn't integrate together, but now we can with vSphere, despite the fact that they are different models. Where they're different physical models, different memory models, you can integrate all of them. It makes our resources more available and our services more reliable to our users.

What is most valuable?

The features in vSphere data recovery are excellent. Sometimes I've deleted an entire server before and was able to recover the deleted VM. I didn't have to use the backup to restore the VM. I just used some command line tools and I was able to restore the deleted VM. I find that fascinating. 

For VM migration, I can migrate my virtual machines from one place to the other. vSphere has easy integration. I have some older server models. They are HP products. I have both old and new server models. I was able to integrate all these servers despite that fact that the date of manufacture is a five-year gap between the units.

I was using the same version of vSphere and I was able to integrate all the servers together. They are working well through it.

What needs improvement?

We want to see improvement from VMware with security. We want minimal downtime. We want automation. We want to deploy more efficiently.

If there is a disaster of any kind we want to respond quickly and recover from it. With vSphere, you get to provision server resources with ease. While we like vSphere, one problem we have is saturation. For example, if I want to deploy 10 virtual machines, I will have to install the operating system one by one. I will have to install the patches one by one, also to every kind of script. I will have to learn more, but automated deployment is not easy to implement. 

It makes you spend a lot of time on deployment. You can't have time for doing other things.

On login incidents and other events, I would prefer to have some notification in the logs.

These are the main areas of improvement that we would like to see.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good. Previously, our whole infrastructure couldn't support our operations. We are always having downtime, we are always having system instabilities. 

Since we implemented a new solution with vSphere, we have a greater capacity of infrastructure relative to our virtualization that almost doubled what we used to have before the implementation. 

It makes our services more reliable. We have also had more uptime of our operational applications.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

VMware vSphere is a very scalable solution. The only thing is if you are to upgrade, i.e. from ESXi 6.0 to 6.7, you might not be able to use your older servers. I believe VMware will not support these after ESXi 7.0.

For newer servers, VMware is scalable. We can always use it at least. The only issue I may have is we may not be able to use our older servers with the newer versions of VMware ESXi. 

In-house users number about 110 to 115. We have customers that login into our servers. We have web applications that customers log into from outside.

Around 2000 to 5000 customers use our vSphere installation per day.

We have billing people that are working there with our customers. We have operation people that are in the field that are using various equipment that is connected via wifi to our systems. Then we use the VMware network to carry our own operations and activities. 

We have customer service people that attend to customer inquiries, to try to resolve customer issues, but are still logged into the same application. There are various roles from read-only customers that want to pick one information or the other about their product on our sites. They don't actually update anything except they want to transact business with us. 

We use vSphere to help the users as well as to manage users that need information regarding a particular product or report. Users generate various reports from our SaaS/PaaS applications.

The staff we currently have are about five in IT. We have the manager, we have infrastructure persons that consist of system and network. We also have a database specialist that manages our applications. Our database specialists also serve as the developers for the application support. We have user support teams. The various support people that we have dedicated for the maintenance of the VMware vSphere deployment is about five in total.

We should still be able to support our users, at least, for the next five years. After five years, we may now be thinking of upgrading the infrastructure. This solution is being used every day, i.e. 24/7/365 days a year.

We believe that there's been increased usage, but we just implemented it last year. From our plan, we know that at least for the next five years we may not upgrade.

How are customer service and technical support?

We also have a maintenance contract with HP. Any event that we could not handle locally, we escalate to HP to be aware of and also to the application vendors. 

For technical support, we have people that maintain the solution. We have a network of experts and specialists. We have a cloud computing specialist as well. We have a database specialist that does VMware integration and so does our software application developer. 

Even with all these people, we still also have a customer service contract with VMware and another with HP, the hardware vendor. We don't actually have any contract with Cisco, but we use Cisco devices. The main vendors that we have a contract with are the application vendors Dell and HP. We have a maintenance contract with VMware in case there are any issues beyond local resources. VMware will escalate them quickly when they respond to our queries.

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

We didn't use anyone before we procured VMware. Before we procured the product, we didn't use any other advisor. We were using HP hardware and servers. 

For the implementation period prior to 2015, we first implemented on-premise attached solutions. Prior to that time, all our applications were stand-alone IDS servers.

How was the initial setup?

Our initial setup was outsourced, possibly it wasn't that complicated. Because it was outsourced, the consultant made it easy for us. 

After the initial setup, the subsequent ones were relatively easy for us. We trained in the VMware settings for the hardware. Depending on the part of the initial setup, we had older models of servers than we had new models. For the initial setup for the older models, we employed a consultant that did it for us. We implemented the newer models ourselves last year. 

We consulted with HP to do the initial setup for us which was relatively cheap. We did the integration of the old and the new servers. Running the new server models with our VMware vSpehere license, we used our own local resources to do that work.

What about the implementation team?

Implementation actually took longer than planned because of some issues that we did not envisage at the start. When we called HP for price assessment, they came and discovered that our power solutions were not good for their product. We had to spend extra buying new UPS units and installing them. That made the implementation take an extra month. 

For everything together, both the implementations, it was four or five months or so for us to install the new server models and the integration as well. We used the VMware ESXi as the VMware vSphere hypervisor, prepared the servers, and installed the hardware from an HP reseller. 'The installation, especially the setting up of partial integration, was actually done by HP Nigeria. Everything went great because we didn't have any issues. 

Some of the administrative tasks we were supposed to carry out by ourselves. HP gave us direction on how to go about it and it went pretty well.

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

This is really a niche area, but we have an enterprise license for our business. We have many users on our cloud applications, so we went with a costly enterprise license.

VMware does provide organizations with discounts. The customer service license fee we got discounts on from the supplier in order for us to get the best out of the license fees. That's our experience. We possibly paid less than our partner company. The partner is only local and not global like our firm.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Even if I decide to use a product, I cannot deploy it because my superiors have to determine the policy. Those superiors are not here locally. They are in Europe. 

We don't use Veeam here, though I've used it at some point. Right now we don't use it in our production environment. We currently use HP Data Protector. 

We evaluated other options like Salesforce and Microsoft Active Directory, which we only tested for production. The policies were on central management, so we only tested these solutions with our time. The applications we used were effective only when activated.

What other advice do I have?

The advice I would give is that there should be proper planning for implementing VMware solutions. With us, the content management suppliers and the various vendors provided this. 

If VMware vSphere is the particular product you are choosing, consider where the sellers were located and if they have a knowledge of the product.

  • Do the suppliers have the right models for your business?
  • Do the suppliers have different VMware licenses available?
  • Will you be able to enjoy the VMware license discount with the manufacturer?
  • Does the integrator company have good partners in the supply chain?

If you just launch a VMware deployment without planning, it is not advised. Engage with all management and staff, then do proper planning before going into vSphere implementation.

No product is perfect but VMware vSphere is absolutely excellent. It has issues, i.e. the result of insufficient speeds, but no product is 100% perfect. That is why I would give it a nine out of ten rating.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Huy Le Quang - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Professional Architect at FPT Software
Real User
Top 10
It helps us in the management of thousands of VMs in the coverage UI

What is our primary use case?

  • Cloud computing service (IaaS)
  • Private/hybrid cloud
  • Virtualization infrastructure
  • Virtualization desktop infrastructure.

How has it helped my organization?

  • High availability causes downtime service because it is needed to reboot VMs.
  • Fault tolerance is limited by the four vCPUs.
  • The service provider is not easy to integrate via API like OpenStack.

What is most valuable?

  • vCloud Director, because we may use it as the dashboard for providing cloud services.
  • vCenter 
  • vSphere, because it helps us in the management of thousands of VMs in the coverage UI.

What needs improvement?

The SDK/API to help SPs (service providers) provide the pay-as-you-go business model in cloud service.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Systems Security Administrator at Twin River Casino
Real User
Dynamic deployment of new servers is critical

What is our primary use case?

Standard commercial environment.

How has it helped my organization?

A gold standard of server virtualization.

What is most valuable?

  • vMotion
  • NSX
  • Dynamic deployment of new servers is critical.

What needs improvement?

Improvements to the vCenter server appliance are still needed, especially the HTML5.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Network Administrator
Video Review
Real User
Allows us to run our critical business workloads at speed and keep them highly available
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features for me are a very easily scalable infrastructure. I can have a couple of hosts to do basic workloads. I can have a lot of hosts to do a lot of workloads. vSAN integrates my storage so I don't need an external storage SAN. I love having everything integrated in the same UI. The new HTML5 interface doesn't require any plugins anymore and it's super-fast."
  • "An improvement could be allowing a "dark mode" for the interface. I think the HTML5 client is a little bit hard to read. It's all white. It's a little bit bright on the eyes. A lot of us IT guys view in the dark."

What is our primary use case?

My primary use case for the product is testing Home Lab. I was involved in the early vSphere 6.7 beta. I wanted to see what the new features were, how it worked. I'm using it currently in my Home Lab for testing lots of the different products as a vSphere-base for vSAN, NSX, running the latest vCenter, etc.

Some of the critical workloads that I'm running in my vSphere environment are Exchange, SQL, various different application servers, and those have to be up and available at all times, and vSphere does that for us. It gives us High Availability, failover, vMotion capability for load balancing. It works great.

How has it helped my organization?

Since migrating over to vSphere, we're seeing a significant performance boost due to the fact that we've migrated over to an all-flash vSAN array. Previously we were running external storage SAN over fiber channel. We saw a significant increase, I would say at least a 50 percent increase, in our speeds due to our vSAN running on all-flash. It's been a huge improvement.

The way that vSphere increases our availability in our organization is that it allows us to run our critical business workloads, keep them highly-available, run them at speed, and easily scale when we need to.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features for me are a very easily scalable infrastructure. I can have a couple of hosts to do basic workloads. I can have a lot of hosts to do a lot of workloads. vSAN integrates my storage so I don't need an external storage SAN. I love having everything integrated in the same UI. The new HTML5 interface doesn't require any plugins anymore and it's super-fast. Really liking that change.

In terms of the built-in security features that I'm using, currently I am using vSAN Encryption, using an external KMS server, and it works great. It's pretty easy to set up, very easy, especially in the UI, to integrate that and get that set up.

The way that I find vSphere simple and easy to manage is that the interface is all laid out for you. You've got various different views based on what you want to do in the UI. You have your Hosts and Clusters view, if you're doing something where you need to manage at the cluster level. You can manage at the host level in there. If you're doing something very VM-specific or on a vApp level, you can go into the VM and Templates view. It's very easy to scale and use what you need to use.

What needs improvement?

An improvement could be allowing a "dark mode" for the interface. I think the HTML5 client is a little bit hard to read. It's all white. It's a little bit bright on the eyes. A lot of us IT guys view in the dark.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability in our vSphere environment has gone very well. We have never actually had an outage. Due to the HA failover capabilities of the cluster, the High Availability of vSAN, Distributed Resource Scheduler allowing you to basically vMotion VMs and balance your loads across all your clusters, it's been very highly available. We've never had an outage or an issue; never any kind of a data loss incident, even when we were running external storage as well.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability works pretty well. You can start out at a couple of hosts, based on your business needs, your budget. That's probably the base recommendation I would start out at for having some of the DRS and HA failover capabilities. But if your business grows, you can easily add a host and a cluster and expand your capabilities on storage and compute. If you're running vSAN, you can run on the storage side, too.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have had several instances where I've had to use Global Support Services. They're always great. They are very knowledgeable. If they don't know the answer, they can easily escalate to another engineer and help you out and get the problem solved, usually pretty quickly.

How was the initial setup?

I was not initially involved in the vSphere setup at my current company; that predated my joining the company. But I've brought up the secondary environment and integrated vSAN at that company, and setup was straightforward. It's pretty easy to get everything set up and get things done. I've done that many times in production, and torn down and rebuilt the Home Lab many times. It's pretty straightforward.

What other advice do I have?

We do not currently use VMware Cloud on AWS.

If I had to rate vSphere from one to ten - version 6.7 - I would say right now it's probably about a ten.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Ganesh Sekarbabu - PeerSpot reviewer
Windows Virtualization Engineer at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
Video Review
Real User
The content library option will help us meet our requirements going forward
Pros and Cons
  • "Since we have an internal cloud, suddenly people may require 1000 or 2000 VMS in something. We have options to analyze and make sure we have enough scalability."
  • "We previously had a hard time using tech support."

What is our primary use case?

We have three different types of environments: internal cloud, managed hosting, and VDA. We use VMware vSphere as the main product to accomplish this.

VMware is now the main backbone in our company.

We are not using VMware cloud on AWS. We are in PoC mode. We may use it in another six months to a year.

How has it helped my organization?

vSphere helps our organization. Initially, we don't have an internal Cloud. We have an internal cloud, which is four years old now. We have 8000 to 9000 VMs standing in our internal cloud. We also implemented VDA using a VMware vSphere. So, it has been an absolutely pleasure having vSphere.

We provide a service to our internal customers for our development center. We have internal cloud developers. If they require 1000 VMs or 500 VMs, and in the background, we're using a vSphere VMware product. 

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is performance, especially the 6.7 version. 

We were looking for content library options for templates and were happy that VMware introduced it in 6.7 version. 

I like the speed and the quickness of the boot in the newest version of vSphere.

The mission-critical applications in our company, like SAP, Siebel, and a lot of financially related applications are running. Our developer uses most of animation, etc., and we are using the vSphere for that.

We have seen a performance boost compared to the previous versions, like a 5.1, five years ago. It has gradually increased. Previously, we hadn't migrated any database, like SQL or Oracle, into VMware. However, we are planning to now. We are moving forward because a lot of new features are now available on 6.7. 

We are doing a PoC, which we are happy about now. We may move over the database into our VMware environment.

It is simple to manage. However, some of our operation teams, they are used to the desktop line, but VMware removed it in the previous version. Initially, we had an issue on the flash, but now we are happy. With VMware moving to HTML, it's really fast. We did a bit of version testing, and it's really fast and easy to use now.

What needs improvement?

I have seen some sessions for version 6.7 covering its improvements, which I was looking for, mainly the content library. Our requirement is to move our templates from one location to another location. Previously, this was not available. We are happy this was introduced. 

Another thing is the flash. However, in 6.7, they completely removed it and they are bringing in the HTML. Let's see, as I haven't tried the 6.7 update yet. I hope it will satisfy everything from our point of view.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good. We have different clusters based on the load of the application and requirements. We can slice the cluster.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Since we have an internal cloud, suddenly people may require 1000 or 2000 VMS in something. We have options to analyze and make sure we have enough scalability. 

We have some issues but so far it has been good.

How are customer service and technical support?

We use tech support, which is okay. We used to have a hard time, but at this time, we are happy.

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

Previously, for monitoring, we use other products. Slowly, we are moving to vRealize now. It depends on our requirements and budget. 

How was the initial setup?

When 5.5 went to 6, we found it a bit difficult because they changed the model. 

Now, we are okay. We have gotten used to it, because it is a new platform. Initially, it was difficult, but now we are okay.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Five years ago, we planned to move from a physical to virtualization environment. We evaluated a lot of other hypervisors, did some PoCs, etc. We decided on VMware. For the past six to seven years, it's been a big journey. 

What other advice do I have?

I would rate vSphere as a nine out of 10.

I will recommend the solution, but there are some steps to take first. There are some VMware videos to view and some KB articles to read, which are available, regarding compatibility. I would recommend them to go through everything. Go through the KB articles, then I will recommend them to implement that one.

An important criteria for choosing a vendor is evaluating how a company behaves. We will review their past history, the current market, and the value of that product. Then, we will see whether that product can used for our requirement. Based on that, we choose our vendors.

We haven't started using the VM encryption. We are in the very initial stage, doing a PoC for it and also the UEFI Secure Boot. These are options that we are trying. Let's see how they will work, and we're looking forward to their results.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Internship Student at na
Real User
Distributed vSwitch and vSphere are the two most valuable features

What is our primary use case?

Server virtualization.

How has it helped my organization?

Consolidation and normalization.

What is most valuable?

Distributed vSwitch, and vSphere.

What needs improvement?

Improvement in price.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
ReviewerU8183 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant at a tech consulting company with 1-10 employees
Consultant
Gathering all of the hosts together to create one single pool across the enterprise is a terrific feature, but the integration between multiple nodes needs improvement
Pros and Cons
  • "Gathering all of the hosts together to create one single pool across the enterprise is a terrific feature."
  • "It needs to integrate better between multiple modules."

What is our primary use case?

We started using this just for virtualization, but now we have gone into creating private cloud features for our customers. 

What is most valuable?

Gathering all of the hosts together to create one single pool across the enterprise is a terrific feature.

What needs improvement?

It needs to integrate better between multiple modules. 

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would rate the scalabilty as an eight out of ten. 

How was the initial setup?

The setup was easy. The deployment did not take much time, as long as it was properly planned. The planning must be from an experienced side and user-acceptance front. It should not take more than two months of time. 

What about the implementation team?

We used system integrators. 

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

The pricing is a bit complex.

What other advice do I have?

VMware alone cannot offer all the features that customers require. There are times when the differential cost of the customer is not feasible. In addition, there are times when the requirements, in terms of API, build up and the connectivity to the outside world is more important. People need to decide on their own whether this is a good solution or if an OpenStack solution is the better choice.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Hazem Mohamed - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy Manager IT at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
It is a centralized platform for hypervisoring that speeds up the migration between the nodes
Pros and Cons
  • "It is a powerful solution that enables us to take a snapshot and clone any version of machine."
  • "This solution should have a better backup policy. Furthermore, there should be an ability to expose the universal machine. In the current version, you need to shutdown and use an offline virtual machine to backup."

What is our primary use case?

It is a powerful solution which enables us to take a snapshot and clone any virtual machine. It is also a centralized platform for hypervisoring that speeds up the migration between the nodes. 

What is most valuable?

It has a very high speed, which is a nice feature. 

What needs improvement?

This solution should have a better backup policy. Furthermore, there should be an ability to expose the universal machine. In the current version, you need to shutdown and use an offline virtual machine to backup.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a very stable product.

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

We previously used Hyper-V, and we found a lot of problems with taking snapshots of our virtual machines. It also was not very stable. 

How was the initial setup?

The setup was very easy. There were guidelines, and we simply followed the steps. The deployment took around three days. 

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

It is expensive. Other solutions on the market are free. We had to plan with VMware how many hosts that we needed in order to determine the price. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Azure Infrastructure Architect at Wireless Car
Real User
Top 10
It is a fast, responsive solution that is easy to use

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use vSphere for management. It is very fast, responsive, and easy to use.

What is most valuable?

It has high clustering and availability features. These features are not found with other hypervisors.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see VMware head towards a more GPU friendly environment. 

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is high. 

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

I also have experience with Citrix ESXi.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The other options that we considered were Cisco, Dell EMC, and Nutanix. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Head of Technological Architecture at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
We saved a lot of time and hardware with this solution

What is our primary use case?

We virtualize our infrastructure with this solution. 

How has it helped my organization?

We saved a lot of time and hardware with this solution. It also prevents fewer incidents. 

What needs improvement?

I would like to see more software as a service solutions.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

How is customer service and technical support?

The tech support is very good.

How was the initial setup?

The setup was a bit complex at first. Now, it is more simple. 

The implementation was fast.

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

The pricing is a little expensive, and the licensing is a bit complex. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user834129 - PeerSpot reviewer
VP Cloud Business at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
It is fairly easy to use and has enhanced security, but the tech support is poor

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case is documentation.

How has it helped my organization?

I use this solution on AWS, which is pretty standard. It is fairly easy to use and has enhanced security. 

What is most valuable?

From a feature set point of view, I am quite comfortable with it. 

What needs improvement?

The pricing and tech support need improvement. 

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I have not scaled it very high. I have only used it in small implementations. I only have a total of 190 people using the solution.

How is customer service and technical support?

The technical support is poor. We are in Australia, but we do not have the same level of support as the US and Europe. 

How was the initial setup?

Setting up this solution is not a problem. 

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

The price is high. It would be nice if VMware made a price reduction. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I looked at native AWS as an option. My preference is Oracle VM versus this solution. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Network Architect at a tech company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
It is easy to set up. Once you get it running, it doesn't break down. It just runs.
Pros and Cons
  • "It is highly scalable. We need to scale out and up, and we can do that with vSphere. We can easily add more storage, drives, or memory."
  • "We stopped using a lot of cloud services. However, I see that VMware has integrated with Amazon Cloud. We will now to have to move everything to the cloud."

What is most valuable?

It is user-friendly and easy to use. 

What needs improvement?

We stopped using a lot of cloud services. However, I see that VMware has integrated with Amazon Cloud. We will now to have to move everything to the cloud. My goal is to uplift our environment to the cloud, which will be probably in two years, but it will happen. It is where everyone is heading, since it is the next big step.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable. Once you have it in production, there are rarely any issues, which is a nice thing about VMware.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is highly scalable. We need to scale out and up, and we can do that with vSphere. We can easily add more storage, drives, or memory. 

How is customer service and technical support?

I do not have any problems with tech support. It is very good. I usually start in-house, then outreach to VMware support if there is a need to do so.

How was the initial setup?

It is easy to set up. Once you get it running, it doesn't break down. It just runs.

The deployment took a week to complete. I do not fault the solution, as it was our personal systematic issues that had to be dealt with internally.

What was our ROI?

ROI is hard to measure because it depends upon the customer's relationship with the solution and how much they spent on it.

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

VMware licensing and pricing are a bit more expensive compared to others, like Hyper-V. However, you get what you pay for.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We considered Hyper-V, but decided to go with VMware since there are certain applications which run better on VMware. 

What other advice do I have?

Price is not everything to me. Even though price may put a burden on a company, if you are trying to solve something for your company, the more expensive solution may help you run your environment smoothly. Then, it is worth the expense. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Pre-sales engineer
Real User
A solid solution for backups and security

What is our primary use case?

We use this product as a solution for backups and security.

What needs improvement?

The functionalities and management of the product demonstrations need improvement.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a stable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is highly scalable. We can add new hardware and expand the infrastructure easily.

How is customer service and technical support?

The tech support is good. 

How was the initial setup?

The setup was easy to install and deploy. It took one or two days for deployment.

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

The pricing is expensive but we really do not have a choice.

What other advice do I have?

I advise anyone looking to use this solution to take the VMware webinars to familiarize themselves with the product. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Founder Director at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5
It has allowed us to have the flexibility of moving around our workloads on different machines, and not having to worry if anything is down.
Pros and Cons
  • "As an end-user, I would say it has allowed us to have the flexibility of moving around our workloads on different machines, and not having to worry if anything is down."
  • "In addition, I think some of the backup features or the prediction features can be improved."

What is our primary use case?

It is primarily for virtualization. 

How has it helped my organization?

As an enduser, I would say it has allowed us to have the flexibility of moving around our workloads on different machines, and not having to worry if anything is down. Since we are a small organization, we don't have a lot of hardware resources to spare. So, this consolidation helps us to aggregate a lot more services and solutions utilizing the same hardware. Of course, it also allowed us to upgrade our skills, which helped us when deploying other solutions.

What is most valuable?

We truly value the security of the solution. We also value the consolidation, which can be done in terms of releasing the hardware footprint, and the service call. Furthermore, the automation and ease, as well as source utilization are key features of this product.

What needs improvement?

I think the cost should be reconsidered. VMware is not the cheapest solution out there, despite the fact that it may be one of the best.

In addition, I think some of the backup features or the prediction features can be improved. The legacy workloads are not prone to be virtualized. Some users may want to see a common deduction product across the physical service.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has been a very stable solution for us. We have not had any downtime in the past three years. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is excellent. I do not see any other solution that comes close to this product.

How is customer service and technical support?

The response time from tech support is efficient. The tech support team there is very knowledgeable. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward, and not complex at all. 

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

The cost is a bit high.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Another solution in the same sphere is Hyper-V, which is quite good in terms of basic plain virtualization software. However, vSphere offers a scaled-up version. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
System Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Video Review
Real User
I like the capability of logging into one system, then being able to shift over to another system within that single pane of glass
Pros and Cons
  • "The ability to to virtualize systems and run those virtual workloads with a fewer number of servers is tremendous."
  • "I like the capability of logging into one system, then being able to shift over to another system within that single pane of glass."
  • "The one area where I would love to see an improvement is the HTML5 client. It's great, but it could get better."

What is our primary use case?

I use it as systems administrative management tool. I use VMware vSphere, vCenter, and vSphere ESXi.

We do not use VMWare cloud on AWS.

How has it helped my organization?

vSphere has improved our organization by far, and it's hard to even quantify. The ability to to virtualize systems and run those virtual workloads with a fewer number of servers is tremendous. We are still in the process of converting physical to virtual, but we are getting there.

The mission critical apps that we use for our system are for monitoring different meters throughout households in the greater area in which we operate.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the single pane of glass management. There are a number of things which vSphere offers in terms of consolidating infrastructure onto single pieces of hardware. This is instead of having multiple systems running on the OSs that we need. I like the capability of logging into one system, then being able to shift over to another system within that single pane of glass.

vSphere is simple to manage. Some of the best parts of managing it is vCenter. I use that to provide entry points for different administrators to login from different environments to manage either physical or virtual servers and resources on the network in our storage site.

What needs improvement?

vSphere is going in a good direction already with its improvement. The one area where I would love to see an improvement is the HTML5 client. It's great, but it could get better. I know it can.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has been fairly stable in 6.7. I have not had any major issues. 

I've come up on older versions from 3.5 until 6.7. This version has been the best experience so far.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I can build out hundreds of hosts, but my environment's not that big. It is not as big as most of the larger companies out there, so I've not hit a bottleneck yet in terms of scalability.

How are customer service and technical support?

Every now and then, I have to use vSphere technical support. My experience with them has been a positive one overall. Usually, if I don't get an answer from one tech support engineer, I can get another answer from another engineer who will help me out with my particular issue.

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

I wouldn't say that I invested in a new solution to get to where I'm right now. I just really have been upgrading upon what's already there. I'm pretty much in bed with VM. I'm staying with VM, and that's where I want to be. I don't want to go anywhere else. VMware is top of the line.

How was the initial setup?

I've done setups of different versions of vSphere. The latest one was more complex than 6.5, which had an external platform services controller. Now with 6.7, you have an embedded platform services controller, much like 6.5, but you also get the enhanced link mode capability. That was a big shift for me. 

What was our ROI?

ROI is tough to quantify once you are already in bed with VMware. However, I did a comparison between physical server to virtual. There was a point in time where we would size out a virtual server to be a massive size, then we'd buy a physical server of the equivalence. We saved somewhere around 20 percent going virtual, as opposed to the physical equivalent.

I have seen a performance boost in a sense that we have provided better utilization of system resources within vSphere. However, I don't have an actual percentage to provide.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Before I started with VMware, I did not have any other vendors on my shortlist.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate it at a nine, because I don't believe any type of technology is a ten. There is always room for improvement. However, this is a solid nine.

Spend time researching, investing, and testing for months. Spend a few months testing the product before implementing it to production.

I don't have too much experience with the encryption or secure features of the new vSphere version.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Vice President with 1-10 employees
Real User
The Scalability of the Solution is Good. You Can Scale Up to Maximum Levels.

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use this solution for replication purposes we have, and to back up information in HR (High Resolution) mode.

What needs improvement?

I think they should consider lowering the pricing of entry-level products.

In addition, I think they should come up with a backup feature that is more product enrichment-based. It should be a full-fledged backup solution. It just is not there right now.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the solution is quite stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of the solution is good. You can scale up to maximum levels. We currently have 2000 users. This requires four engineers to run the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

How was the initial setup?

It was complex, and not straightforward. The deployment took six hours initially to setup. Then, we migrated our virtual-physical servers to virtual machines and now coming projects were also built on virtual machines.

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

The pricing is justified. It may be a bit high, but the features are worth it.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise others to go with this product if they want to scale their enterprise, definitely if there is no budget constraint.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Head - Server and Storage at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
The DRS feature is helpful to my organization.
Pros and Cons
  • "The DRS feature of this solution is a very valuable feature."
  • "From my point of view, my advice is to design the solution properly the first time."

What is our primary use case?

My primary use case for this solution is the DRS feature of the solution.

How has it helped my organization?

When checking the utilization reports, the operational reporting and matrixes are a little weak.  In terms of what has been the starting growth or trend analysis is something which, currently they have an add-on which we have not used  because it's an add-on product, which we have not bought. As of now, they have this capability but I've not seen these features to be more integrated on the base product itself rather than having as a special add-on.

What is most valuable?

I really value the DRS feature of the solution. Apart from that, there is a high availability in the feature called VMotion. In addition, the centralized management throughout the V-Center software is useful.

What needs improvement?

When checking the utilization reports, the operational reporting and matrixes are a little weak.  In terms of what has been the starting growth or trend analysis is something which, currently they have an add-on which we have not used  because it's an add-on product, which we have not bought. As of now, they have this capability but I've not seen these features to be more integrated on the base product itself rather than having as a special add-on.

As I mentioned, the necessary improvement would be to add additional features that would integrate reporting and management in terms of automation. Those are the two things I would say it's a lot of, or the third item could be of some service important to integration. Right now everybody is talking about private clubs, but these are the base foundation so, the effect it has had on embedded software attack, running on the hypervisor for self-provisioning, it definitely has an edge.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Its highly scalable, we have never had to make radical changes to the design to make it more, or to put in more capacity. So, as we are growing we have been adding the servers into the existing pool without even worrying about a need for redesign. As we grow, we find that our company is more dependent upon this product. 

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support usually we have online support, where we can log a call if there is any trouble. But so far in the last three years that I have been here, we rarely, or I cannot collect any one instance where we had necessity to log a case with the support team, the forums and the community are, have enough knowledge based articles to make us pass through any technical challenges that we have faced.

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

We have prior use knowledge of Hyper-V. First, it did not have this automatic scalable capability which are scored to move across from one specific hardware to another without impacting any downtime. And secondly, it did not have a lot of automatic configuration capabilities, based on the utilization of the specific hardware it could re-balance what goes around on top of it. So these two are they key features that I feel were lacking at that point in time and it's hard to use another feature that I feared was lacking. In addition, it relied a lot upon the physical machine.

How was the initial setup?

It was very straightforward setup. 

The way we had done it is it came pre-installed with as part of the hardware stack that we purchased so the new servers that we purchased we bundled that ESXi software on top of it from the hardware vendor itself. So from that perspective, the implementation strategy was to have it as an OEM100 by the hardware vendor itself and then the way we designed it from our side is we designed it into two different data centers. One for production, one for test and development. So just have a logical separation there in terms of the hardware that was used for production and what was used for distribution.

Overall timelines are approximately two to three weeks time-frame. After the hardware was developed, they came in and installed the base software and considered it based on our requirements.

What about the implementation team?

Deployment was done by the hardware vendor itself. The hardware came from HP and there was a HP reseller who shipped us the hardware. The resellers team only came and did all the installation and confirmation after the design was agreed with us.

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

Pricing is competitive I would say, because usually we buy the software, along with the hardware stock so it's usually a bundle thing that we try to squeeze the hardware windows in to get us proper discounts. So, it is regularly higher than what a Microsoft overall solution turns out to be. But, the capabilities are worth it. The price is justified.

Licensing is pretty standard.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

In my previous organization, we used Hyper-V for over eight years.

What other advice do I have?

From my side, the advice would be to design it properly the first time. Have proper capacity planned out, and don't just create over-provision in the production environment. Best you can do with provisioning with production, you definitely need to have some capacity sizing done properly. And, that goes in not for just this product but any virtualization product that a company implements. You do not want to overload the hardware. You have to think about the capabilities of the end-user.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Sajag Chaturvedi - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Infrastructure Architect at a retailer
Video Review
Real User
We have seen a tremendous performance boost with 100% uptime
Pros and Cons
  • "We have seen a tremendous performance boost. From when we started this VMware engagement in 2016 until now, we have seen around a 70 percent performance boost. This is a good number."
  • "There is still room for improvement with the HTML5 Web Client. They are working on it, as I can see on their blog. However, there is still room for improvement in the newer features that they can push into it."

What is our primary use case?

Our main use case for the product is we want to do virtualization. We want to save costs on the physical hardware because we were running some big workloads on the physical hardware that we migrated over to VMware. In terms of the retail applications which we are running on the physical hardware, we have now virtualized them.

How has it helped my organization?

The product has improved the organization in terms of the infrastructure stability and security, balancing the resources, and providing cost saving. The cost savings and the TCO with vSphere are very good.

We are using our vSphere for our new workloads in terms of Federation Services as well as for our VDI workloads. These are mission critical for us because they are the customer-facing.

What is most valuable?

Day-to-day, the most valuable feature on vSphere is its DRS feature: Distributed Resource Scheduler. We don't need to manage or balance resources. As soon as you come to the office in the morning, it's automatically balanced.

We work in a retail company, so you don't know what time the customer will be coming in or what time the work load is high. We are not uniform in terms of our workload. Therefore, it is important for us that when the workload is high, it is automatically optimized.

In terms of the vSphere security, the most important feature is the Trusted Platform Module (TPM), which was launched in 6.7, as well as the encrypted vMotion. These help us to bridge the gap if there is a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack or suspicious activity, so at least our VMware workloads are secure.

The best feature that we like is the Web Client. We just login and there is the data center. We don't have to walk to the data center everyday. We just open our laptops, log into our vCenter, and we have our full data store and data center ready. 

What needs improvement?

I can see the room for improvement still in the user interface (UI). 

There is still room for improvement with the HTML5 Web Client. They are working on it, as I can see on their blog. However, there is still room for improvement in the newer features that they can push into it.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability is perfectly fine. In the past eight months, we have been able to achieve 100 percent uptime. Therefore, the stability is quite impressive.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We are using it on a big scale. vSphere is one of the biggest product of VMware, and we have around five vCenters with around 80 hosts.

Scalability is one of the best things about vSphere. You don't need to change your design if you have a new demand for workloads or if a new product is coming in. Thus, the scalability feature is awesome.

How is customer service and technical support?

Tech support is sometimes good and sometimes bad. We work in the Southeast Asia region where sometimes we have a language barrier. Therefore, their tech support is 50/50 for us.

How was the initial setup?

With the initial setup, server workloads were running on an open source. When we had planned to go with VMware, we faced a bit of complexity. It was just a one time thing. After that, everything went smoothly. So, there were some complexities that we did face.

What was our ROI?

In the past six months, we have saved around 110TBs of storage, which is almost equivalent to $200,000 USD. That is a huge savings.

We have seen a tremendous performance boost. From when we started this VMware engagement in 2016 until now, we have seen around a 70 percent performance boost. This is a good number.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

When we started with VMware, we also tried Citrix XenServer. We considered them as well as Red Hat's platform.

What other advice do I have?

I will rate vSphere a ten out of ten, as I'm a huge fan of vSphere. 

Please look into this solution. You can have it, test it, and download it for 60 days, then you can test it yourself decide what is best for you.

We don't have VMware cloud on AWS, but we have plan to go on it in six months.

The most important thing when choosing a vendor: We look for performance, return on investment, and tech support. Tech support is very important for us in day-to-day tasks. These are the things that we look for in a vendor.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Chief Technology Officer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Video Review
Real User
Easy to use, anybody can figure out how to power on or create a VM
Pros and Cons
  • "The built-in encryption of vSphere really helps us to secure our customers, especially customers in the medical field who need to be HIPAA compliant. Being able to encrypt the VM itself helps out a ton."

    What is our primary use case?

    My primary use case of VMware vSphere 6.7 is that I manage some 100 clients who are using this product in their day-to-day work. These are businesses that use it. It runs the core of their networks. It runs their business. It is critical for them to be up and running, so vSphere is pretty important for them.

    The mission-critical application that we run on vSphere is our main program that we use to actually monitor all of our customers. We have hundreds of customers. Our main application of remote monitoring runs in our vSphere environment. We also run our Exchange, which is critical. That's how we get our alerts about all of our systems that we're managing. We also run our ticketing systems. When a customer will submit a ticket via email we get it. All of that is running on vSphere.

    How has it helped my organization?

    While I don't have percentages to share, I can say that I have received a performance boost (using vSphere).

    The solution has improved our organization because it's made our jobs a lot easier. We're able to monitor all these customers and, with vSphere, they're much more stable than they were previously when they were on physical servers. The fact that they're more stable makes our jobs a lot easier.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable features of vSphere are really the scalability and its reliability. It's really helped us, as a managed service provider, because we have so many customers that we have to be pretty much on call for, so that when it's up and running and it's working well, that makes our jobs a lot easier.

    The built-in encryption of vSphere really helps us to secure our customers, especially customers in the medical field who need to be HIPAA compliant. Being able to encrypt the VM itself helps out a ton.

    I find vSphere very simple and easy to manage. It has a very good GUI that you're able to use. Anybody can log in and start clicking around and figure out how to power on a VM, how to create a new VM. It's pretty streamlined for the most part.

    As far as the ease of use goes, if you ever were in a situation where something was down, I feel like the logging in VMware makes it really easy to report what's going on. The logging is a really helpful feature. Also, some of the features built in, like vMotion - if you do have a server that's down - you can use something like vMotion to get it back up and running.

    What needs improvement?

    As far as room for improvement goes, I really feel like each release they're coming out with new features, making it better and better. The new HTML5 client is almost there. It needs just a little bit more and then it will definitely be ready.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability has been awesome. Like I said, we have 100 clients who are on vSphere and it has made all of their systems a lot more stable, which is great for us.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability is really great. Being able to have a customer who decides, maybe a year after they've purchased their hardware, that they need to add another server because maybe they've decided to purchase a new product - being able to scale that system out really helps a lot.

    How was the initial setup?

    Getting vSphere set up for the first time is pretty straightforward. The installation process is not that painful. It really guides you through it so it makes it a lot easier, especially if it's your first time doing it.

    What was our ROI?

    As far as our ROI goes, vSphere actually reduces time to set up a server by a ton. By a server, I mean a virtual machine. In the past, you'd have to order in hardware, wait weeks for it to come in, and then install Windows, patch it, and actually go deploy it at the customer location. Now, if the customer's already running vSphere, all we have to do is log in to that, build the VM, and install Windows and we're good to go. We've gone from days to an hour, probably.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    When we were looking at vSphere, we did look at some of the competitors. Of course, we looked at Microsoft Hyper-V because we're a Microsoft partner as well. However, it lacked a lot of the things that vSphere had.

    What other advice do I have?

    The best advice I could give somebody looking to implement the solution is definitely to download the trial because you can try it out for free. Put it on some test equipment and run it and you're going to love it.

    We don't have a customer that uses VMware Cloud on AWS, but we've been very involved in hoping the price gets cheaper so we can sell it. 

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    PeerSpot user
    Brian Kirsch - PeerSpot reviewer
    Instructor at MATC
    Video Review
    Real User
    You see more responsiveness now with the HTML5 client. It feels like a much snappier product.
    Pros and Cons
    • "You see more responsiveness, especially now with having the HTML5 client. It feels like a much snappier product."
    • "Having a virtualized infrastructure and being able to bring up Windows, Linux, and VMware within a virtualized environment brings more technology into the classroom. Without it, we couldn't do what we do."
    • "The biggest issue with stability is the SSO. That is still an issue as far as integrating it with Active Directory, and any large scale of it."
    • "The biggest thing to improve is to have more self-service in the portals. I would like to receive more help through the web interface."

    What is our primary use case?

    The primary use case is spinning up lab VMs. We can spin up several hundred VMs for students to work with, which could be Windows-based or Linux-based. It's about creating these VMs, then destroying them as soon as they are done. So, there is a lot of creation and destruction. We also spin up VM environments as well. On the vSphere 6.7 product, the optimization is great. The older versions, 6.0 and 6.5 were sluggish. When your spinning and destroying things, it's a big deal to have higher performance.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We don't do a lot with the encryption, but we do have the ability to encrypt something if we send it offsite. We have multiple locations, so we can encrypt our VMs, if necessary. However, we don't have a big need for it, but it's nice that it's there.

    Our mission critical is our classroom. If we have college students who can't work, they paid to be there, and are paying us for the environment. Therefore, if we're down for a day, that's a real problem. Given that people have a choice of where they can go for education, we have to be always available. Otherwise, they will go next door. For us, it's about a student's success and you can only do that if you're up and running.

    What is most valuable?

    1. A big feature for us was Quick Boot. You don't have to wait for the host to do a recheck on memory. You do an upgrade, and it's not a 10-minute reboot cycle. You can bring your host online and offline. 
    2. Database optimization. They did a lot in enhancing the performance. They took down the memory utilization and increased what it brought in. You see more responsiveness, especially now with having the HTML5 client. It feels like a much snappier product.

    The biggest feature that everybody wanted was the HTML5 client. This has made everything native where you're able to surf through it. Going into our web page, you're no longer refreshing it. It feels more like an enterprise product now. With Adobe Flash, it didn't feel that way.

    What needs improvement?

    The biggest thing to improve is to have more self-service in the portals. I would like to receive more help through the web interface. 

    I would like to see continual improvements of the client. It doesn't need to go much larger for support on the number of VMs or its size, because there are pretty high limits already. However, it needs a bit more in the management and the reporting aspect. We have to get a third-party for that. It would be great if it was a bit more integrated.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability has been good since the 6.0 days. The biggest issue with stability is the SSO. That is still an issue as far as integrating it with Active Directory, and any large scale of it. That is still a work in progress. However, the core stability aspect of it has been there and hasn't changed. This has just gotten better.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I have no issues with scalability. As large as we have wanted to go with as many VMs, we have never had an issue pushing its limits. 

    The majority of the issues are truly integrating it into the Active Directory structures. This doesn't seem to be there yet.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    VMware tech support has always been good to us. Our biggest challenge is getting them the logs, but once they have them, the logs are so detailed that any possible issue usually is resolved within a few hours. So, it has always been a positive experience.

    What was our ROI?

    Given that we spin up and down hundreds of VMs, we physically couldn't do that with physical hardware. It would just be financially impossible. Having a virtualized infrastructure and being able to bring up Windows, Linux, and VMware within a virtualized environment brings more technology into the classroom. Without it, we couldn't do what we do.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    There wasn't a short list. It was the only solution. It's the only thing that made financial sense as far as being able to do what we needed it to do. Nobody out there had it.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate it as a nine out of ten.

    Go big with your hardware. You have to be willing to invest in the hardware platform. Storage is key. Make sure you have enough performance with it. When you're looking at the actual overall product, make sure you understand what third party offerings you need to put in. It could be something from VMware or one of the partners, but it's going to be more that just the VMware Suite. There will be one or two things you need to add to it. Specifically, monitoring or reporting will be the big draws.

    I don't have a percentage for the performance boost of the apps. However, there is noticeably different speed of how the database is working and how you move through the client. Everything is a bit more responsive. Part of that was getting rid of the flash client as well. We're seeing an overall general performance increase in everything we do, whether it's the monitoring aspect or deploying.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Brian Kirsch - PeerSpot reviewer
    Brian KirschInstructor at MATC
    Real User

    With more virtualization the experience level with the products has grown and the admins today are able to troubleshoot a wide range of issues with less help. Ideally getting more technical information in the client will help to shorten issue resolution time and improve overall uptime.

    PeerSpot user
    Cloud Solutions Architect at Clouditalia Telecomunicazioni
    Video Review
    Real User
    All our daily operations are faster with HTML 5 and vCSA makes it faster and more stable

    What is our primary use case?

    Our main use case of vSphere is as the lower layer of a cloud service provider. It's the basis for offering our services through vCloud Director to our customers.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The HTML 5 is valuable in the measure of time saved, day by day.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature of vSphere 6.7, is the HTML 5. I find it really awesome because it speeded up all our daily operations.

    It's reliable, stable, and much easier than the previous version.

    vSphere now is even simpler. It was simple even before, but going through the HTML 5 interface - and 90 percent of the features are on HTML 5 - it's even easier than the previous ones. Version 6.05 still was, it had HTML 5, but not one 100 percent.

    What needs improvement?

    A slight improvement could be made to the interface of the management of vCSA, so that they answer on the 5480 ports. That kind of graphical interface could be improved, but it is not a main point.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of vSphere has reached a good point. Especially without the Flash and the so-called FLEX Client, with HTML 5 it is much more stable than it was before. Previously we used vCenter on Windows. We're adopting the vCSA now, it's much faster and more stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    vSphere is much more simple to scale than before, thanks to vCSA instead of the monolithic installation on VMware.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    We use VMware support. We use it quite often, but not because the product is bad, just because we have so many customers. We are talking about 5,000 virtual machines, so it's statistically probable that we would need to access support. The support is really great.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    When we chose VMware, of course we checked other vendors like Microsoft because it's present everywhere; even the open-source KVM. But we decided Microsoft wasn't at an enterprise stage and the open-source one was nice to use but, since there was no support, it wasn't suitable to offer to our customers. We didn't have any doubt choosing VMware.

    What other advice do I have?

    The built-in features such as encryption - even including TPM module 2.0, are good, but still not useful for us, just because we don't have a lot of requests for this.

    The mission-critical applications - more or less all are critical applications. vCenter keeps all the virtual machines of our customers and we don't know what's on those virtual machines. For us, every one of them - not knowing what is inside - is critical. That is for the vSphere used for resources. For the vSphere that we use for management, the critical ones are the infrastructure applications, the ones that keeps the infrastructure working. So from the databases to vCenter itself, to vCloud Director, to NSX. All those machines are critical in that they keep the system working.

    As for VMware Cloud on AWS, we have only tested it.

    I rate vSphere at eight out of ten. Ten is perfection and I, more or less, never give a ten because people can improve. It's eight, not nine, because I still don't have complete control of the interface.

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    PeerSpot user
    Chief Architect at RoundTower Technologies
    Video Review
    Real User
    TPM and virtual machine encryption provide more security for our financial and healthcare customers

    What is our primary use case?

    It's running mission-critical and business-critical workloads for our customers, and the experience has been positive.

    The mission-critical apps include core banking systems, core healthcare systems, artificial intelligence. And highly transactional workloads are also great fits for vSphere 6.7.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We've seen an increase of about five to ten percent for the mission-critical apps. Their code is a lot more optimized now that they're using it in the public cloud with VMware Cloud on AWS.

    In our organization, the lifecycle management has improved. What that means is our customers are spending a lot less time on "keeping the lights on." Day 2 Operations are being simplified a lot.

    What is most valuable?

    • The move towards feature-parity with HTML5 for the user interface.
    • Also, increasing the release of features, which is partly through the use of that technology stack with VMware Cloud on AWS, so it's a much more robust product right now.
    • It is a lot more simple and efficient to manage. It has improved a lot from the early days of vSphere 5.x. Lifecycle management and reducing the number of clicks that an administrator has to do to actually do a task have been greatly optimized, particularly with the HTML5 interface.
    • In terms of more easily managing networks and improving visibility, the two go hand in hand. Compared to the vCloud Air days, it's come a long way. It's a solution that actually works now, and you can use your vSphere staff - who have been trained on and understand vSphere - to actually consume that hybrid cloud with very little or no training.

    What needs improvement?

    vSphere is the Rolls Royce of hypervisors. Moving forward, they just need to continue integrating and simplifying that user interface experience. With VMware Cloud Foundation, that's the Day 2 lifecycle management. You've got the VMC offering that's obviously all public cloud. They need to keep on integrating the APIs and simplifying the user experience. And they're definitely moving towards the one-click experience that you have with other technology vendors.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability has been good. Now that the VMC on AWS codestream is 6.7, and they're following a DevOps methodology, the stability of vSphere obviously has increased greatly.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It scales very well. Now, with vSphere 6.7, it's 128 hosts. Talk about scale with vSphere is now a non-issue. Typically what we do with our customers is deploy vSan clusters, typically 20 to 30 hosts, because that's a natural failure domain. Going beyond that, it really makes no sense, because you want to have separate failure domains.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    In the early 6.x days, their support went down. Now with 6.7, being with VMware Cloud on AWS, their support level has increased, because they've had to. It's definitely a better experience now.

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

    Regarding knowing that it is time to switch to this solution, our customers tend to be existing vSphere customers. End-of-life, end-of-support tend to be the trigger for, "Okay, we need to upgrade our infrastructure stack."

    The other big trigger is end-of-life of the hardware stack that they're going with. That's typically a conversation about moving from legacy, three-tier infrastructure to a hyperconverged infrastructure stack. And then there's a hypervisor conversation about the best-of-breed to use to meet their business requirements.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Nutanix AHV, Hyper-V is commonly on the list, and Red Hat KVM is the other one.

    What other advice do I have?

    Partner with the right partner because not all partners are the same. And have a strategy in mind. Have a design in place, the logical design. What functions are you trying to achieve? What business problems are you trying to solve? And then go ahead and do your due diligence with testing, etc. Once you involve the partner and you're implementing, make sure you have proper testing, have a soft launch, and then a go-live, so that you've got a risk-free solution.

    That's where a lot of customers go wrong. They don't do their due diligence, and they don't properly launch, and they have the wrong partner that they partnered with, who is not quite up to the task of doing this type of thing.

    For our customers that are very security conscious, in the financial space and the healthcare space, they typically will have clusters where TPM and virtual machine encryption are enabled to provide a more secure experience for those services.

    We sell a lot of VMware Cloud on AWS. It integrates natively through hybrid cloud extensibility into VMC on AWS. That's actually been a big selling point with 6.7.

    I rate the solution at nine out of ten. What would bring it up to a ten is feature-parity with the HTML5 interface.

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    PeerSpot user
    Technical Support at a energy/utilities company with 5,001-10,000 employees
    Real User
    It is a fast, and expedient solution. It performs our TCO easily.

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using the VMware vSphere product to virtualize our servers and we are very succesful. We are very satisfied.

    What is most valuable?

    It provides a new environment in an expedient manner. It is a better use of resources between the servers. As we can use these resources better, it helps our TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) analysis.

    What needs improvement?

    We would like VMware to add capacity to add more equipment. We also think it could improve with the hyper-converged.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is very scalable. We like that it is very functional and it has ability to access hyper-conversions. There is a capacity to grow the environment by adding the same type of equipment, and that really interests us. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I do not have experience with the technical support team.

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

    We looked at Microsoft Hyper-V, but it does not have all of the systematics of VMware vSphere.

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

    I think that vSphere is an expensive solution.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Engineering Manager at Turnkey Cyber Solutions
    User
    We are distributed across the nation and are primarily all remote employees. I was able to build our private cloud with the tool.

    What is our primary use case?

    • Enterprise Infrastructure.
    • We are distributed across the nation and are primarily all remote employees. I was able to build our private cloud with the tool.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We are distributed across the nation and are primarily all remote employees. I was able to build our private cloud with the tool.

    What is most valuable?

    Virtualization of our environment has made our carbon footprint, the real estate necessary and the ease of deployment in time savings significant.

    What needs improvement?

    The thick client had features that were removed from the HTML5 web console and it has caused a learning curve deficiency. Training could be more customer-centric.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Lead IT Systems Engineer at a tech consulting company with 10,001+ employees
    Video Review
    Real User
    VCHA is a nice redundancy feature, while VMFS-6 for using auto UNMAP on data stores is a quality of life improvement
    Pros and Cons
    • "Most valuable features of vSphere 6.7, for us, at the management level would be: VCHA is a nice redundancy feature that they added in v6.7. I like the quality of life improvements with the VMFS-6 for using auto UNMAP on the data stores. And we really appreciate the improvements to the Clarity UI where we can manage Update Manager (VUM) and our vSAN stack within the modern interface."
    • "The solution is also very simple and efficient to manage. Features that have made it simple and easy to manage include the newer VAMI for the V-center appliance, it's very easy to see what version we are at, and very easy to upgrade to the next version. The fact that we can now use VCHA at the appliance level just decreases our chance of having an outage because so many of our customers rely on the API interface for V-center."

      What is our primary use case?

      My primary use case for vSphere 6.7 is that it's used strategically as a management plain for all 2,100 ESXi hosts across our environment.

      In terms of mission-critical apps, I couldn't tell you, because I operate the public cloud and we don't really care what our customers use it for.

      We do not use VMware Cloud on AWS yet but it is something we are exploring.

      How has it helped my organization?

      In regards to a performance boost, I don't know at the application level, but I can tell you, purely at the vCenter level, that we have seen improvements in our ability to migrate from Windows to the appliance, now that there is full feature-parity across the stack. We're seeing reduced resource usage from the appliance, it's way more efficient in 6.7. Operations are able to complete faster, so we're happy.

      It has streamlined things for us. We've been able to standardize on the newer 6.7. It's definitely given us a path forward, where we might be able to look at expanding into the public cloud, augmenting our on-prem solution now that we have some sort of feature parity.

      What is most valuable?

      Most valuable features of vSphere 6.7, for us, at the management level would be:

      • VCHA is a nice redundancy feature that they added in 6.7.
      • I like the quality of life improvements with the VMFS-6 for using auto UNMAP on the data stores.
      • We really appreciate the improvements to the Clarity UI where we can manage Update Manager (VUM) and our vSAN stack within the modern interface.

      The solution is also very simple and efficient to manage. Features that have made it simple and easy to manage include the newer VAMI for the V-center appliance, it's very easy to see what version we are at, and very easy to upgrade to the next version. The fact that we can now use VCHA at the appliance level just decreases our chance of having an outage, because so many of our customers rely on the API interface for V-center. 

      What needs improvement?

      There are a few things I wanted to see in the next version of vSphere 6.7 which, it turns out, were announced today (at VMworld 2018) so I haven't had time to explore them. But one of the things that was most important to me was the ability to automate or improve deployment of VCHA in an advanced configuration, where it's not hosting itself. I'm looking forward to playing with the new release and seeing where it's at.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      The solution has been very stable for us. Since we rolled the 6.7 we have seen consistent uptime.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      Being that it's reduced our resource footprint, I think its very scalable.

      How are customer service and technical support?

      We have had to open up support cases for vSphere 6.7. We have gotten generally good feedback, but it's still fairly new for them, like it is for us. A lot of things work differently in production then they do in the lab or in your QA environments, and they're willing to help however they can to stabilize the product.

      As we're a partner, we do get generally good help pretty early on.

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

      I was not using any other solution before vSphere.

      I was involved from all the early stages of planning to move to vSphere 6.7.

      We were already considering moving to 6.5 and, for us, there were so many added benefits of going to 6.7, and being that it's not a real major bump - it's more like 6.5 "Update 3" with a lot of quality of life improvements - it made it very easy for us to make that decision.

      When I'm working with a vendor, some of the most important criteria are 

      • their release cadence
      • how much support they're giving to the product
      • what kind of R&D they're investing in
      • generally, anecdotally, the response we're getting when we're asking for support.

      What was our ROI?

      Moving to 6.7, like I said, has standardized a lot of our environment for us so we have definitely seen a reduction in the amount of time we are spending trying to troubleshoot things. It's very consistent. Everything has performed exactly how we expected it to.

      What other advice do I have?

      We don't use any of the built-in security features but I do appreciate that vSphere 6.7 is inherently more secure in that it's limited, by default, to using TLS 1.2.

      I would rate the solution to be a nine (out of ten) but I think they're steadily creeping towards a ten with some of the post-GA releases I've seen.

      Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
      PeerSpot user
      Stephen Parker - PeerSpot reviewer
      Systems Engineer at BYU Idaho
      Video Review
      Real User
      End-user interface is more efficient in v6.7, can be used from phone, laptop, and any OS
      Pros and Cons
      • "The main benefit of the version 6.7 is that it makes end-users able to use the interface much more effectively. They don't have to install a client on their machine, they can do it from their phone, their laptop, their tablet, any OS, anytime. It's a better experience for the end-user."
      • "Ease-of-Use; The solution is very simple to use and to manage. Updates are simple. The biggest feature that enables the ease of use is the fact that you can update via the web interface. With a couple of clicks, the update is done; no manual intervention, you just click Update and it automatically reboots the server for you and you're back up and going again."
      • "It would be nice to see it a little more tightly integrated with the patching solution so you could do it in one pane of glass. Right now, you have to jump back and forth. It's still not difficult, but you have to jump back and forth to do your update definitions and then go back and actually do the updates themselves."

      What is our primary use case?

      The use case is that we want to upgrade to the new features and functionality of version 6.7.

      We run several SQL Servers on there, Active Directory Servers, file servers, web servers; multiple servers running on it.

      How has it helped my organization?

      The new HTML5 interface is much more robust; a lot fewer bugs in it, more features. It's an overall better experience for us.

      It's hard to say there has been a performance boosts for these apps but I would say it is a boost because the servers are much more responsive, the end-users complain less about it. So it must be a good thing.

      The main benefit of the solution is that it makes end-users able to use the interface much more effectively. They don't have to install a client on their machine, they can do it from their phone, their laptop, their tablet, any OS, anytime. It's a better experience for the end-user.

      What is most valuable?

      The HTML5 interface is much better, it's faster, faster than the old C# Client, which was very nice to have. But with the HTML5 interface, it's smooth, fast, responsive. I can do it from any device, from my Mac, my PC, even from my phone.

      The solution is very simple to use and to manage. Updates are simple. The biggest feature that enables the ease of use is the fact that you can update via the web interface. With a couple of clicks, the update is done; no manual intervention, you just click Update and it automatically reboots the server for you and you're back up and going again.

      What needs improvement?

      As far as additional features go, they've already added the VMware Update Manager to this version, which has been great; it's been very nice to use.

      It would be nice to see it a little more tightly integrated with the patching solution so you could do it in one pane of glass. Right now, you have to jump back and forth. It's still not difficult, but you have to jump back and forth to do your update definitions and then go back and actually do the updates themselves.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      In terms of stability, so far the impressions of this solution have been very good. It's been very stable. We haven't had any downtime at all with this new solution.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      So far, we haven't had any issues at all with scalability. We've got over 1,500 VMs, about 84 hosts right now, so it's been very scalable for us.

      How is customer service and technical support?

      I have used technical support before, via the web interface. You ask questions there and they respond with email or a phone call back to help you solve your problems.

      How was the initial setup?

      I was an initial installer and I was actually a beta customer as well. The setup was very straightforward. Compared to the previous versions, it's much easier. You can upgrade from a Mac or a PC or via a web interface.

      What was our ROI?

      The biggest ROI has been technical. Technically, it's much easier to deploy, much easier for the end-user to use, we have much happier end-users. As they manage their systems, they're much happier without having to install a client, which takes time, takes resources on their machine. They can do it from any device, anywhere, at any time, which is very nice for them.

      What other advice do I have?

      Anybody who's looking to research this, to upgrade in the future, should go for it. It's a very easy upgrade. The features are very beneficial. It's very worth the time to update. It's a much easier solution for the future, and it's a better experience for all involved.

      Regarding using VMware Cloud on AWS, we use AWS right now, but for our backup solutions, is all. Cold backup, long-term storage out to the cloud, is all we do right now.

      For us, the biggest criteria for selecting a vendor, right now, are the pricing and the support. Because we are higher education, we have to find the best price, and support comes right behind that. We need the best support as well.

      I would rate the solution as about a nine out of ten right now. It could be better but it's very close to perfect right now.

      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
      PeerSpot user
      Senior System Administrator at a university with 501-1,000 employees
      Video Review
      Real User
      Quick provisioning allows us to respond more quickly to the needs of the business
      Pros and Cons
      • "Most valuable features are quick provisioning, High Availability, and DRS for balancing workload."

        What is our primary use case?

        Primary use case: data center virtualization. It's performing well. We're really happy with vSphere as a virtualization platform. 

        In terms of the built-in security features, we use none of them. I really couldn't tell you much at all about that.

        Mission-critical apps would be our student information system - that one is running on PeopleSoft - student portals, also PeopleSoft. Those are the mission-critical ones that we're running on VMware. There's other stuff that is critical, but I wouldn't say that it's mission-critical.

        How has it helped my organization?

        Benefits of vSphere: It saves me a ton of time, I can really quickly spin up new things to test them out or to respond to a need from the business. The way that it improves the way that the organization functions is that it makes us a lot quicker to respond to the needs of the business.

        What is most valuable?

        Most valuable features are 

        • quick provisioning
        • High Availability
        • DRS for balancing workload.

        I definitely find vSphere to be simple and efficient to manage. A key feature that enables this is vCenter. It is super simple to stand up, and once you're in there, especially with the new HTML5 client, everything is easy to manage.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        I find the stability of vSphere to be pretty great. We've had some issues, like everybody. Most of them were around hardware, so we thought it was really important to check the compatibility lists and make sure that you're running the right driver versions. But once you've got that running, it's solid. We don't have any stability problems.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        Scalability is great. It's easy to scale.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        I honestly found that I spent too much time in "back-and-forth hell" with help desks that are offshore. I found that VMware Support - it used to located in North America and that's who I would get when I would pick up the phone - the last few support cases that I opened didn't go that well. I ended up finding the solution myself and just telling them, "You know what? Forget it."

        How was the initial setup?

        I was not involved in the initial setup.

        What was our ROI?

        Straying a little bit from vSphere, but on vROps, the ROI that we're getting from that is that we're able to reclaim a lot of idle and oversized VMs, and we're actually saving money or actually giving ourselves more time with the resources we have, before we have to purchase new stuff. So that's an ROI.

        What other advice do I have?

        Aim for simple, go for fewer hosts with bigger resources, depending of course of on what you need. Don't try to do everything at once. Start with a basic setup and work up from there.

        We did not really see a performance boost with version 6.5.

        Regarding the most important criteria when selecting a vendor, it needs to be an industry-leading solution, needs to be easy, simple to set up, not an entire ecosystem of things that I need to deploy to get their system working. Ideally, I want something that we can set up in a day.

        I'd give vSphere about a nine out of ten. There is still stuff to work on, but it's definitely the best for me. As I said, I find that the support never blows me away, and maybe that's because I don't pay for the most premium level of support, but I find that what we got on the last few tickets that we opened was not great.

        Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
        PeerSpot user
        Sean Crawford - PeerSpot reviewer
        Information Systems Analyst at Sandag
        Video Review
        Real User
        We can do VM encryption on the fly, adhere to PCI DSS, and pass our audit without issue
        Pros and Cons
        • "In the past, we struggled with VM encryption. We couldn't encrypt the virtual machines with older versions of vSphere without some kind of third-party tool. Now, with 6.7, it's all in the application itself, in vSphere. We no longer have to procure additional products to meet that requirement. We can just do it on the fly, and pass our audit with no issues."
        • "The most valuable feature would be enhanced, what we call, Linked Mode to link our disaster recovery site to our primary site across different vCenters, without being required to be broken apart. Meaning, we have identity management and the actual vCenter servers split. We can actually do embedded now, thanks to vSphere 6.7."
        • "There is definitely room for improvement and that improvement should be in the licensing and the simplicity of procuring additional licenses or additional VMware products. Right now, it's very complex."
        • "VMware has amped up how frequently they release new versions and that adds instability to a stable environment."

        What is our primary use case?

        The primary use case for the product is, we use it as our core infrastructure to power all of our servers as well as any kind of application that runs tolling for the region.

        For mission-critical applications that we use this for, it's mostly for proprietary applications that were specifically built to run tolling. So all of our tolling applications run on vSphere 6.7.

        How has it helped my organization?

        In terms of a performance boost, we have seen about a 10 percent boost; not by much. Our workloads aren't CPU or memory-intensive, they're more idle-intensive with storage.

        The solution has improved our organization in terms of compliance. In the past, we struggled with VM encryption. We couldn't encrypt the virtual machines with older versions of vSphere without some kind of third-party tool. Now, with 6.7, it's all in the application itself, in vSphere. We no longer have to procure additional products to meet that requirement. We can just do it on the fly, and pass our audit with no issues.

        In terms of managing it, it's a lot simpler now with the vSphere HTML5 client. With the phase-out of the Flash client, which everyone doesn't like, it allows us as administrators to do our jobs far more efficiently than it did with the Flash client.

        What is most valuable?

        The most valuable feature would be enhanced, what we call, Linked Mode to link our disaster recovery site to our primary site across different vCenters, without being required to be broken apart. Meaning, we have identity management and the actual vCenter servers split. We can actually do embedded now, thanks to vSphere 6.7.

        For the security features for vSphere 6.7, VM encryption was really critical because we're required to protect virtual machines. We have to adhere to PCI DSS for credit card protection. So the VM encryption was very critical to passing our audit.

        What needs improvement?

        There is definitely room for improvement and that improvement should be in the licensing and the simplicity of procuring additional licenses or additional VMware products. Right now, it's very complex.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        Stability for vSphere 6.7 has been a little rocky at times compared to 6.5, but I believe that's because it's a very new product. With updates later, I think it will stabilize out.

        We have especially had an issue with our backup software communicating with vSphere 6.7, but that's been remediated so that has kind of gone away. Initially, it was a little rough, but now it's smoothing out.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        Scalability for vSphere 6.7 has been a major enhancement compared to 6.5. That is because of the technical features they've added that allow you to scale further away from your primary data center, such as vMotion over long distance, etc. It's made things better for us.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        Only for vSphere 6.5 did we use tech support. We have yet to need tech support for 6.7, but I can't imagine it would be any different than 6.5. Any tech support, period, with vSphere, I have never had an issue. Even when it was a really strange issue, we've always resolved the problem.

        How was the initial setup?

        I was involved with this design, the procurement, the deployment, and the management.
        In terms of complexity, it was very complex for the licensing aspect. That's because in 6.7 it's changed, compared to what I procured years ago with 6.5 and 5.5. It has gotten a little bit more complex, but it's easier once you do it.

        Which other solutions did I evaluate?

        Nobody else was on our short-list. Hyper-V had come up because another IT office in our agency does use Hyper-V, but for mission-critical applications that are powering an operation, my opinion was "vSphere-only" and my manager's opinion matched mine. So there really was no other option, it was just vSphere.

        What other advice do I have?

        We do use AWS, but not for VMware Cloud on AWS. We only use it for storage.

        I'd give vSphere a nine out of ten. The only reason I give it a nine is because VMware has amped up how frequently they release new versions and that adds instability to a stable environment. But other than that, I would've given it a ten.

        Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
        PeerSpot user
        David Grimes - PeerSpot reviewer
        VP of Product Engineering at Navisite
        Video Review
        MSP
        Improved our organization by delivering solid stability to our clients in a cost competitive fashion
        Pros and Cons
        • "vMotion radically changes the way we think about how we can operate a large infrastructure, and notably, in terms of proactive maintenance."
        • "An important vSphere feature from a security perspective is VM encryption. As is the right thing to do in this day and age, security needs to be the number one concern for any IT operator. While there are security solutions which can be delivered at the physical, hardware layer, they don't necessarily address all of the requirements from an encryption perspective. Being able to have VM-centric, VM-level encryption is a great feature of vSphere."
        • "As we continue to push mission-critical workloads into vSphere, and those workloads are not readily protected at the application layer for availability, continuing to increase the size limitations on FT-protected VMs would be a great advance."
        • "It's inherently complex. Operating a large virtual infrastructure is not an easy task for anyone."

        What is our primary use case?

        Our primary use case for vSphere is not a primary use case, because we actually offer a pretty wide breadth of services. Our key use cases revolve around hosted private cloud, as well as being the underpinning virtualization platform for our multi-tenant vCloud Director based cloud.

        We don't use VMware cloud on AWS.

        How has it helped my organization?

        vSphere has improved our organization by allowing us to deliver rock solid stability to our clients in a cost competitive fashion. The industry has moved far beyond bare metal infrastructure, other than for very specific us cases. As an operator of mission-critical applications on behalf of our clients, we chose vSphere because we needed the operability we get from features like vMotion, the stability that it gives us, and the ability to run pretty much any workload.

        We host infrastructure for a very large number of clients. In many cases, we're running all their mission-critical applications in our data centers on top of vSphere. So, there is no single industry vertical. However, for each of our clients, we are their operator, and this is their mission-critical infrastructure.

        When I think about the performance aspects of vSphere, we've been using it since before there was vSphere. We were actually a very early partner of VMware. I've been with NaviSite for a very long time, and I recall doing a VMware GSX Server deployment, from a number of years ago. 

        When I look at the performance aspects, I've definitely seen a reduction over versions from the virtualization penalty. This has been significantly reduced over the years. The size limitations of VMs, number of CPUs, amount of memory which can be allocated, and amount of storage which can be allocated are no longer of practical consequence. So, the monster VM that we talked about over VM Worlds of three to five years ago, they're here to stay, and those limits are no longer practical impediments to virtualization. 

        What is most valuable?

        1. The most valuable feature of vSphere is vMotion, because it rocks. It radically changes the way we think about how we can operate a large infrastructure, and notably, in terms of proactive maintenance. 
        2. The second biggest feature is HA, because complexity around IT resilience is a difficult problem to solve, especially at the application level. Therefore, being able to rely on the infrastructure to provide a 90:10 or 99:1 rule is more than enough resilience for most applications, and getting that directly from the infrastructure is fantastic.

        These features are useful day-to-day, because we operate a very large number of single-tenant private ESX deployments, managed by vCenter, as well as VCD-based public cloud. Frankly, with hundreds and thousands of hosts under management, there's no way we could operate that infrastructure without the use of vMotion. The ability to migrate those workloads to free up the physical infrastructure for maintenance activities, patching, BIOS updates, etc., is a critical requirement to operate.

        An important vSphere feature from a security perspective is VM encryption. As is the right thing to do in this day and age, security needs to be the number one concern for any IT operator. While there are security solutions which can be delivered at the physical, hardware layer, they don't necessarily address all of the requirements from an encryption perspective. Being able to have VM-centric, VM-level encryption is a great feature of vSphere.

        What needs improvement?

        As with any piece of technology (hardware or software), there's always room for improvement. vSphere is incredibly mature from a core feature and function perspective. As we continue to push mission-critical workloads into vSphere, and those workloads are not readily protected at the application layer for availability, continuing to increase the size limitations on FT-protected VMs would be a great advance.

        vSphere management has evolved over time. It's inherently complex. Operating a large virtual infrastructure is not an easy task for anyone. That's why certifications, such as VCP exist, because you have to have the right skill set to operate the environment. As the product evolves and starts to take advantage of things, like DRS, workload placement becomes less of an issue for humans to worry about, because the system takes care of it for you. Of equal interest is SDRS, storage management and storage placement, as historically, it was one of the most challenging things to mange in a large production VMware environment. With SDRS, we've actually seen our need to babysit it and manage it as a human go way down.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        vSphere has been very stable. It would be where it is in the market overall if there were any sense of instability. No software nor hardware is perfect, so really it comes down to the failure rate that we see running workloads on vSphere. Is it significantly, materially, measurably different than running those workloads on bare metal? I would say absolutely not. 

        Equally important is the stability better because, when things happen, hardware is lost. In response, VMware HA automatically restarts those workloads and the effective downtime is radically minimized. This is compared to what it would be for a human response.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        Scalability on vSphere has always been important for us, because of the scale at which we operate. We had a client, who maxed out under the VMware 5 limit of 32 hosts per cluster. So, it has been great to see the continued improvements in scalability. At the VM level, the limits are no longer practical impediments. Now, at the VMware cluster level, we're also seeing sizes which can operate pretty much any large client environment.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        We've had to use vSphere and VMware tech support on a fairly regular basis, but not because there are fundamental flaws in the platform. Things happen. Client environments are complex, and in some cases, the interoperability with other third party products requires engagement with support. We have found the engagement able to solve our problems pretty much all the time.

        How was the initial setup?

        I'm not directly involved in the day-to-day operations of our vSphere environments, but we stand up private vSphere-based clouds on a fairly regular basis. We manage those on a go forward basis in terms of patching, upgrading, etc. Deploying vSpheres is pretty easy. The biggest feature that has made that easier, as compared to three or four years ago, is the vCenter Server Appliance. Its ability to deploy the management plane as a virtual client and bootstrap an ESX environment. That's a big step forward.

        What was our ROI?

        1. Compared to deploying traditional infrastructure models, like bare metal, and the ability to virtualize and maximize the utilization of the physical infrastructure speaks well for ROI. 
        2. In today's market, agility is the new currency. Without virtualization, and vSphere in particular, we wouldn't have the level of agility in the business that we have today. Frankly, it's needed by pretty much any industry. Regardless of whether you're technology-centric or not, you are a technology company.

        What other advice do I have?

        If I had to give a rating of one to ten for vSphere, I would give it a nine. No software nor hardware is perfect, but vSphere is good. That's why I would say a nine. There is still some room for improvement, like larger FTVMs, continued evolution, and keeping pace with the scalability of underlying physical infrastructure.

        For somebody looking to evaluate a virtualization platform such as vSphere or any of its competing open source solutions, like KVM or other virtualization platforms, one of the key considerations is to look at TCO. vSphere may seem expensive upfront, and there may be some sticker shock there, but if you look at it over the long-term and from a human capital perspective to operate the platform over a period of three or more years, the manageability of vSphere drives the total cost of ownership way down.

        Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
        PeerSpot user
        Brandon Morris - PeerSpot reviewer
        System Administrator at City of Sioux Falls
        Video Review
        Real User
        HA and DRS make sure our machines are always available, while encrypted VMs enhance security
        Pros and Cons
        • "One of the most valuable features that vSphere has is its HA and DRS protection, where it can simply make sure that all the machines are always where they need to be and how they need to be taken care of. We have a lot of servers and services for emergency services for police, fire, and the like. We have the ability to use DRS as Anti-Affinity Rules to make sure that those redundant server pairs always stay away from each other. But then, if anything would happen to one of them, we have HA to be able to come up and bring it right up and going again."
        • "Security-Features; vSphere does offer quite a bit of security stuff built-in. It is nice to know that we can have the virtual machines encrypted, so that if somebody were to get a hold of any of those files, we don't have to worry about them actually being used. Since we do have so many different departments and areas with a lot of people that need access into the solution, we can use the role-based access controls to really restrict and control who can do what, so everybody can do what they need to do, but they can't do anything else past that."
        • "vSphere does offer quite a bit of security stuff built-in. It is nice to know that we can have the virtual machines encrypted, so that if somebody were to get a hold of any of those files, we don't have to worry about them actually being used."
        • "I met with the lead solutions architect for vSphere, and one of the things that I really kind of sat him down on was, "What's the deal between these Custom Attributes and these Tags? What are you trying to do with that?" He said, "So here's the deal. I know that they're halfway done and we have a vision of where they're all going, but we'll get it there." That that would be a great ability, to keep all that metadata about your virtual machines inside the solution and staying with the machines."

        What is our primary use case?

        The primary use case for vSphere is managing and controlling all of our virtual environments from the servers, and the storage resources, to all of the guest virtual machines.

        As far as mission-critical apps go, the most important that I see is our computer-aided dispatch software which runs all of the police, fire, and ambulance services for the city. That that is the most important thing that we do, to simply protect lives and protect property.

        Other kinds of very critical workloads that we have to have include an enterprise-resource-planning system that most everything goes through. The city also has a lot of geographical information about everything that is in the city. The citizens use that data constantly.

        We do not use VMware Cloud on AWS.

        How has it helped my organization?

        As far as performance on vSphere goes, the performance is great. We've been running everything virtualized from VMware forever, so I can't really say that there has been a boost in performance, but I can tell, from version to version - and now out on version 6.7 - that everything is continuing to be better, faster, and stronger in everything that it does.

        vSphere has improved our organization and what we do because it easily enables all of us as IT professionals to provision and manage the vast quantity of servers and other resources that we have. For the about 400 virtual servers that we run, it takes less time to manage and take care of those than it does for the 25 physicals that we have, just because it's so easy to simply take care of it all in one common solution, in one pane of glass.

        What is most valuable?

        One of the most valuable features that vSphere has is its HA and DRS protection, where it can simply make sure that all the machines are always where they need to be and how they need to be taken care of. We have a lot of servers and services for emergency services, for police, fire, and the like. We have the ability to use DRS as Anti-Affinity Rules to make sure that those redundant server pairs always stay away from each other. But then, if anything would happen to one of them, we have HA to be able to come up and bring it right up and going again. A lot of companies will say, "Oh no, we lose so much money per hour when something goes," but in our particular use case, if our emergency services would go down, people could actually die. That's a little bit more important.

        vSphere does offer quite a bit of security stuff built-in. It is nice to know that we can have the virtual machines encrypted, so that if somebody were to get a hold of any of those files, we don't have to worry about them actually being used. Since we do have so many different departments and areas with a lot of people that need access into the solution, we can use the role-based access controls to really restrict and control who can do what, so everybody can do what they need to do, but they can't do anything else past that.

        I do find vSphere simple and easy to manage. Most of the common tasks that you would do are very quickly available. One particular case that we go in all the time for is provisioning new servers. If you take that to the analogy of the physical world, that was something that, by the time you got it and you plugged it in and you stacked it, you did everything, you got the firmware up and going, you got the OS loaded and patched, you were easily in it for a day to two days, trying to prep up something that way. Just yesterday, I was sitting in a session (here at VMworld 2018) and I got a request for a brand new SQL Server for somebody and it was literally: right-click from template, new machine, here's its name, here's its IP address. Oh, by the way, tag it out as an SQL machine, and in 10 minutes the machine is up and running and is already installing SQL on its own, automatically. So it's pretty cool stuff.

        What needs improvement?

        I see room for improvement in the vSphere product just a little bit. I know they are doing all that transition from the traditional fat client to the new HTML5 interface. I've watched that grow from being technical previews to where it's at today, and it's probably 90 percent there. But I think that VMware could continue to put improvements into that UI, so that all the tasks can be performed as quickly as they used to be done in the fat client. 

        Just yesterday, I met with the lead solutions architect for vSphere, and one of the things that I really kind of sat him down on was, "What's the deal between these Custom Attributes and these Tags? What are you trying to do with that?" He said, "So here's the deal. I know that they're halfway done and we have a vision of where they're all going, but we'll get it there." That that would be a great ability, to keep all that metadata about your virtual machines inside the solution and staying with the machines.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        Stability is great. We keep all of our stuff up to patch and keep up on drivers. I actually couldn't tell you the last time I've had one of them crash on me. It's been a while.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        For our environment, the scalability has been great. I've been with the city for about three-and-a-half years. We had about 100 VMs at that time, and now our account is well over 500 and the solution has simply grown to fit that need.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        I am going to be honest that their level-one support is actually not that helpful. It's been something that I talked about with some of the people in the Inner Circle discussions and they're changing some of those processes around. But I do find that once you get up to the level-two and level-three techs, that they are very competent and very capable engineers who have been able to resolve any problems that we've had.

        How was the initial setup?

        I was involved with the initial vSphere setup. For the most part, the setup is fairly straightforward. The last time, when we set up the vSphere 6 environment, we went into fully redundant HA platform, services controllers, so I think we chose to make the solution a little bit more complicated than it needed to be. But with 6.5 and 6.7 there are some enhancements and they want all that stuff embedded and the process is a lot simpler and it's a lot easier to get everything going.

        What was our ROI?

        For return on investment, I don't know that I can give you any real hard and fast numbers on things, but I can tell you, from a time perspective, what vSphere has been able to do for us. When I started out, provisioning servers was a very long and drawn out process. Now, we're to a point where literally, from the moment I decide I want a server to the time that Windows is up and running is less than ten minutes, and that's fantastic to me too. 

        It saves me a lot of time because I'm now provisioning several servers a week and that's just par for the course. All that time that you do that repetitive, tedious type work, is time that you're not being able to deliver meaningful, value-added work for the company.

        Which other solutions did I evaluate?

        We did take a look at Microsoft's Hyper-V platform. The city's always had a philosophy of, "Just because we've always used something doesn't mean that that's always going to be the right way to continue to go forward." So we did take a look at the Hyper-V Server 2016 type stuff. But honestly, in my opinion, it's not there yet. VMware was still the superior choice for the hypervisor. 

        What other advice do I have?

        As an overall solution, I'd probably give it a nine out of ten. It is very rock solid in everything that it does and it simply works with everything, and it does a pretty darn good job doing it.

        Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
        PeerSpot user
        Mikael Korsgaard Jensen - PeerSpot reviewer
        Sr. Operations Engineer at Kamstrup
        Video Review
        Real User
        I'm able to schedule backup for the VCSA and boot just the OS, not the entire server
        Pros and Cons
        • "For me, the most valuable feature would be the EVC, but EVC has been changed to be per-VM which makes it possible for us to migrate the VMs to cloud and not take into account what hardware they're running on. Also, a big improvement from the previous version is that I'm now able to schedule backup for the VCSA. That is, in my opinion, a huge improvement. The last thing that I think is really great is, I'm not able to boot the OS and not the entire server. That's going to save me a lot of time."
        • "Where I think there is room for improvement is in the HTML5 interface in vCenter. What it lacks, for me, is integrating to VMware's other products, especially NSX."
        • "I would like to see a more automated upgrade, where you take the other products into account, so you can upgrade the entire VMware stack from a single interface."

        What is our primary use case?

        The main use case of this product and its performance is server virtualization, and the performance is pretty good compared to what we were used to with the previous version. The previous version for us was version 6.0.

        There are built-in security features, TPM and encryption, which are something we're going to use at a later stage. Right now, we are waiting for a hardware refresh to be able to support a TPM version too. But it's something I'm really looking forward to.

        The mission-critical apps and workloads running on vSphere are just about everything. Our municipality covers everything from cradle to grave. We are running a retirement home, nursing home, schools. The most important are the healthcare applications.

        How has it helped my organization?

        Since we started using vSphere, there hasn't been as much of a performance boost, but more flexibility and stability. We've actually been running vSphere or ESX since 2003.

        How vSphere has improved our organization is that we have a lot of fewer admins today than there were 15 years ago, and we have a lot more servers than at that time. But because of the flexibility and stability we encounter with vSphere, it's manageable.

        What is most valuable?

        For me, the most valuable feature would be the EVC, but EVC has been changed to be per-VM which makes it possible for us to migrate the VMs to cloud and not take into account what hardware they're running on.

        Also, a big improvement from the previous version is that I'm now able to schedule backup for the VCSA. That is, in my opinion, a huge improvement.

        The last thing that I think is really great is, I'm now able to boot the OS and not the entire server. That's going to save me a lot of time.

        I find vSphere easy to manage, especially because of both the vCenter and probably because I've been doing it for 15 years.

        What needs improvement?

        Where I think there is room for improvement is in the HTML5 interface in vCenter. What it lacks, for me, is integrating into VMware's other products, especially NSX.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        The stability of vSphere is, in my opinion, just fantastic. I can't remember the last time we had a breakdown in the hypervisor. 

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        The scalability of vSphere, for my company, is perfect. It easily fits in, but we are way ahead of what is the theoretical limit.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        I have used VMware technical support and the experience has been variable. But I have seen an improvement in the last year.

        How was the initial setup?

        I was involved in the setup of vSphere. The setup was, in my opinion, very simple. It was very easy to get started.

        Which other solutions did I evaluate?

        When we initially chose vSphere, there weren't any other products, so it was simple to select the direction we were going in.

        What other advice do I have?

        My advice would be just get started as soon as possible.

        At the moment, we are not using VMware Cloud on AWS, but that's because we're still trying to get ahold of legislation because of GDPR.

        If I had to rate the product from one to ten, I would rate it at a nine. What could they do to bring it to a ten? In my opinion, it would be alignment with other products, and a more automated upgrade, where you take the other products into account, so you can upgrade the entire VMware stack from a single interface.

        Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
        PeerSpot user
        it_user938985 - PeerSpot reviewer
        Customer Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
        Video Review
        Real User
        Gives us the ability to bring up and tear down pods, nodes, and clusters quickly and easily
        Pros and Cons
        • "The redundancy, the failover, the ability to stay up and running 24/7, all the various tools that are in there, high-availability, DRS, are very critical to us."
        • "My biggest suggestion would be some kind of a mechanism - and it's almost an AI-type thing, a Siri/Cortana - for where to find how to do certain things. If there was the ability to just type in a basic question and say, "How do I change the VM settings for this?" and it could bring me right there, that would be really awesome."

        What is our primary use case?

        We are in the IT manufacturing industry. This solution has performed wonderfully. We do research and development into how our products can be best used in a vCenter/vSphere environment.

        Mission-critical applications we use it for include vSan, HA, DRS. They're all very, very important to us.

        How has it helped my organization?

        We have a lot of customers that use VFRC, so the ability to put that together and now, with 6.7, to have full multipathing support, we do a lot of fiber channel work, we do a lot of fiber channel support. That makes it really easy with some of our own items to get them out there to the customers who need them.

        The redundancy, the failover, the ability to stay up and running 24/7, all the various tools that are in there, high-availability, DRS, are very critical to us. All of that has helped improve our organization.

        What is most valuable?

        The vCenter management is huge: ease of use, the simplicity of it.

        It gives us, with the Enterprise Plus version, pretty much all the tools that we need right on hand that work great with our products. We can help our customers make their data centers run a lot smoother.

        What needs improvement?

        My biggest suggestion would be some kind of a mechanism - and it's almost an AI-type thing, a Siri/Cortana - for where to find how to do certain things. If there was the ability to just type in a basic question and say, "How do I change the VM settings for this?" and it could bring me right there, that would be really awesome.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        It's very, very stable. The amount of times that we have to reboot vCenter or any of the VMs is very rare. It's only gotten better over the last couple of years. You expect a certain number of reboots and it just seems that the number needed is going down every single year.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        Scalability is awesome because, for us, we do a lot of pods. We create pods and nodes and small clusters to do some of our R&D products. The ability to bring them up very quickly, very easily, without adding lots and lots of additional hardware, and without taking excessive amounts of time, and then tear them down, but just shove them on the back burner in case we ever need to come back to it - that for us is one of the biggest features that we could ever have.

        How are customer service and technical support?

        They're very awesome, quick to respond to us. Sometimes you get the email exchanges for a while, but once you get somebody on the phone, they get in, they dive in, they fix it, it's done.

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

        We were previously using standalone servers. Once I came on board and I started talking to them about the features, we made the decision to virtualize some of our more urgent applications. We did it and everything has been running really great since. As a result, we are bringing more and more in, to the point where those standalone servers are basically sitting idle on a shelf now. 

        How was the initial setup?

        The initial setup was very straightforward, very easy. For me, it's been about eight years using VMware, so it's very fluid, very easy for me to do. I've never really had any kind of a problem.

        What was our ROI?

        Being a field engineer, it's a little more difficult for me because I'm not involved with the finances of the company. But we know that we're getting a strong ROI because the amount of money that we're spending on external assets seems to come down every year. We're getting by with what we have longer and making more efficient use of it.

        Which other solutions did I evaluate?

        We did take a look at Hyper-V, we considered KVM, but it really came down to Hyper-V and VMware and, in the end, because of VMware's market share, it became a no-brainer solution for us. We went that way. Once our management made that decision, I was able to push and show them all the features and the abilities that they were unaware of at the time they made their choice, to really enhance what we were doing.

        What other advice do I have?

        Do your homework, figure out what you need. This really relates back to the question about the licensing. Do your homework, find out what version you need, think to the future, and figure out what you might need in five years and invest in that now, because that stepping stone just gets easier and easier if you plan for the future now.

        We have not done a lot with the built-in security features. Some of our customers are inquiring about it. That really is their own choice to use. It's not something that we develop products for when we have not begun to use it internally in our own environment, yet. We also do not use VMware Cloud on AWS.

        Regarding a performance boost, there is nothing that I've noticed but, to be blunt, it's so robust, we've never pushed it to the max.

        As far as simplicity, it is the easiest solution, especially with the vCenter management tools. As far as specific examples, I started way back in the days when we were using the Client, the individual 4 Client, and trying to manage multiple servers was really a headache. The ability to do it all, multiple data centers, multiple areas, from one centralized location, is huge. It's just gotten easier and easier. There are still some areas where it would be nice to be able to find things quicker, but it's improved so much over the last two to three years that it's phenomenal.

        It's so versatile, so feature-rich, but there is some of that add-on confusion. What version do I need for this? What licensing do I need for that? What comes free? What doesn't come free? If that was a little cleaner or eliminated entirely - here's your product and everything comes with it - that would probably raise it to at least 9.5; nothing's perfect.

        Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
        PeerSpot user
        Blake Grover - PeerSpot reviewer
        System Admin with 1,001-5,000 employees
        Video Review
        Real User
        Increased performance and streamlined VM management for our back-end engineers

        What is our primary use case?

        We use vSphere to manage VMs, route our infrastructure, changing settings, remote desktopping, and providing services for the university.

        In terms of mission-critical apps, we use it for our Student Information System (SIS) to manage all student records and financial aid for all students on campus, along with databases and other web servers on campus.

        How has it helped my organization?

        I would think there has been a performance boost. I don't know exactly what percentage, but maybe five to ten percent.

        For benefits for the organization, I don't know if they see a big difference, other than that performance boost, but I do know that it helps the engineers who work on the back-end to be able to manage the VMs; and improved access and experience for the engineers is a big improvement.

        What is most valuable?

        This version has added a lot more features to the HTML5 interface and that helps us monitor and manage the system better and faster than with the old interface.

        I also think it is very easy to manage. When it moved over to HTML5, bringing all those new features into the HTML5 interface, that improved it a lot. I don't know specific performance data points, but I would say it has helped tremendously in being able to stay in one interface and not having to manage multiple, different interfaces in connecting to it.

        What needs improvement?

        There are still a few features that have been left out as far as updating and sending firmware to the host. You still have to go into the Flash interface to do that. But, for the most part, there are just those few missing features from the HTML5 interface.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        At the beginning, it was a little rough because it was a beta. They put out some updates and it has been really stable. We haven't had any outages or downtime, as far as stability goes.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        I assume it scales really well. We tested it on a few VMs at the beginning and we've rolled it out to a lot of hosts and everything has been working great.

        How are customer service and technical support?

        I have not used technical support.

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

        When I came on, they were using vSphere.

        How was the initial setup?

        I was involved in the initial setup. It was pretty straightforward, pretty simple to set up.

        What was our ROI?

        I'm not very good at ROIs, but I know that it has improved the management of the VMs, and being able to help customers more easily and faster has been an improvement with this release.

        What other advice do I have?

        In terms of advice, I've looked at many different solutions out there and, right now, VMware is the only one that can provide all the different things that we needed it to do.

        When selecting a vendor, the most important criteria would be the ease of use, the benefits it has, the features. If we were to switch to someone else, they would have to have all the different features that VMware has currently. And then, price would come in last.

        I give it a nine out of ten because it has almost all the features we've needed and it's pretty much simple keeping it under control.

        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
        PeerSpot user
        Systems Engineer at Vestmark inc
        Real User
        Seamless HA with vMotion, and being able to run vCenters in HA mode, are key for us
        Pros and Cons
        • "The most valuable features are the seamless HA with vMotion and being able to run vCenters in HA mode."
        • "I'd like to get rid of the Flash Client. There are still some things we need to go in there and use it for, some plugins and other things aren't supported in the HTML5."

        What is our primary use case?

        We use vSphere for our production and DR infrastructure. We have all our critical machines on there: domain controllers, monitoring systems, ticketing systems, financial systems, billing systems, Test and Dev environments. For the most part, as far as vSphere is concerned, it's performed pretty awesomely. Sometimes the hardware doesn't work as well.

        Once we got VMware vCenter, once we got all that setup - did a PoC, proved that it worked - we did a big push. I led the project to move our entire internal infrastructure from physical to virtual.

        We haven't worked with VM Encryption or support for TPM and VBS.

        How has it helped my organization?

        Between vMotion and all the HA, it has made my life a lot easier, and similarly for a lot of my colleagues, and my boss.

        What is most valuable?

        The most valuable features are the seamless HA with vMotion and being able to run vCenters in HA mode. We use a company called SimpliVity, it's a hyperconverged system that sits on top of VMware. They have a product called RapidDR which automates the entire DR process for us. So in a DR event, we just run a script, and that's it. Between vMotion and vCenter, everything moves over to the DR environment.

        Also, once you start using it and you get your hands dirty with it, it's very intuitive. I find the menus make sense. Other UIs, specifically Salesforce, for example, can sometimes be weird. Things are in weird places, there are a lot of menus, a lot of dropdowns. Especially, in the new HTML5 Client with vSphere and vCenter, everything is pretty straightforward and easy to find and easy to use.

        What needs improvement?

        I'd like to get rid of the Flash Client. There are still some things that require us to go into it and use it, some plugins and other things aren't supported in the HTML5. I love the HTML5 Client. I think it's a lot smoother, a lot faster. Version 6.5 was kind of slow. From our testing, from what I've seen, 6.7 is supposed to be better. That would be my biggest complaint right now: that the 6.5 Flash Client is slow. It takes a while to load.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        It's very stable. We had one "pink screen," which is basically equivalent to the "blue screen" in Windows, and that was hardware-related.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        The scalability has been good, as far as the vSphere and vCenter go. We've had to add more hardware, but it's scaled pretty well. We haven't really had any issues with it.

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

        The move to vSphere was really just a business-continuity initiative. Vestmark makes a financial platform. It's important that we are able to be up as much as possible.

        I work on the internals teams, so none of the stuff that I work with is customer-facing, but for our customer-facing teams to be able to correctly support customers, our internal side has to be up as much as possible. It was really just business-continuity, coming down from the executive level, saying, "We need as much HA as possible. We want our systems to be up as much as possible because we need to support our customers as best we can."

        When you're looking at HA and seamless DR and the like, there's really one decision, and that's going virtual, whether it's on-prem or in the Cloud. VMware has been a leader in the virtual industry for years. It was a pretty simple decision to go with VMware.

        How was the initial setup?

        It took some time to really research vSphere as a whole, as far as what the best setup would be for our company, for both the present and the future growth of the company, and to correctly size it. There was a lot of research beforehand that needed to be done to get to the appropriate solution. Once that work was done, the actual install and implementation of it were very smooth, for the most part.

        What was our ROI?

        When I first started at Vestmark, a little over four years ago, everything was physical. We had a row of about seven to ten racks - I forget the exact number - of just physical machines. After going virtual, using VMware, vCenter on Cisco UCS, we dropped that down to two racks.

        What other advice do I have?

        Take your time to do the appropriate research and planning, so that it's sized appropriately. A lot of issues that I've seen are from either underlying hardware or resource constraints that aren't necessarily related to vSphere or VMware, rather that things weren't implemented appropriately.

        We do not you use VMware Cloud on AWS. Right now we just have on-prem for both production and DR. We are starting to move some small Dev environments to AWS. I haven't been a part of that project. From what I hear, there have been some ups and downs but, for the most part, I believe there has been positive feedback.

        I would rate vSphere a nine out of ten. Ten means everything is perfect. As much as everyone tries to strive for that goal, it's unattainable because there are just so many moving parts, hardware, software, user input, end-users. It's the best that it can be in a nonperfect world.

        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
        PeerSpot user
        Systems Administrator at a pharma/biotech company with 51-200 employees
        Real User
        Gives us greater flexibility, allows us to adapt our environment much more quickly

        What is our primary use case?

        The primary use case for us was to virtualize a small data center of about 30 guests. We use it for our Active Directory and Exchange servers. The solution has worked well.

        We're not yet using VMware Cloud on AWS or vSphere's built-in security features.

        How has it helped my organization?

        Going from a purely physical environment before, we have seen a performance value boost. It also gives us greater flexibility and it allows us to adapt to our environment much more quickly than a standard hardware solution would.

        What is most valuable?

        The most valuable features are the simplicity and ease of use for, a small IT department like ours. It's simple and efficient to manage.

        What needs improvement?

        I would like to see continued support of the HTML5-based utilities.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        It's been very stable for us.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        We have a pretty static environment but, for our needs, it has been very good.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        We have had to use technical support a couple of times. It has been very good, a very good experience.

        How was the initial setup?

        We had outside help from a partner, but the initial setup was pretty straightforward.

        What was our ROI?

        We're a small, privately held company, so ROI is not something we concentrate a lot on. But just from the surface appearance, it has really helped us.

        What other advice do I have?

        Make use of the resources that are there. That's something we failed on when we first started. We started out thinking, "We're going to go with this company for storage, we're going to use Vsphere, etc.," and we just went in with a partner. As I went further along, I learned that there were a lot of built-in resources that I really didn't know I had access to. That was a bit tough.

        When selecting a vendor, the most important criterion for us, being a smaller IT department, is the support. Also, to a certain extent, the name is important, because when you're a small department you don't have the opportunity to evaluate as many companies as you'd like to. Sometimes you end up going with the main name brand. When you're a small shop, you need all the help you can get.

        I rate vSphere a solid nine out of ten, especially since, with 6.5 and beyond, it has matured and it's full-fledged. It's tough to think of anything I'd want to add to it at this point. I would have rated vSphere 5.5  as an eight out of ten, so it feels like 6.5 is a progression towards ten. There's really no feature that I can explicitly name that would make it a ten. They just need to make more progress, have more stability, and continued simplicity.

        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
        PeerSpot user
        Desktop Support Supervisor at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
        Real User
        VMotion enables us to migrate easily, flexibly move machines around on the host
        Pros and Cons
        • "The most valuable feature is being able to VMotion and migrate easily, moving machines around on the host. I know DRS will take care of a lot about that, but there's still some manual intervention here and there, so the flexibility of it has been really good."
        • "I would like to see DRS for the GPU machines."

        What is our primary use case?

        Primary use-case would be updating our Gold/Masters for the Horizon environment. It works pretty well. We're still getting used to the HTML5 Client versus the old Flash-based Client.

        We use it for all of our servers, we have virtualized everything. The mission-critical things, for a bank like us, are the mainframe - it's the IBM iSeries - and our Saleslogix application. Those would be the two biggest ones, but we use it for all of our databases as well. We're 90 percent VMware, with hundreds of servers.

        It's been a pretty smooth transition. We just upgraded to 6.5. Hopefully, we'll be updated to 6.7 soon. But it's been working really well.

        How has it helped my organization?

        It's hard to say whether we've seen a boost for these apps since we were very much first onboard a long time ago with a VMware. But performance-wise, every upgrade we do, we see it gets better. Everything gets better: the networking gets better, NSX is getting better. Security-wise, that's been a really good thing for us, separating our network out a little bit more, automating our failovers.

        What is most valuable?

        The most valuable feature is being able to VMotion and migrate easily, moving machines around on the host. I know DRS will take care of a lot about that, but there's still some manual intervention here and there, so the flexibility of it has been really good.

        It's pretty simple. It's easy to upgrade.

        What needs improvement?

        I would like to see DRS for the GPU machines.

        For how long have I used the solution?

        More than five years.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        It has always been stable. We haven't had any downtime in all the years we've used it.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        It's highly scalable. We've grown, we've doubled our size, and it has been easily scalable for us: slide in a new host and then attach the host to the vSphere client and then push the profile out. It makes it really easy.

        How is customer service and technical support?

        I've never had to use technical support, myself. We have probably used our VMware rep here and there. We usually get our answers through our rep or our TAMs. There hasn't been anything "break-fix" where we had to call technical support and get on the line right away.

        Our customer rep answers all our questions and, if he doesn't know, he comes back the next week and he lets us know. It's been a really big help.

        What was our ROI?

        Our ROI comes from being able to replace a lot of our endpoints, mostly on the Horizon side. But using vSphere with all the endpoints, replacing all of our physical machines as well with Dell EMC's wide clients, it has almost been invaluable to us. The cost savings have been great there: buying $300 machines instead of $1,000 PCs.

        What other advice do I have?

        It is quick to learn, it's not overly complicated. You don't have to spend a lot of time learning about it, at least from the usability perspective, once it has been set up, of course. It's really easy to use, easy to set up, easy to find what you're looking for, easy to manage.

        When selecting a vendor to work with, our biggest issue would be availability. We've had some issues with some vendors in the past where they were just too small. Being in Des Moines, we don't have a lot of options, other than bringing people in from other states, or even other countries, possibly. If we do have something come up - which, luckily, we really haven't had anything too bad - just having that immediate connection and resolution is important.

        This solution has to be a ten out of ten. It's been great. It's easy to use, it's laid out very well, so it's easy to onboard.

        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
        PeerSpot user
        Senior Network Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees
        Real User
        We even run our ERP environment, which is AIX, on vSphere

        What is our primary use case?

        The primary use case is to virtualize our physical environment and to decentralize management of the systems themselves. It has been performing very well. We use it for everything. 

        About 95 percent of our environment is virtualized at this point. Even our ERP environment, which is AIX, runs on vSphere, ESXi is the host. We have implemented SRM for failing-over and having high availability and disaster recovery in our other data centers.

        How has it helped my organization?

        We have seen a good 20-30 percent performance boost for our apps. Our underlying infrastructure is a full HPE shop. We've gone to full SSD drives at this point, so by doing that we have actually gotten a good performance boost.

        What is most valuable?

        The most valuable features are the scalability and the ease of use. The latter makes it most efficient to use. It is very simple, very easy. We've been doing it for a while now. Most of that comes from having the expertise in-house to run it, and that's why we're here at VMworld 2018.

        What needs improvement?

        I have just been looking through what vSphere 6.7 has coming, and one of the things I'm most excited about is the fact that we won't need to use multiple Clients any longer, if all the features that are supposed to be available are, in fact, available in the HTML5 Client. That's one of the biggest things because, for me, it's all about management. For the most part, all the other things that have made VMware invaluable in our lives should be working just as well, but a little bit more speed won't hurt.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        The stability is okay. For the most part, when we have issues it's because the self-connections or the VPN connections between the cloud space and our internal network go down. It doesn't necessarily mean that access to those applications is cut off from the outside, because the applications are up. It's just the connectivity on the inside. Depending on the use case, if the application is hosted on the outside and it's being used by people on the inside - which in most cases is not the case - it's usually people who manage it who can't get to it. For the most part, we're okay with it.

        How are customer service and technical support?

        I rate tech support highly, for the help we get.

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

        Prior to having this, we had physical servers. We've virtualized almost everything that we can virtualize. I wish we could virtualize our IBM iSeries, the mainframe, which is impossible to do. But for everything else, I think we are pretty okay.

        When selecting a vendor, I first look at

        • proven industry standards
        • longevity
        • security
        • good customer experience
        • a robust infrastructure that is scalable and tested. 

        Usually, when we make recommendations, which is one of the things we do as infrastructure specialists, we evaluate several vendors and try to see which ones match up most with these criteria. Whichever one comes out ahead, comes out ahead.

        How was the initial setup?

        The NSX part of the setup was fairly complex: Setting up the networks and setting up the VPCs was a little bit challenging, but there was good support from both sides, from the VMware side and AWS side, to get things up and running the proper way, and that helped a lot.

        What was our ROI?

        We see a tremendous return on investment.

        What other advice do I have?

        If you're not on vSphere, you should get on it as soon as possible because it will only make your life easier. All the different innovations that have been coming out over the years have shown that it's only going to get better, especially with artificial intelligence, IoT, etc. With all the different technologies that are being proposed, VMware is always going to get better. From a technology standpoint, anybody who is in the industry needs to be on this because it just makes everything easier.

        We have been using the built-in security features such VM Encryptions and support for TPM and VBS, and it has been hit or miss for us. In some instances we've used it and in some instances we haven't. But for the most part, I think it's okay.

        We have started using some cloud technologies with it, partnering with AWS to do that. We have a couple of internet-facing applications that we have used, that we have deployed to the cloud, and the experience has been somewhat okay.

        Because of the nature of our business, there is an apprehension toward actually putting information out on the cloud, if it's not a private cloud. So the latter is what we have chosen to do. We have been able to deploy applications into our own private cloud space, with dedicated pipes to the cloud, with firewalls on both sides of it. We do AD Federation Services to authenticate between the cloud space and our internal network, and we have domain controllers in the cloud as well. We have gone through the growing pains of going to the cloud and now we're working through the quirks and nuisances that come along with that.

        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
        PeerSpot user
        IT Infrastructure Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
        Real User
        Runs the back-end for all of our retail, point-of-sale systems
        Pros and Cons
          • "The vSphere Client always feels slow, and/or like it doesn't keep up with what I'm trying to do. So I usually use the thick client most of the time."

          What is our primary use case?

          The primary use cases for the solution are all of our production and DTQ. 

          We're not using any of the built-in security features.

          How has it helped my organization?

          We run 3,000 VMs. It works for what we need it to do. All of our retail point-of-sale stuff, the back-end for that, is on VMware. We're retail, so everything is run in virtual.

          What needs improvement?

          The vSphere Client always feels slow, and/or like it doesn't keep up with what I'm trying to do. So I usually use the thick client most of the time.

          I'm looking forward to some of the new features on 6.7 where you can record your actions in the Client and then it will spit out all the code. So if you want a script of what you just did, it gives you all the code for that. That's probably the one thing I'm looking forward to the most in the 6.7.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          I feel that it's stable. We haven't had any downtime because of the VMware.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          It's scalable.

          How is customer service and technical support?

          Technical support is helpful. I get through to the right people and they are able to give me the support I need.

          What other advice do I have?

          It's the only virtual solution I've ever used.

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          PeerSpot user
          Preston Lasebikan - PeerSpot reviewer
          Lead Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
          Real User
          Changes made to VMFork instant cloning enable HA and DRS on a parent virtual machine
          Pros and Cons
          • "The most valuable feature would be the slight changes they've made to VMFork instant cloning, in which they have abstracted out the parent-child relationship in cloning, in which certain features, like HA and DRS, are now usable on that parent virtual machine. That is wildly amazing and something that wasn't available until 6.7."
          • "In the past, little changes have broken things in vSphere. Going from 6.0, which worked perfectly fine on the Mac Pro, there were certain changes in hardware drivers, when 6.5 came out. Some were no longer present or had been deprecated. As a result, it didn't work on the Mac Pro anymore, which was business critical."

          What is our primary use case?

          Our main use case for this is that it's the foundation of our company. What our company, MacStadium, does is provide virtual environments for customers to do iOS development on Apple hardware. And the foundation for that, for creating the private cloud, is vSphere.

          In terms of mission-critical apps, it's utilized mainly for iOS development. So customers will use the API for vCenter to automate things. They can do CICD, where they can spin up and spin down virtual machines, rapidly, and provide them to their internal groups or to their customers to do iOS development.

          It has actually been performing a lot better than you'd think for an initial release. It's very smooth and I've been pretty impressed with it so far.

          How has it helped my organization?

          As a connection for our business, it goes hand-in-hand. It being the only hypervisor that runs on top of Apple hardware the way we want it, there is no "us" without that.

          What is most valuable?

          The most valuable feature would be the slight changes they've made to VMFork instant cloning, in which they have abstracted out the parent-child relationship in cloning, in which certain features, like HA and DRS, are now usable on that parent virtual machine. That is wildly amazing and something that wasn't available until 6.7.

          We are actually making a lot of use of the VM Encryption feature. We're using that mainly because it's a customer requirement, especially after all the changes in the European Union for security. And that's a major issue. We've been adding in NSX and that, combined with the ability to have encrypted VMotion as well, has been huge.

          In addition, the simplicity and efficiency in managing it has always been one big thing with the entire vSphere suite. It has been very straightforward if you're just using it from the user interface. Hitting the API has always been great, and they're continuing to grow that, which has been really good for us.

          What needs improvement?

          I know, coming out in 6.7 Update 1, that the HTML Client is going to reach full parity and have all the same features that they had in the now-deprecated thick client that used to be on Windows. That's one really neat feature I'm actually looking forward to.

          There are always little "gotchas." In the past, little changes have broken things in vSphere. Going from 6.0, which worked perfectly fine on the Mac Pro, there were certain changes in hardware drivers, when 6.5 came out. Some were no longer present or had been deprecated. As a result, it didn't work on the Mac Pro anymore, which was business-critical. Okay, everybody could stick on one version and wait until it was fixed. We were able to take drivers out of the 5.5 version, add them to the build package for installation and it worked. It was not the most efficient, and storage I/O was kind of slow. Since 6.5 Update 1 came out, that has been solid, no real issues with that.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          The stability has been very good. I've run several builds on 6.7 from pre-release and it's been good.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          As far as scalability goes for us, I've run it as far as having up to 100 hosts in the cluster and I haven't noticed any degradation. It's been running well.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          I actually have gotten quite a bit of tech support for initial installations. Even though they're on the hardware compatibility list, Mac Pros and Apple hardware are very different than your traditional Dell, Cisco, or HPE Blade. Apple hardware is kind of like a black box, so it's very hard to interact with, but ESXi has been perfect.

          My experience with tech support has been pretty good. The response times are really good. If the engineer that I'm working with is not directly knowledgeable on that idea, usually he'll get back to me in a short time and hand me off to a guy knows exactly how to help me out with the problem. And then, the follow-up is good as well.

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

          We've always been using vSphere from the beginning, starting with 5.5. We actually worked with William Lam from VMware on getting ESXi working on Minis at that point in time. It's been a wonderful relationship since then.

          One big thing that I know a lot of people talk about, when looking at why go with vSphere, is the ecosystem. You have other products that were built solidly to work with the vSphere product and the integration is always completely solid. The continuous development on the vSphere product and all the other products in the ecosystem, and the community, also play a part. There's pretty much nothing that I have run into where I say, "Hey, I want to do something outside of what vSphere does," and there hasn't been somebody within the community who has been able to say, "Oh yeah, I got that running, it is really easy, this is how you do it." That's not something I have seen in any of the other ecosystems.

          How was the initial setup?

          It was pretty easy upgrading any of the older hosts from 6.5 to 6.7. Everything was pretty straightforward.

          What other advice do I have?

          In terms of advice, especially if you are on things like Hyper-V or other products that I've touched, the simplicity and scalability of the vSphere product has been solid. For another individual who is in the IT or engineering fields, I wouldn't go with anything else.

          One thing a lot of people don't realize or know about is that Xcode and OS X are closely tied to the versioning of vSphere and what features will be enabled. Coming out this September is MacOS 10.14 and that brings with it the need and requirement to run APFS, which is only supported in 6.7. So we have an abundance of customers, all of which are iOS developers, who require 6.7. So having that coming out was a major need and requirement for us.

          I haven't noticed a direct performance boost, but the performance is no less than it was in 6.5, which is always generally a good thing. With the addition of features, nothing slowed down, everything is still exactly where it was.

          Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          PeerSpot user
          IT Director at Jewish Family Service
          Real User
          VMotion gives us the ability to move things on the fly; to be scalable, agile, flexible
          Pros and Cons
          • "VMotion is the biggest feature. It gives us the ability to move things on the fly."
          • "I do not find it to be simple and efficient to manage. The tools, the interface to manage it, are a pain. In the latest version, they moved us to web-only, the Web Client and it's terrible. It's slow. It crashes. It's annoying. I used the Web Client in the older version and was happy. I would go back to the regular thick client but I don't have that option anymore, so I am always fighting it."

          What is our primary use case?

          The primary use case is to save us a lot of money. Really, the primary use case is to be flexible, to be scalable, to be agile, as the company changes. As a non-profit, we really change often. New programs come in every day. vSphere gives us the ability to be flexible The mission-critical apps we use it for include Exchange, SQL, Active Directory, document management systems. We use it for everything.

          While we haven't seen a performance boost for these apps, they're flexible. That's really what it's about. I'm still learning how to make it boost performance.

          We haven't used any of the built-in security features.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It saves us a lot of money.

          What is most valuable?

          VMotion is the biggest feature. It gives us the ability to move things on the fly. That's it.

          What needs improvement?

          I do not find it to be simple and efficient to manage. The tools, the interface to manage it, are a pain. In the latest version, they moved us to web-only, the Web Client and it's terrible. It's slow. It crashes. It's annoying. I used the Web Client in the older version and was happy. I would go back to the regular thick client but I don't have that option anymore, so I am always fighting it.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          The solution itself is really stable.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          The scalability is insane. It's great.

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

          We were all physical and it wasn't scalable. Every time they came to me and said that they wanted to start a new project with a new piece of software, I had to buy hardware for it. One day we looked at it. Quick, funny story: big presentation to the Board. Spent an hour explaining what virtualization was. I said, "Okay. I can do this by spending less over the next five years and we've already budgeted more." And the Chief Financial Officer looked at me and said, "Why did you just waste our last hour? If it's going to cost us less, then just do it." Why didn't you start with that? Way to bury the lead!"

          It was a no-brainer to move.

          The most important criteria when selecting a vendor is support, absolutely. US-based support that doesn't pass the buck, that takes ownership of a situation and deals with it.

          How was the initial setup?

          The initial setup was straightforward. I built the whole thing myself, without knowing anything about VMware to begin with, just learning it as I went.

          What was our ROI?

          Our ROI is huge. We put, in hardware and software, probably $80,000 dollars into the solution and have never spent another penny in the last five years, other than for support. Compare that to a budget of $30,000 a year, we'd be at $150,000 in those five years. So, the return on investment is huge.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          For our initial look into vSphere versus others, we started with Cisco's version of virtualization. It was cool. It was free. But it was a pain. It didn't scale. When I started looking at the software we wanted to run on it, nobody supported it. That made the decision.

          What other advice do I have?

          In terms of advice to a colleague, I'm giving it every day. I take the guy out to lunch to beat him up with vSphere. I've got a buddy who is a Hyper-V guy. He's says, "But it's free," and I keep saying, "Well, you get what you pay for." He says, "But it never gives me any problems." I say, "Then why are you calling me every week asking me why Exchange is doing stupid things? I don't have those problems and I run exactly the same version you do."

          It's stable. It just works. I don't have to think about it.

          Some of the new stuff that's coming out is pretty exciting, as we start thinking of moving to the cloud. But, as a non-profit, at this point, it doesn't make sense to do so, yet. But as we move to the cloud, some of the new stuff they talked about yesterday, here at VMworld 2018, is really going to help us do that.

          I give vSphere an eight out of ten because of the web interface. It would be a ten otherwise.

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          PeerSpot user
          Server Engineer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
          Real User
          Enables server consolidation and saves us rack space
          Pros and Cons
          • "Server consolidation. Getting rid of our physical servers and going virtual is saving us some money in overall rack space."
          • "It's extremely simple. Installing the ESXi is a piece of cake and then putting servers on there is really simple and having HA and building a cluster for our VM servers. It's very easy."

            What is our primary use case?

            We use it to manage our VM servers, everything we have. We're about 98 percent virtualized and we're using VMware vSphere and it works great. It performs great.

            In terms of mission-critical apps, we mainly host a lot of our accountants, so we have a lot of accounting software. It's really mission-critical to where we have to have these apps running 24 hours a day, seven days a week. With vSphere, we're able to use VMotion, HA, and Fault Tolerance to keep our apps up and running for them.

            We don't use VM Encryption or support for TPM or VBS. We don't yet use VMware Cloud on AWS but we're looking forward to it.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Getting rid of our physical servers and going virtual is saving us some money in overall rack space.

            What is most valuable?

            Server consolidation.

            It's extremely simple. Installing the ESXi is a piece of cake and then putting servers on there is really simple, as is having HA and building a cluster for our VM servers. It's very easy.

            The UI is great with the new HTML.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            In terms of stability, so far it's been really simple. We've been running it for a few years now and it has been flawless. We haven't looked back.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It's really simple to scale. Just add another server, add it to the cluster and, bingo bango, you're done.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            Our experience with technical support has not been the greatest. We currently have a ticket open and it's been open for a few months now, for our VDI solution. I can't complain. In other situations, it has been fine.

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

            A big thing for us, and the reason we went with VDI, was for security. We didn't want folks having laptops or taking them out of our environment, out of our building, and not having them secured, where somebody could just pick one up and take it. This way, we keep it all in-house and it's more secure. It's in our hands and not theirs.

            We went with VMware because we were all more familiar with VMware and our vendors, our reps. We all have a great relationship with them, so we decided to go that route.

            How was the initial setup?

            The setup was pretty straightforward.

            What was our ROI?

            I honestly don't know what our ROI is, but it's a lot.

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We looked at Citrix and we looked at Azure.

            What other advice do I have?

            Give it a shot, check it out how easy it is. It just works.

            I rate it a ten out of ten. I'm a big advocate of VMware.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            PeerSpot user
            Network Administrator at a mining and metals company with 201-500 employees
            Real User
            It saves us money because we don't have to buy as many physical servers
            Pros and Cons
            • "We find the solution simple and efficient to manage."
            • "We use it to virtualize our server infrastructure. Virtualization has made it easier for us to manage our environment. We can manage it from location, the vSphere web client."
            • "They should make it more efficient and stable."

            What is our primary use case?

            We use it to virtualize our server infrastructure.

            How has it helped my organization?

            Virtualization has made it easier for us to manage our environment. We can manage it from location, the vSphere web client.

            We find the solution simple and efficient to manage. 

            What is most valuable?

            It provides us cost savings. We are able to virtualize instead of buying many physical servers. Therefore, we can buy one server and add VMs on top of it.

            The SQL Servers are our mission critical apps.

            What needs improvement?

            • Keep innovating.
            • Make it more efficient and stable.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's very stable. We've had no issues with it.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            It's very scalable. You can add different components to it. Moving into the future, as we do different things, we'll be able to stay with VMware.

            How are customer service and technical support?

            The technical support is very helpful. VMware's technical support seems to be very knowledgeable.

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

            We did not have a previous solution that we were using.

            How was the initial setup?

            I was not involved in the initial setup.

            What was our ROI?

            It's huge. It has been a big return on investment for us. It saves us money because we don't have to buy as many physical servers. VMware seems to be the future of computing.

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

            It is cost effective. 

            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

            We did not look at anything else. We just looked at VMware.

            What other advice do I have?

            We are just learning about VM Encryption, TPS, and VBS right now. We just moved to VMware ESX 6.7. While I don't have a lot of experience in it yet, but we're looking to implement them.

            Since we have had VMware, we've had no problems with it. It's easy to manage. It works very well. Other competitors may not offer as much. You can do a lot with VMware. You get different plugins, so it's a great product. Just go with it.

            Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

            • Cost
            • Stability.
            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            PeerSpot user
            Windows Systems Administrator with 1,001-5,000 employees
            Real User
            Stable solution that meets all of our needs

            What is our primary use case?

            It's how we manage our server infrastructure virtually.

            How has it helped my organization?

            It meets all of our needs.

            What needs improvement?

            I'm looking forward to the HTML client being finished. That's the thing that's annoying me, but I know it's coming this fall.

            If they were going to make the transition from the standalone installable client to the HTML, I wish they would have done more development on it before they released. It's not feature-complete, so we have to go back to the old client to do certain things, and I don't really want to.

            For how long have I used the solution?

            One to three years.

            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

            It's a very stable product.

            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

            We haven't had any scalability issues yet. I don't foresee us having that issue. We're small enough that, if there is a case where it wouldn't scale, it's not going to be discovered by us.

            How is customer service and technical support?

            Technical support is always helpful.

            What other advice do I have?

            I would absolutely recommend it. vSphere has been at the last two jobs that I've had and it's solid.

            It's a definite nine out of 10. I'm not sure that there's anything out there that would be better. Microsoft has a hypervisor but I think VMware is more feature-complete.

            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
            PeerSpot user
            IT Professional with 5,001-10,000 employees
            Real User
            We have seen a significant lift in terms of delivery of applications
            Pros and Cons
            • "Its most valuable features are reliability, for sure, and quickness in getting the job done. I can spin off 100 or 200 machines in the matter of half an hour."

              What is our primary use case?

              I'm building a VDI center and a second-tier user. In terms of mission-critical apps, we use it for our executive pool of users to secure their everyday work. Sometimes we use it for distance education programs as well.

              It has been performing pretty well.

              How has it helped my organization?

              We have seen a boost in performance in terms of delivery, but in everyday work, it's just like any other. Our delivery lift is probably more than 50 percent.

              In terms of delivery, very often we would have requests for adding some new applications which were not previously there. And in previous deliveries, we would have to lose a day or so to prepare the application. Today it takes me about two hours at the most.

              What is most valuable?

              Its most valuable features are reliability, for sure, and quickness in getting the job done. I can spin off 100 or 200 machines in the matter of half an hour.

              What needs improvement?

              If I could talk to the engineers I would probably suggest a little bit different approach. There's a process that includes base-lining, then installing the program, and then doing the differentiation. That kind of approach for delivering applications, in my opinion, is way quicker. That approach would take me not more than half an hour to prepare any application. That's a feature I would like to see.

              For how long have I used the solution?

              One to three years.

              What do I think about the stability of the solution?

              We haven't had any stability problems.

              What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

              From my point of view, it scales really well; in terms of storage, I don't know.

              What other advice do I have?

              Test it, give it a try, and see how it goes. Definitely try it.

              For me, the most important criteria when looking for a vendor are

              • reliability
              • ease of use
              • customer support.

              I would rate it at eight out of 10 because there is still room for improvement. However, we are not using the full extent of the product so I might be wrong. There is some room for improvement in the ease of use.

              Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
              PeerSpot user
              delete - PeerSpot reviewer
              delete at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees
              Real User
              Enables me to spin up and bring down virtuals and use DRS for load-balancing
              Pros and Cons
                • "It would be nice if it had auto-scaling, no need to select CPU or select database size. Let it auto-scale, let it use the features that VMware has, instead of having to preselect."

                What is our primary use case?

                Use case is to manage virtuals; spin them up, bring them down, create them, and a little maintenance on them. It performs okay for me.

                We do DRS for load-balancing. We're looking at doing Microsoft SQL virtual on it, probably without clustering; replacing physical clusters with it; and job scheduling; all probably in Q1.

                What is most valuable?

                The most valuable feature is that it's not a Windows license. It's also good that it finally has the patch manager included in it. And it's simple and efficient to use.

                What needs improvement?

                It will be nice when it's all HTML 5.

                It would be nice if it had auto-scaling, no need to select CPU or select database size. Let it auto-scale, let it use the features that VMware has, instead of having to preselect.

                What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                It's solid. Other than a host crashing, we haven't really had any downtime.

                What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                For us, the scalability is good. We haven't hit any limitations.

                How is customer service and technical support?

                Technical support is a little slow to get back to you. We haven't had any mission-critical outages but we play some phone-tag. It could be better.

                How was the initial setup?

                The initial setup could be a little convoluted. You've got the PSC or you've got something else, plus you've got to the vSphere, and then you want to do Server Linked Mode. You have different environments, you have different storages. Some support the plugin, some don't. That's a pain.

                Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                Hyper-V sucks, some of the other stuff isn't good. Cloud solutions are too expensive, if you're actually going to use them. We did a side-by-side comparison of Hyper-V and VMware and VMware was substantially better for performance and usability.

                What other advice do I have?

                Do a side-by-side comparison. Try it, stay away from Microsoft. The Microsoft solution of being everything to everybody does not fit. Never fits.

                Everything that we do is strictly within our own company. So we don't do encryption, although we might look at that. We don't really have a need for TPM. It's a pretty controlled environment.

                I would rate vSphere an eight out of 10. To make it a 10 they need to get rid of Flash and then apologize for having used Flash, have it auto-scale, and no Java.

                Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                PeerSpot user
                Infrastructure with 5,001-10,000 employees
                Real User
                All my data centers show up in one view and performance statistics help reveal major issues
                Pros and Cons
                • "What I like about it is being able to see my entire organization, especially with some of the newer enhanced links. All of my data centers show up in one view and I can see every server that's running. I also get performance statistics so if there are issues, major problems going on, I can see them."
                • "From the interface, you see how much CPU utilization and RAM utilization that each one of those hosts is giving you. You can tell ahead of time when you need to start expanding the environment. And with VMotion, you expand the environment and then let DRS have at it and walk away."
                • "vSphere itself is great when you don't need to make updates, but any time you have to touch it, unfortunately it's always the little bit of a fight to get it to do what you want."

                What is our primary use case?

                We run, easily, 98 percent of our servers out of vSphere. We pretty much have nothing physical anymore.

                In terms of mission-critical apps, our entire ERP environment is all virtualized, outside of the rack. Everything in our organization, our student database records, employee records, all of our management stuff, is in VMware.

                How has it helped my organization?

                It's difficult to say if we had a performance boost when we moved to vSphere because we have been using VMware for a long time. Our ERP was actually the driving force behind our acquisition of VMware. We used that as the driver to get VMware in the door and going. Then, as we started to see what it was capable of doing - essentially running this entire heavy product - we started consuming more and more of our servers and eliminating physical machines, based on the success that we had with the ERP system.

                What is most valuable?

                What I like about it is being able to see my entire organization, especially with some of the newer enhanced links. All of my data centers show up in one view and I can see every server that's running. I also get performance statistics so if there are issues, major problems going on, I can see them.

                What needs improvement?

                Management of the solution depends on the interface you are in. The Flash interface can be a little cumbersome sometimes, but thankfully they are moving all of that into the HTML 5. I did see that with the 6.7 Update 1, every function now is pretty much capable of being run from HTML 5. I'm really happy about that and looking forward to moving to that.

                Unfortunately, because I'm the infrastructure guy, some of the features, day-to-day things, require me to go back into the Flash version, but I long to go with the HTML 5. It's really fast, performance is great on that, it looks really good, and using it is not a pain.

                It would be nice if they could make the upgrades a little bit smoother but sometimes that's a little tricky because, unfortunately, everyone can throw plugins into the environment and VMware can't necessarily control all of those. So I understand the headache for the engineering team there.

                What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                The EXSi hosts are rock solid. We've had a couple problems once or twice with a driver update or bad firmware on one of the devices, but I haven't actually had a problem with those in years now. They pretty much run rock solid, 24 hours a day.

                vSphere itself is great when you don't need to make updates, but any time you have to touch it, unfortunately there is always a little bit of a fight to get it to do what you want. But then, once you get it there, it's great.

                What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                We have grown our environment, introduced new hosts, taken old hosts out. We have some 1,500 VMs running inside of all of our environments now and that has been a slow growth. I don't know how long it took us to get there, but we've grown to that level and it's never once given us a problem. From the interface, you see how much CPU utilization and RAM utilization that each one of those hosts is giving you. You can tell ahead of time when you need to start expanding the environment. And with VMotion, you expand the environment and then let DRS have at it and walk away.

                How is customer service and technical support?

                Often, by the time I'm going for support, there's a major issue with the environment. It sometimes takes a little bit of time for them to either see what's going on or to get me to whatever support I need. The few times I have had to call them on something very basic though, they have been pretty quick.

                How was the initial setup?

                We use the appliances, so the setups are pretty straightforward. Anytime I have to install new test stuff, I never really have much of a problem with it anymore. Obviously, in the past, there were the issues with SSL certificates, but a lot of that has been worked out and the systems are pretty straightforward now.

                Upgrades, sometimes, are hit and miss. It depends upon the complexity of the environment. The more side products you are throwing into vSphere, the stickier it can get. I've had upgrades that have failed, but what's really great about using the appliances is that, when the upgrade failed, I just shrugged my shoulders, turned that new box off, turned the old box back on, and kept moving along for a while, until we figured out the issue.

                What other advice do I have?

                In term of advice, obviously some of the SSL stuff would be good to know upfront because the requesting of the certificates, while it's gotten easier, can still be a little bit tricky. There are so many of them that you need. Knowing the right steps for selecting what you need can be challenging.

                We're not using VM encryption, support for TPM or VBS right now, but we're looking at implementing some of that stuff to improve our security stance.

                We're slowly attempting to push our database administrators into moving into VMware. They're reluctant, of course, but we have not given them much of a choice. They will come along and we just need to make sure that they're comfortable and we get them fully supported and happy.

                I would easily rate the solution a nine out of 10. The little problems I have with it here and there notwithstanding, it's the easiest product I have ever had to use for something as complex as your entire infrastructure being in one area. I have dabbled around with other products and they never seem to quite be at the same level of stability and feature sets.

                Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                PeerSpot user
                IT Systems Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
                Real User
                Being able to dynamically allocate memory and processors has boosted performance
                Pros and Cons
                • "We have seen a performance boost because we have been able to more dynamically allocate either memory or processors."
                • "It's a very nice tool to be able to reduce your footprint, consolidate servers, and accumulate several servers in a high-density configuration."
                • "Workloads; We use vSphere for mission-critical apps including SAP and and part of our internal development in C+, for the solution that collects everything for the buyers."
                • "Performance; We have seen a performance boost because we have been able to more dynamically allocate either memory or processors."

                  What is our primary use case?

                  We're virtualizing the whole infrastructure of the company. We are only keeping some of the bigger servers as bare metal, but aside from that, everything is being virtualized.

                  We use vSphere for mission-critical apps including SAP and part of our internal development in C+, for the solution that collects everything for the buyers.

                  How has it helped my organization?

                  We have seen a performance boost because we have been able to more dynamically allocate either memory or processors.

                  It has provided us with cost reductions, a little bit more speed in deploying servers, and, of course, consolidation.

                  What is most valuable?

                  It's a very nice tool to be able to reduce your footprint, consolidate servers, and accumulate several servers in a high-density configuration.

                  It's pretty simple to manage.

                  What needs improvement?

                  It's simple enough right now, but some more automation tools would definitely make it simpler.

                  It's pretty well integrated with vROps but the integration could be improved a little bit. 

                  What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                  It's pretty stable. We have a wide variety of versions, starting from 4.5 all the way up to 6.5. They all work together and it's pretty stable.

                  What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                  It's simple to scale and the upgrades are pretty simple as well. The upgrades were straightforward. We just installed a new HPC and GN and we deployed everything in there.

                  However, I prefer to erase completely and reinstall, from the top.

                  How is customer service and technical support?

                  We have Premium Support and they're excellent.

                  What was our ROI?

                  We see a high return on investment, precisely because of the higher density hardware. We're using fewer hypervisors, which results in some return. We also have more virtual servers and less cost. Everything goes hand-in-hand.

                  What other advice do I have?

                  Analyze your infrastructure first, see what you want to do, and then start deploying everything from zero.

                  Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                  PeerSpot user
                  Raden Evangelista - PeerSpot reviewer
                  Systems Engineerineering Manager at a wholesaler/distributor with 51-200 employees
                  Real User
                  We use its customization to prevent network and DNS collisions to the router
                  Pros and Cons
                  • "The VMware community is always there and it is a valuable resource."
                  • "I use the ESXi a lot for my users to create their own templates and control their own VMs without my interaction."
                  • "I use customization to prevent any network and DNS collisions to the router."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    Our primary use case is for labs, development workloads, and engineering. I use it for our processing development on our product. Our company does printing technologies for gaming, particularly for gaming casinos in the gaming industry.

                    It's working great.

                    We are looking at going to VMware Cloud on AWS. I'm familiar with the SDDC software solutions, but cost always comes in to play. I would like to find out more, as it sounds a lot cheaper now. We already use Azure for our deployment packages. Right now, it is just FTP, but we could use somewhere to actually manage the infrastructure ourselves. It is much easier to manage it than relying on customer infrastructure to do the hosting for us. We are mostly on-premise, but we are looking to move to the cloud since there are more opportunities there. It should help us gain more customers and expand the market share for our company.  

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    We are able to replicate and create customer environments. We can do an upgrade path in production and see what the expectations of the upgrade will be on production by testing it in the lab internally first. Then, once everything is approved by the customer and it works well, we can roll it out to production. Therefore, the downtime is planned.

                    The solution is simple and efficient to manage. With VMotion, I don't have to worry about resources. It can move things around. For example, I use Confluence and JIRA as part of our documentation to establish a process within the app. 

                    What is most valuable?

                    • The hypervisor
                    • I use the ESXi a lot for my users to create their own templates and control their own VMs without my interaction. 
                    • The stability of the networking site
                    • I can automate deployments.
                    • I use customization to prevent any network and DNS collisions to the router.

                    Our mission critical apps are mostly database servers. We are pretty much a Windows platform company.

                    What needs improvement?

                    Flexible pricing would be nice. Some of the pricing models are fairly big.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    We take whatever the customer has and make sure we use our application to upgrade them. If there is anything unexpected, we already know internally instead of doing it during production or go live. It is bad for business to extend planned downtime more than expected.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    It is very scalable. Soon as I switched to a vSphere environment, ESXi, and vCenter, I was able to buy hardware and add it in. I just had to buy another license, since the infrastructure is there. It takes me a short amount of time to add something that benefits everybody.

                    It scales vertically. In terms of horizonal scaling, it depends on what the requirements are for it.

                    How are customer service and technical support?

                    The VMware community is always there and it is a valuable resource. Just go to support.vmware.com, type in your question, and one or two users probably have experienced the same problem. 

                    I haven't called them. I mostly go online.

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

                    The previous development team at my company used Workstation. When I joined the company, I didn't like the product. So as soon as I joined, I transformed our entire infrastructure to vSphere along with vCenter. This made things easier with our directory and for other users in the company to deploy and perform their own VM development. Managing users has become more streamlined.

                    As soon as we switched over from Workstation to ESXi and vCenter, the downtime was very minimized. Growth and flexibility are now there. If I want to add more hosts, servers, and devices, it is not a big deal. The infrastructure is there. As far as having more job requirements, we wanted to explore our development lifecycle more without making major changes.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    I started the setup from scratch. The hardware was already there, and it is just a matter of getting software in. It is straightforward to set up. I have built many infrastructure environments.

                    What about the implementation team?

                    I worked with my internal team who did the installation. Mostly, my responsibility was to the VMware infrastructure, lining up the VMs, and what applications that needed to be installed.

                    What was our ROI?

                    Most of our current customers are pretty happy. They don't utilize VMware, but we just sell the software for them. Internally, we use VMware for support.

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

                    We would like it to be affordable to use the manage services on the cloud, then let VMware manage it and have AWS a part of it. This would make the easier transition from on-premise to cloud and be of value. We don't want to go through a third-party vendor.

                    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                    Some of our customers use Hyper-V because it is much cheaper (free). I've seen it and it has the features. It does its job if there's a problem to solve for a small company. However, if you're going to grow, I am not totally impressed with it. There's no support. I didn't see any add-on development features in the pipeline. 

                    What other advice do I have?

                    Go for it. It's easy to use and manage.

                    Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: support.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    IT Analyst I at Sacramento City College
                    Real User
                    Virtualization makes it easier for us to back up, maintain, and manage our servers
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "Ease of support is one of the main features that we have with it. We're able to take Snapshots before doing updates to make it easy to roll back if something does happen to go wrong."
                    • "The visibility that we have of our VMs is also important. What's being applied? Who has management of them? Laying it out in a virtual environment allows us customization for our students. We're able to respond to the students' needs much more quickly than we could in a physical environment."
                    • "I would like to see a little bit more visibility regarding errors. When an error does occur, there are times where it says "Unknown error" or something to that effect, and it doesn't necessarily give you a lot of metrics. If you go online and you give a description of it, normally the VMware forums can help you find out what it is, but I'd like to see a little bit more visibility from the software itself regarding what's going on: "This went wrong, this is why.""

                    What is our primary use case?

                    vSphere allows us to virtualize our campus servers and our student environment. We run vCenter within vSphere, so we have about 300 or 400 student desktop workstations that we run at any given time. We are able to customize our students' experience very quickly, very easily, and are able to make it mobile from different computer labs on campus.

                    We're also exploring opening it up so students would be able to remote into their VDI workstations from offsite. We're also looking into wrapping everything up with Workspace ONE, so we can virtualize more applications and let them have more of an MDM experience as well.

                    We're not really virtualizing the apps themselves, yet. We're trying to move towards that. Our mission-critical things rely on our servers that we have virtualized. We have web servers, security servers, database servers that we have virtualized and that makes it easier for us to back up and maintain them. Really, vSphere plays a part in our management.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    We have seen a performance boost. As we keep moving up to different versions it gets more seamless, it gets easier to maintain, to do updates to our virtual environment and to the physical end. We're also moving towards virtual storage. Moving to flash arrays and virtual storage is even speeding up our students' experience when using the virtual desktops. I would estimate a 25 percent boost.

                    Another benefit we've seen is with our IT technicians. It used to be this IT was assigned to a specific area, and that was what they worked on. They had 300 or 400 machines that they would have to run around to, to maintain them; re-image them every semester. Now, with the virtual environment, they are able to keep more up-to-date on their applications, on their Windows updates, and do it in the background. They are able to refresh entire labs within less than an hour, rather than sitting there all day or all week refreshing all of the labs.

                    We have a better, faster management. We have more productivity from our IT staff and more productivity from our students, as well.

                    What is most valuable?

                    Ease of support is one of the main features that we have with it. We're able to take Snapshots before doing updates to make it easy to roll back if something does happen to go wrong.

                    The visibility that we have of our VMs is also important. What's being applied? Who has management of them? Laying it out in a virtual environment allows us to customize for our students. We're able to respond to the students' needs much more quickly than we could in a physical environment.

                    I found it a little bit daunting at first when I was coming into it raw, but now the management of it is very simple.

                    What needs improvement?

                    I would like to see a little bit more visibility regarding errors. When an error does occur, there are times where it says "Unknown error" or something to that effect, and it doesn't necessarily give you a lot of metrics. If you go online and you give a description of it, normally the VMware forums can help you find out what it is, but I'd like to see a little bit more visibility from the software itself regarding what's going on: "This went wrong, this is why."

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    One to three years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    The downtime that we have experienced has not been that much, and normally it's the result of a mistake on our part, not necessarily the software. We've misconfigured something or we haven't thought about a configuration setting that we should have put in place or we didn't do our research. It's not normally the software that has a problem. When we do have a software glitch, it is normally a reboot and it's back up and running, so we have not had much downtime.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    So far, we've really enjoyed the scalability of it. The main thing that we have to accommodate for is licensing, making sure that we have enough license to cover our expansion.

                    Otherwise, we just throw a few more hard drives into our server array and make sure that we have enough storage.

                    How are customer service and technical support?

                    On those occasions where we do run into a problem, we have had great help from VMware's customer support. Recently I had problems getting new certificates for our servers to be able to bring them into our vSphere and Horizon environment. VMware support was able to help me diagnose what was going wrong with those, come up with a plan for the future to be able to more accurately get the certificates I needed, and integrate them into the environment.

                    I would rate the technical support a solid eight out of 10, maybe even nine. They are responsive, always quick to answer questions, and knowledgeable.

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

                    I don't think we were using anything before vSphere. I think we led off with it. My partner was thinking for a time about Microsoft, but he decided that Hyper-V wasn't for us and we went with VMware, and we haven't regretted it a day since.

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

                    Pricing can be an issue in terms of scalability, depending on how quickly you want to expand. If you budget every year, put some aside that you know you need to get another host and you plan for it, then it shouldn't be that hard. If you're going to try to all of a sudden say, "I want to add six hosts to my environment," then it's going to a little bit pricey and you're not going to want to spend the budget on it.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    Plan your environment well, determine what your needs are, and then try to bump that up by 20 percent; give yourself a little bit of future expanding. That way you don't have to leap off and buy a lot right away. Budget for the future if you can. Put a little bit away here and there. Look at the virtual storage, you will save yourself a lot of headaches on configuring. The physical storage can be a pain. The virtual storage, once you get it in place then you don't have to manage it much.

                    Make sure that you really have spec'd out your ESXi host so it can support your environment. Normally, that's been fairly easy. Companies like HPE and Lenovo are more than eager to help you make sure that you have a server that is spec'd out for the VMware environment, and help you get solid on what you need.

                    We haven't done a lot with the built-in security and encryption yet, but from what I've been looking at so far in vSphere 6.7, it looks like something that we would like to integrate. Before I became an analyst I helped manage TPM and BitLocker on laptops. It was a pain. It had to touch each device physically. I'm looking forward to 6.7 where I can utilize TPM 2.0 and encrypt all of my stations on the fly, and make it a more seamless experience.

                    We are not using VMware Cloud on AWS. Being just a local community college, it's a little bit expensive for us right now, but one day we would like to.

                    The product is a good, solid nine out of 10. The only reason I would knock it down any is, as I said, I wish the error messages would, at times, be a little bit more verbose and more explainable.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    IT Analyst at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
                    Real User
                    We have seen an improvement in uptime. The whole hardware lifecycle process is easier.
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "We have seen an improvement in uptime. The whole hardware lifecycle process is easier."
                    • "On Vista, there should be a lot more new features. We would like to see more security features to harden our environment in the future."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    It's a virtualization service.

                    The product is performing well. We are quite satisfied with it.

                    We are looking into using VMware on AWS in the future.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    We have seen an improvement in uptime. The whole hardware lifecycle process is easier, which was previously a pain.

                    I find the solution simple and efficient to manage. It is not rocket science. It is easy to install and maintain. I didn't need to read a lot of books. The solution is quite handy.

                    What is most valuable?

                    • The high availability (HA)
                    • VMotion
                    • The seamless 24-hour uptime

                    We have a lot of databases running on mission critical apps which control our end production line: Exchange, virtualize, and the main controller. We are at about a 85 percent virtualization rate. We also have mission critical apps which conform our factory.

                    What needs improvement?

                    On Vista, there should be a lot more new features. We would like to see more security features to harden our environment in the future.

                    From a technical point, there is not much room for new innovation in the hypervisor. It is more about improving the environment or the landscape, not the product.

                    The licensing should be more competitive based on its price. There should be more features for the licensing that you own. Money is a factor, because our management is looking right now at its money. The most annoying thing is to tell people that I would like to continue using VMware, and have them argue the other solutions are free.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    Maybe 80 percent of the time, our issues were hardware problems caused by HPE. Crappy driver issues leading to a blue screen of death. If you have a corrupt driver, is it the fault of the VMware or is it the fault of the vendor who should support it? These were mostly our outages.

                    This was due to the product cycles being too quick. Neither VMware nor HPE could test the stuff properly. The cycles were too quick and they had to push out the software, then errors happened. Both software companies needed to fix or address issues in their old versions, but then they also implemented new bugs in their newer versions. Software will never be error-free, because the product cycle frequency is too high. 

                    We are version 6.0, but these issues happened on 5.0, 5.1, and 5.5. We haven't seen them on the current version. It is annoying because we work with clusters, and we can't really have one node fail.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    It can scale linearly. At some locations though, we are using HPE SimpliVity to scale.

                    How are customer service and technical support?

                    The technical support is very good. I have nothing to complain about, as they are quick and try to respond quickly. Sometimes, they don't have a solution right away, but that's reasonable. 

                    If you track down an issue and you don't have a solution or work around, you have to give it to the engineers who will take sometime fixing it. That's fair.

                    We have PCS support. It has better support compared to HPE. Maybe Cisco is better, but it is still good.

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

                    We were not previously using anything from a virtualization perspective.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    If you figure out how to do it, it's quite easy. 

                    There are so many options on the market, and if you switch from a SAN to an S environment, you have to look for white papers and guidelines from Windows. It is also hyper-converged. Yet, if you can follow the guidelines, it's easy. 

                    What about the implementation team?

                    We did the implementation on our own.

                    What was our ROI?

                    The business is able to gain in faster services because you are provisioning the ends more quickly due to templates. Thus, the provisioning is quite good. 

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

                    The pricing is too expensive. The reason why we implemented Hyper-V is because of the licensing costs. 

                    They are way too high. This is tough when you have to present to management with a flat budget, and everything will be more expensive. 

                    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                    We are currently using VMware and Hyper-V.

                    Our shortlist consisted of KVM, Hyper-V, and VMware. We went with VMware back then because of its reporting, it was market leader, it has good support, and the price was previously fair. 

                    What other advice do I have?

                    I would recommend trying the solution.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Senior Systems Administrator at a consultancy with 5,001-10,000 employees
                    Real User
                    We have seen a significant performance boost for legacy apps, and we're able to rapidly scale workloads
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "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."
                    • "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."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    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.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    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.

                    What is most valuable?

                    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.

                    What needs improvement?

                    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.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    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.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    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.

                    How is customer service and technical support?

                    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.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    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".

                    What was our ROI?

                    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.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    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.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Luis Arencibia - PeerSpot reviewer
                    IT Operations Services Manager at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
                    Real User
                    It is a single pane of glass that lets you access your hosts and VMs
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "It is a single pane of glass that lets you access your hosts and VMs."
                    • "We scale it both vertically and hortizonally. We have many data centers on it."
                    • "I would like to see AI in future releases."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    We use vSphere to monitor our ESX hosts and VMs. We use it on day-to-day basis. vCenter one of the first things employees open when they arrive to our offices. It is a good product. It has an array of things that you perform with it, and we use it all the time.

                    We are planning to use AWS, but we are not using it yet. 

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    It's easy to use. For an admin who is just starting to use it, it doesn't matter, since it's generally widely used. This is a big advantage. Anybody can just come in and start using it from day one.

                    It's simple to use. I don't use it a lot, but I can get in and guide myself through the menus. That is what makes it intuitive and easy to use.

                    What is most valuable?

                    It is a single pane of glass that lets you access your hosts and VMs. This makes the solution impactful, as you have one place to go to manage everything from one console.

                    The encryption security is great. It is a topic we take into consideration daily. It is important that we enable all the features and make sure our data center is secure. Nobody can hack us, get in, steal information, and use it from our systems.

                    We run an electric grid. Our apps that run on the electric grid are going on VMs, so these are very secure apps.

                    What needs improvement?

                    I would like to see AI in future releases.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    We have had downtime, like everybody in the industry.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    We scale it both vertically and hortizonally. We have many data centers on it.

                    How is customer service and technical support?

                    We have a great team behind us technically from VMware.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    I did not do the initial setup.

                    What was our ROI?

                    It keeps together a lot of different environments, making it easier and faster to work. It definitely has a good turn around.

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

                    The pricing could be improved.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    I would definitely recommend the product.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Senior Systems Administrator at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
                    Real User
                    Having a lot of the encryption built in helps us with federal compliance
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "With the current compliance options that I have to go through, it's very nice to have a lot of the encryption built in. It checks a lot of boxes for the federal level so I don't have to either bolt something on or have something on top of it. Having it native and integrated into the system makes things much easier."
                    • "being able to manage a lot of servers in one pane of glass makes things a lot simpler. Basically, a lot of things just happen in one area. You can roll things over, move things around more dynamically, without having to hit multiple systems."
                    • "Valuable features include VHA, DRS, VMotion, and redundancy and failover; any DR situation."
                    • "Not having to buy something from a third-party to scan the actual hardware components, like the hard drives and the port containers and fan speeds; not having to bolt something on and go through another vendor, would be helpful."
                    • "the HTML version of things needs to get a little bit better. The vSphere side of things gets a little difficult to manage; right-click, in some browsers, doesn't work as well as it used to. I'm seeing a little bit of general latency that we didn't used to get with the thick client, although it's getting there."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    Our use case is virtualization of hardware infrastructure, for return on investment cases. We have done pretty well with it. I'm really happy with it.

                    The mission-critical apps we run on them include SQL; there is a lot of file sharing; there are a lot of websites and web servers running on them. There's some big data stuff for big science. We have to be able to digest lots of data and then pull analytics on it at a high-level, and be able to show big data in useful ways.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    With the current compliance options that I have to go through, it's very nice to have a lot of the encryption built in. It checks a lot of boxes for the federal level so I don't have to either bolt something on or have something on top of it. Having it native and integrated into the system makes things much easier.

                    Also, being able to manage a lot of servers in one pane of glass makes things a lot simpler. Basically, a lot of things just happen in one area. You can roll things over, move things around more dynamically, without having to hit multiple systems. Being able to manage it, in its entirety, is easier and better for us.

                    What is most valuable?

                    • VHA
                    • DRS
                    • VMotion
                    • Redundancy, failover, any DR situation
                    • Reducing the overall physical footprint for electrical needs, heating, cooling
                    • Money-saving, in general

                    What needs improvement?

                    In terms of management, it's getting better. There were recent changes with the infrastructure and the architecture, going from a physical vSphere vCenter client to the web interface. That has slowed things down a little bit, to be honest. It's getting better. With the 5.7 release they've optimized it, the menus are a little snappier, and it isn't as cumbersome to manage through as it was on the previous website or vSphere Web Client instance.

                    Also, reading some of the sensors in the hardware itself, that's where VMware does a really great job in the digital infrastructure and being able to scale things and knowing what's going on in vSphere. But not having to buy something from a third-party to scan the actual hardware components, like the hard drives and the port containers and fan speeds; not having to bolt something on and go through another vendor, would be helpful.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    Stability has always been really well done with VMware. I have always been very happy with the stability of the system. You can set it up, you can check your optimizations there. But as far as weird issues with being able to convert things from physical to virtual, I've really had no big problems in switching that over. It's been really seamless to the end-user as well, just doing standardized conversions. It's been very stable and easy to manage.

                    I haven't had any loss of data in quite some time. Data is the key to everything. Downtime and loss of data are almost unacceptable in my current position.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    I can always go horizontal, vertical is a little problematic sometimes. Horizontally, being able to add storage on the fly - even hot ad-hoc remove, if we do have some higher workloads or the like - we can always scale that without re-booting, with the newer operating systems. So the scalability portion is always on key.

                    How are customer service and technical support?

                    Technical support is pretty good. I've had to use them a couple times for smaller issues. They've always been very helpful and we've always come to a solution.

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

                    The backup solution we were using at the time was Dell's version of IBM's Tape Library with Symantec Backup Exec. We were doing tape backups at the file level, not really any virtual snaps, so incrementals every day, fulls on the weekends.

                    As data gets bigger it's harder and harder to back up and that's where virtualization comes in, because you can start doing analysis on data changes and deltas a little bit better. Tracking and things that are tied into VMware assist digital backup solutions to be faster, more resilient, and have less downtime in a restore situation.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    In my previous job, I was a Senior Systems Administrator for a credit union. We were running VMware 3.0, 12 years ago, and having that experience - and being bleeding edge at that time - helped me really be a catalyst in getting over to virtualization. That knowledge that I had in the past has always helped me, because I've seen VMware grow and do the things that it has done. Having that knowledge was helpful in setting it up from fresh, again: making the redundancies, knowing some of the pitfalls you have when first setting it up, and seeing a lot of the capital that you can lose if you don't understand what you're doing at that time.

                    I set it up myself. I can get technical support, but I can't have on-prem or anyone else.

                    What was our ROI?

                    Performance is somewhat relative, but an overall return on investment comes from not having multiple physical servers and from helping to aggregate a lot of the processors and RAM, and being able to use them more efficiently. We're not really worried about speed but about more efficiency.

                    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                    I've been with them for so long, I never looked to much else. I've always been happy with vSphere and seeing what they've done for VMware itself. Intel products weren't really there, and I still don't feel they're there.

                    I've really enjoyed the Dell partnership because I do Dell on the back-end. The hand-holding between Dell and VMware works relatively well, with their hardware control lists and being sure they stay compatible for long periods of time, without having to spend money on new hardware. You can stay in your swim lane. That partnership is really a key to success.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    My advice is "do it".

                    I rate vSphere at nine out of 10 because the HTML version of things needs to get a little bit better. The vSphere side of things gets a little difficult to manage; right-click, in some browsers, doesn't work as well as it used to. I'm seeing a little bit of general latency that we didn't used to get with the thick client. It's getting there.

                    Version 6.71 brought some of those performance metrics back, but it's just hard to get from one end to the other. With the ever-changing federal requirements, we need to really strip down and minimize what can be done in the browsers. It is getting more and more difficult, Java being the key thing. Going to HTML 5, that's a great thing because Java is going to be pay-to-play next year. And you don't have the vulnerabilities with HTML 5. It works symbiotically. We're seeing that progress. There are some growing pains, but it's getting there.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Senior Manager Systems/Network, Global Information Systems at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
                    Real User
                    We can easily pull reports and give access to people to look at specs or performance metrics
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "Visibility: We can easily pull reports and give access to other people to look at specs or performance metrics."
                    • "When it comes to cross-regional (e.g., someone in the US managing the China vSphere implementations), it can be a somewhat slow. I would recommend increasing the speed. While there has already been improvement there, I would like to see more."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    We use it to manage multi-site, multi-regional implementations of VMware. We use the security end roles to give different tiers of access from the VM up to the VMware installation. We manage the roles and responsibilities within the security to do this. 

                    We do all the functionality inside vSphere. We use VMotion and DRS to manage some of our licensing issues that we have. With bigger software vendors, like Oracle, we use it to keep licenses and requirements compliant and keep VMs running on specific hardware. 

                    We use it for quite a few daily tasks: cloning and testing out patching. Then, we can perform snapshots through vSphere. 

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    Visibility: We can easily pull reports and give access to other people to look at specs or performance metrics. This came as a bonus to us. Yet, we have been using it for quite a long time (12 to 13 years). 

                    The solution is simple and efficient to manage. It has brought ease of use to employees who are not at a senior level. It has been able to expose minimal tasks which can relieve some of my senior guys to do engineering tasks, as opposed to help desk, reboots, restarts, etc. We have been able to pass some of those tasks along. 

                    What is most valuable?

                    The ability to segregate roles and responsibilities, as well as regions. For example, I can give access to my Chinese team to manage the China servers and hosts. On the other hand, I could give access to my Canadian team to manage global VMware installations. Therefore, I like the flexibility of this tool.

                    We have just migrated most of our SQL and enterprise databases to vSphere. We don't use it for Oracle, but we do for most other things. We also use it for our communications exchange link, etc. Therefore, it is pretty business critical when it comes to the back office support and server implementations.

                    What needs improvement?

                    There has been a lot of improvement with UI: its speed and usability features. Before, it was very slow. When it comes to cross-regional (e.g., someone in the US managing the China vSphere implementations), it can be a somewhat slow. I would recommend increasing the speed. While there has already been improvement there, I would like to see more.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    I haven't had any real issues. In the very beginning, there were some issues when upgrading or migrating from versions. However, our last upgrade was 5.5 to 6.5 where went from Windows to the Linux OVF version, and we did not have any issues with it. 

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    It is easy to scale and obtain as much power as we need. It is easy to provision and join it to the cluster. We haven't had any issues or limitations.

                    How are customer service and technical support?

                    Technical support is very good. I haven't used them in quite some time though, because we have on-staff VMware experts. When I did use them a long time ago for compatibility with network cards (we use FCoE, which is not the industry standard), they were pretty quick to link us back to some articles to help us resolve our issues. 

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

                    When I first came on board, they had a very small implementation of Citrix. The servers at that time would cost 20K per application. They didn't allow us to centrally manage any systems. There would be a hodgepodge of vendors and versions of hardware. Therefore, it was a more difficult to track. When I came on board, we were maybe 20 to 30 percent virtualized. Since then, we're probably 99 percent virtualized. This did reduce staffing costs.

                    The APIs and plugins are important. We used to use NetApp. We use now InfiniteApp and Compellent. Having these types of plugins and using their APIs in the storage subsystems, allows general admins to provision storage easily, as opposed to being a storage admin. It has alleviated having to have five to 10 storage admins. We consolidated to one or two storage admins, while having the others be able to provision their own storage. 

                    What was our ROI?

                    We are spending less on buying bigger machines, which are overprovisioned. Thus, the ROI is found in consolidation and cost savings.

                    There are a lot of management and soft skills that we end up being able to save on. For example, my engineers in Canada could watch over systems in China, California, and Phoenix. Thus, it gives us the flexibility of administration. 

                    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                    We evaluated Hyper-V four or five years ago. They weren't as fast to develop technologies or even adopting the technology. There were some tools missing. Also, they were less innovative than VMware. Now, I think Microsoft has caught up a bit. However, it seems that VMware is putting a lot more R&D money into the product. So, we've been happy. We haven't had a need to leave.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    • Look at the market and see what is supportable. How long can you support the product. VMware has the history. It has the people who can support it in the industry. 
                    • Look at the supportability of it. Look at the job market and how many people, from a staffing perspective, can support it. 
                    • Then, look at the cost, because I don't think cost is everything.

                    Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: They are a leader and more innovative than the competitors.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    System Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
                    Real User
                    Gives us flexibility and provides our user base with ease of use

                    What is our primary use case?

                    We use it for VMware AirWatch/Workspace ONE: managing mobile devices.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    We haven't seen a performance boost at all because we haven't been using the product long enough to be able to fairly evaluate it. But I have no complaints with the performance at this point.

                    What needs improvement?

                    The roadmap VMware has for Workspace ONE is on target with what we want to do. A year from now I might have a different opinion, but right now, I'm good. I see no negatives at this point.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    It is a stable product. It has been stable since we installed it eight months ago.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    It's a scalable solution. We went from 200 test devices to 11,000 devices in three weeks, without any issues.

                    How is customer service and technical support?

                    So far, we haven't used technical support a lot but I would rate it a three out of five. They have to earn my trust.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    The setup is not difficult but there a lot of details that may or may not be documented clearly in the installation guides. What made it difficult for us was that we had to keep asking questions that should have been documented but were not.

                    What was our ROI?

                    Our ROI is the ease of use for users.

                    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                    We abandoned one vendor and looked at two others but I can't name them. We dealt with one vendor for five years and we bailed as quickly as possible.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    I would recommend it highly. I have no complaints. We did a PoC with them and we have been using other products from VMware for years.

                    The important criteria involved in choosing it were flexibility and ease of use for our user base.

                    My advice, if you are going to implement it, is: Read the documentation and question the vendor carefully when doing the install.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    CIO at a library with 201-500 employees
                    Real User
                    Allows us to build servers and hand them over to users so that they can "own" them

                    What is our primary use case?

                    We had almost 100 servers and we wanted to consolidate them and also make them movable, especially when we have to upgrade hardware. It also allowed us to create more testing environments, because we tended to buy new iron every time. We also want users to be able to “own” servers themselves, so that we would build them for them, hand them over and say, "Have fun".

                    What is most valuable?

                    • Flexibility
                    • Ease of management

                    What needs improvement?

                    Maybe it's there and I don't know about it, but I would love to be able to build a standard server set and be able to give users, who want to build another server, the ability to click in and have a pool of 20 options for the five groups that are using them. I could just say, “Hey if you want a server click here," and then the server is built for them, tells them how to connect, how to login to it. Done. That would be so cool.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    It's stable. It has only crashed once.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    We're not a very big shop, so it's not really appropriate for me to answer this question.

                    How is customer service and technical support?

                    I would give technical support about 7.5 out of 10.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    I waited until version 5 because, prior to that, I thought it was too difficult to set up. With that version, the setup was fairly easy. And it has gotten a lot easier since.

                    What was our ROI?

                    On the server side, we have definitely seen ROI. If servers fail we just restart them, if a piece of hardware fails we just move it. We haven't saved any money but we have been able to double our load without adding any more staff. That's our ROI.

                    In real terms, because of the cost of the product, I don't know that we really save anything. We're a public institution and we tend to have very long time frames for holding onto hardware, not like a corporation. I would say it's a wash on a pure ROI, unless we can look into the future and say, “I'm going to be able to do increased stuff without adding any money.”

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

                    Pricing is the one "ding" I have against it. Except for VMware vSphere Essentials, it would be pretty challenging for anything but a medium or large size company to use.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    If you're managing more than five servers run over and get some vSpere Essentials. I think virtualization is the only way to go, whether you do it on-premise or in the cloud, nowadays. It doesn't make any sense once you get beyond a couple.

                    I rate the solution an eight. Price would be the main thing, as well as the relative inaccessibility for end-users to be able to touch the product.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    IT Manager at a construction company with 51-200 employees
                    Real User
                    Used for our VDI infrastructure and managing virtual machines

                    What is our primary use case?

                    The primary use is to manage all of our virtual machines/servers and the ESX host. It is performing well.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    We use it to incorporate our infrastructure around one product.

                    What is most valuable?

                    • Ease of access
                    • Manageability

                    We use it for our VDI infrastructure and managing virtual machines.

                    What needs improvement?

                    I would like to see the UI incorporating all of the functionality that the thick client had.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    More than five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    It is very stable.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    Scalability is great.

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

                    I have used the product my entire IT career.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    The initial setup is pretty straightforward. I have been setting it up for 10 years.

                    What was our ROI?

                    Our ROI is time management savings.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    Do not look at Microsoft.

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Bobby Shirley - PeerSpot reviewer
                    Desktop Support Specialist at Bank Independent
                    Real User
                    Makes managing your virtual servers easier and more centralized

                    What is our primary use case?

                    We use vSphere to manage our virtual servers. We have about 50 spread across our main company as well as another company that we own. We use them to manage the applications which are attached to different tasks.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    It makes managing your virtual servers easier and more centralized.

                    What is most valuable?

                    • Usability
                    • Convenience

                    What needs improvement?

                    It could use a smaller learning curve.

                    For how long have I used the solution?

                    Three to five years.

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    It has been very stable since we did the most recent upgrade.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    It is scalable.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    I would definitely recommend the product. 

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Tom Pine - PeerSpot reviewer
                    Lead Administrator at Comcast
                    Real User
                    We don't have any downtime because it was built right
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "We don't have any downtime because it was built right."
                    • "Technical support is not that great. It is too slow."
                    • "They need to stop pushing code out so fast."

                    What is our primary use case?

                    We use it for call centers and providing server applications.

                    How has it helped my organization?

                    It's awesome. It works. It does exactly what we want it.

                    What needs improvement?

                    Code: They need to stop pushing it out so fast. Nobody in the real world is really using it yet, because it's not ready for prime time. It needs to be more stable. They need to get their product more stable before they push more code out. 

                    An example, in vCenter 6.5, they pushed HA, but it doesn't work. I've worked with so many engineers who finally said, "Give up! It doesn't work." 

                    I asked a question to one of the guys who did a demo with us on 6.7, and said, "Did you guys fix it?" 

                    They immediately skirted around the question. I said, "I'll take that as a no."

                    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                    We don't have any downtime, because I built it right. I work a lot with VMware's engineers.

                    Though, it is not stable. The product was pushed out too quick, and now, there are a lot of bugs. We have seen bugs in vSphere, NSX, and ADDVOLUME, which we haven't even been able to have installed yet because of bugs. Also, with Horizon, we are constantly running into problems.

                    We are a bleeding edge company. We push it. Yet, we're not even touching 6.7 because it's too buggy.

                    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                    It is easy to add stuff to the product.

                    How is customer service and technical support?

                    Technical support is not that great. It is too slow. When you get them, they are honest, and about what is going on, which is helpful. Because if they lie to you, then you're even more screwed. So once you get somebody, but it's too slow. We've had Level 1 support where it can take hours (maybe a day) to talk to somebody, and our company can affect millions of customers.

                    How was the initial setup?

                    I find the initial setup easy, but it has been becoming more difficult and technical.

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

                    Pricing is insanely expensive. We spent millions of dollars on NSX. If you want anything, it costs you more. The pricing model is constantly changing. We wanted to look at HCX, but we had to get it bundled with NSX and vRNI. We already have vRNI. I will be installing, architecting, and rolling it out. However, how does it affect the cost for HCX? We still haven't received a real answer.

                    What other advice do I have?

                    I'm anxious for 7.0 to come out because I'm curious to see how the HTML will function. We keep hearing the web client will be better, and it's not. Bring back the fat client!

                    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                    PeerSpot user
                    Director, Windows Server Infrastructure at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
                    Real User
                    Gives us high-availability, easier management, and a lower cost of support
                    Pros and Cons
                    • "The most valuable features are its flexibility and the ability to move workload."
                    • "Scalability is the big advantage of it. The product itself allows us to scale on the fly as we need it, and plan for the future."

                      What is our primary use case?

                      We use it for virtualization of approximately 90 percent of all of our computing. In terms of mission-critical apps, quite honestly we use it for the majority of them on the banking side: our financial apps, loan accounting, loan origination, etc.

                      How has it helped my organization?

                      We have seen performance boosts for our mission-critical apps, with the ability to add compute at any time. We've been using this for so many years, so over that time we have probably seen performance increases of three to four times. As compute has increased we've been able to offer that to the apps. I don't know that I can give you a total percentage increase but it's a lot.

                      Other benefits include high-availability, uptime, management is a lot easier, and a lower cost of support but with increased availability. That's a win.

                      What is most valuable?

                      The most valuable features are its flexibility and the ability to move workload.

                      The built-in security features, such as VM Encryption and support for TPM and VBS, are all important for us, but I can't go into specifics about them.

                      It's also simple and efficient to manage. It's a complex environment but it is one that we can get our staff trained on, it's not like a one-off environment.

                      What needs improvement?

                      In terms of additional features I would like to see, I just heard about them here at VMworld 2018. They're rolling in security to be a core feature. Built-in app defense is something we'll take advantage of. The ability to utilize tools that are in the cloud - we don't really use the cloud - will be available for use on-premise, and that is a pretty big feature.

                      For how long have I used the solution?

                      More than five years.

                      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                      The stability has been huge for us. We have a very predictable environment, robust, fault-tolerant. It's great.

                      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                      Scalability is the big advantage of it. The product itself allows us to scale on the fly as we need it, and plan for the future.

                      How are customer service and technical support?

                      We are a Business Critical Support customer, so we have an engineer dedicated to our team. We use them on a day-to-day basis.

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

                      We didn't have a previous solution. We just had challenges that everybody was faced with and VMware, back in its core, back in its early days, had the capability to move compute from one data center to another and that was huge. We wanted to be able to do things in a secure, safe manner with low risk.

                      How was the initial setup?

                      I was involved in the initial setup, back in 2005. Back then it was fairly complex but that's because we were early adopters of it.

                      What was our ROI?

                      I don't know that I can give you a number, but our ROI has been significant.

                      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                      At that time, VMware was an innovator in this technology so it was a question of learning more about what they offered and taking advantage of it.

                      What other advice do I have?

                      If you're not already looking at vSphere, you're probably behind. I don't really have any colleagues who aren't utilizing this product.

                      I rate this solution as a nine out of 10 because I think you can always improve. But it's a tremendous product. We consider VMware a partner, we work with them closely.

                      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                      PeerSpot user
                      Systems Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
                      Real User
                      Since it is riding inside of a multi-hardware environment, downtime is virtually nothing
                      Pros and Cons
                      • "We have removed the need for backups and going to the office at three in the morning to change a server. I do everything during my business hours. It gave me my life back."
                      • "Since it is riding inside of a multi-hardware environment, downtime is virtually nothing."
                      • "I would like them to move into having a containerized application to manage the vCenter."
                      • "I would like having something that works on a smaller screen, so we can get to it on our iPads and have it more touch-centric versus having to sit at a laptop."

                      What is our primary use case?

                      We use it for about 90 percent of our corporate network. 

                      We have a separate vSphere for an ISP that we run on a private and public cloud, because we are an anti-cloud company.

                      How has it helped my organization?

                      It rides our entire corporate network. Everything inside of our corporate Windows domain (e.g., domain controller, database files, etc.) rides inside VMware.

                      In the last three years, we have moved from a physical to a virtual environment. We have removed the need for backups and going to the office at three in the morning to change a server. I do everything during my business hours. It gave me my life back.

                      What is most valuable?

                      • Stability: Since it is riding inside of a multi-hardware environment, downtime is virtually nothing. That is a plus.
                      • It is simple to manage. 
                      • We use two-factor authentication.

                      What needs improvement?

                      • It is simple to break. 
                      • As far as ease of use and their front end (vCenter), it needs refreshing. They are doing some good things with HTML5. I would like them to move into having a containerized application to manage the vCenter.
                      • I would like having something that works on a smaller screen, so we can get to it on our iPads and have it more touch-centric versus having to sit at a laptop.

                      For how long have I used the solution?

                      Three to five years.

                      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                      The product is very scalable. Since it is a virtualized environment where all the compute rides, it doesn't care about what is riding under it. Therefore, you can expand or shrink it as much as you want.

                      How are customer service and technical support?

                      Most of my support goes through my third-party. The person who helped us integrate VMware is the person who we also contact for support. They have an inside support guy with VMware. While it is a middle man type of thing, it has been pretty good so far.

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

                      We started out in the Microsoft Hyper-V because it came with everything in their license. After messing with Hyper-V, we always had a small VMware environment. With some of the blade services that came out from Dell and Cisco, we moved over to VMware because they utilize all the back-end interconnects a lot better than Microsoft does. After that, we went full VMware.

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

                      I miss the Enterprise tier. When they went to Enterprise Plus, it increased the price. I was one of the guys that operated well inside the Enterprise tier. I paid a little bit more than standard but I got a lot more features. Enterprise Plus has a lot of things that I'll never use. So when they chopped that tier out, they kneecapped me. 

                      If you go with a standard license, it's very affordable. If you start digging into how they price all of their add-ons compared to Hyper-V, you get into the mud, because Hyper-V bundles everything together. So, at least you can customize your pricing to exactly what you need, so that is a plus.

                      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                      We evaluated Cisco and Dell. We have been moving more towards Cisco's computing. We did evaluate Micro-Tech for switching since they have cheap switches.

                      What other advice do I have?

                      Do your homework and build it from the ground up. Set up a plan to replace everything and get started from the beginning as a full virtualized environment. It won't bite you later, which is one thing we were worried about, and we ended up having to do extra work to do small steps into virtualization. 

                      Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

                      1. Interoperability with what I currently have and its ability to work with others.
                      2. Support.
                      3. Price.
                      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                      PeerSpot user
                      Network Administrator with 5,001-10,000 employees
                      Real User
                      Changing hardware is quicker, but the web client is browser-dependent
                      Pros and Cons
                      • "One of the things I like with the web client, versus the thick client, is that we're able to access all the vCenters that we manage. With the thick client, you have to log in to one vCenter at a time."
                      • "As far as the web client goes, one of the frustrating things is that it's dependent on different browsers. One day it may work with only a given browser or there may be issues with Flash. So I look forward to being able to use the HTML 5 client."

                      What is our primary use case?

                      We use vSphere to manage the various vCenters that my group is responsible for. We use it for the main controllers. We have VMs that that manage access to buildings. Until there's a problem you don't realize, necessarily, how many key systems have been virtualized. If we shut everything down, then maybe people would realize how virtualization has really changed things.

                      We don't do anything active with the built-in security features, such as VM Encryption and support for TPM and VBS.

                      How has it helped my organization?

                      It's a big difference compared to having everything on hardware. In that situation, if you want to change memory, you have to bring your system down, open up the box, put new memory in - or a new processor, or any other hardware changes you want to make. With VMware, you may have to bring it down to make some changes, but then it's right back up again in a few minutes. It's a lot easier than if it was hardware.

                      What is most valuable?

                      There are various clients, for the environment that we have, that can be used. There's the thick client, there's the web client, there are obviously new clients when we upgrade to vSphere 6.7. One of the things I like with the web client, versus the thick client, is that we're able to access all the vCenters that we manage. With the thick client, you have to log in to one vCenter at a time.

                      What needs improvement?

                      As far as the web client goes, one of the frustrating things is that it's dependent on different browsers. One day it may work with only a given browser or there may be issues with Flash. So I look forward to being able to use the HTML 5 client. Hopefully, it will be a lot more stable and not have the kind of issues that I necessarily run into with the web client today.

                      One thing that is a little frustrating for me is that you have the network side with bandwidth and, if it's a system that's virtualized, obviously, you have VMware vSphere in the mix. There are all the different components. If someone has a VM and they don't like the performance or they see something that causes them to say, "Oh, this seems a little sluggish," they contact us and say, "Hey, what's going on?" And that becomes a kind of "magical mystery tour," a black box sometimes. I think, "Okay, where do I need to look? Is it even a problem within the virtualization infrastructure or is it somewhere else?" So that's what I'm hoping to find out about in some of the sessions, here at VMworld 2018, and maybe get some answers.

                      I haven't seen the new client with vSphere 6.7, so it's hard for me to say what additional features I would like to see.

                      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                      The stability is pretty good. If there is a stability issue it's probably something else, for instance, the power for the building or something like that. It's usually not an issue with VMware.

                      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                      As long as you got the ESXi hosts with the resources necessary, scalability isn't a big problem. We don't really lock down a lot of our clients which are still within our organization. We don't really limit the resources. If it becomes an issue we'll look at that, but for the most part, it hasn't been a problem. If we look like we're getting a little tight on resources, then we look at getting and setting up a new ESXi host.

                      How is customer service and technical support?

                      I've had pretty good results with VMware technical support. It's not uncommon for us, if we're doing some kind of an upgrade that we're not necessarily familiar with, to open up an incident and tell them we're going to upgrade this to this version on this hardware. We just want to have an incident open. If something does happen, they're more than willing to work with us. I've had positive results.

                      How was the initial setup?

                      I was not involved with the initial setup but I've been involved the last couple years or so with setting up some new ESXi hosts and I've gone through some practice in our test environment to upgrade to 6.7.

                      Overall, it's okay. There are some good resources out on the web or through VMUG that you can go through.

                      What was our ROI?

                      I don't really deal with the budget so it would be hard for me to say what our ROI is, but my boss does the budget and he seems happy. We keep getting more resources and more things are being virtualized.

                      What other advice do I have?

                      I would tell colleagues to take a look at vSphere, if it makes sense for their organization. I've been working with VMware products in one way, shape, or form since the late 90s. Originally, I used it for training purposes and I wasn't even thinking about production. But I have no qualms today, if it's a production system, virtualizing it, as opposed to keeping it on hardware. 

                      There is always a learning curve and there are also functionality differences between the clients.

                      For the most part, if everything is working fine, it's efficient to manage. But if you have people say, "Hey, I see performance issues," that's where it becomes a little more of a problem. That's one issue that we're trying to address right now: being able to capture more logging for longer periods of time. Perhaps we need to use a Syslog Server to be able to help troubleshoot some issues by being able to look at particular periods of time.

                      I rate this solution as a seven out of 10 because of the issues with the clients, especially the web client, at times. And there is also the "black box" nature of understanding what's going on when there is a problem.

                      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                      PeerSpot user
                      IT Infrastructure Architect at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
                      Real User
                      Snapshotting gives a layer of protection for simplified rollback when we do updates
                      Pros and Cons
                      • "Some of the most valuable features are: the ability to Snapshot so that when we do updates we have a layer of protection for simplified rollback; the replication that we can leverage for data center failures and data center downtime; the ease of migrating workloads from physical device to physical device for maintenance that we have to do on physical servers."
                      • "We can slide in new resources without any impact. We can do maintenance on our clusters without any impact to applications, and we have the flexibility of migrating those workloads to other data centers, when required, in the case of data center downtime."

                        What is our primary use case?

                        We use vSphere to virtualize or server workloads. We use the solution for all our mission-critical applications. We're an airline so our main application servers for running the airline are all virtualized on vSphere.

                        We don't utilize the built-in security features such as VM Encryption and support for TPM and VBS.

                        How has it helped my organization?

                        It decreased our overhead for our data center sizing, and it also increased our productivity by being able to deploy applications in a much more timely manner. We have also seen performance boosts. Although I can't give you an accurate number, I would estimate it at about a 40 percent increase.

                        What is most valuable?

                        Some of the most valuable features are 

                        • the ability to Snapshot so that when we do updates we have a layer of protection for simplified rollback
                        • the replication that we can leverage for data center failures and data center downtime
                        • the ease of migrating workloads from physical device to physical device for maintenance that we have to do on physical servers.

                        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                        The stability of vSphere is fantastic. Over the 10 years that we've been utilizing vSphere, we haven't had a loss, or any downtime, of a critical application, based on the reliability and the flexibility of vSphere.

                        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                        The scalability is also fantastic. We're able to add resources so that we can grow our clusters and provide more resources to our organization and to our business units. We're able to grow our application sets when required.

                        How are customer service and technical support?

                        We have used the technical support and we haven't had any issues. Every time we've called, we have been directed to the correct servicing department and they have been able to resolve our issues in a timely fashion.

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

                        We were just utilizing physical servers with manual deployment of applications. By moving to vSphere, now it's just: Deploy VM from a template, or clone a VM now. Whereas previously, we had to order a physical hardware, wait for the arrival, deploy that into the data center, configure it. Now all of that has gone away.

                        How was the initial setup?

                        I was one of the original architects deploying vSphere in our organization. At first, it seemed complex, but as we got a little more familiar with the product it became very straightforward on how to add resources and configure workloads to run on vSphere.

                        What was our ROI?

                        The biggest ROI is the decrease of the physical server in our data center. By reducing that physical server, we're able to reduce our network infrastructure, we're able to reduce the footprint in the data center, and that allows us to recover costs in just operating that data center.

                        Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                        At the time, Hyper-V was putting its foot in the water and Citrix was another competitor. But VMware just seemed to be a little more on - I don't want to say on the cutting edge - but they were the leader in the space at the time so we decided to evaluate them. The evaluation went fantastically so we decided to choose them as our vendor.

                        What other advice do I have?

                        The advice I would give is: This is the only solution that you need to evaluate.

                        I'd have to say that vSphere is a 9 out of 10, just because of its flexibility and ease of use. We can slide in new resources without any impact. We can do maintenance on our clusters without any impact to applications, and we have the flexibility of migrating those workloads to other data centers, when required, in the case of data center downtime.

                        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                        PeerSpot user
                        PeerSpot user
                        Senior Systems Analyst at Manufacturing Organization
                        Real User
                        Increased density of virtualized servers enables a lot of page sharing and memory sharing
                        Pros and Cons
                        • "We are able to increase the density of the virtualized servers and, with the increased density we have a lot of page sharing as well as memory sharing."
                        • "It is absolutely simple and efficient to manage. We can bring in people who have never been exposed to vSphere or virtualized environments and they're still able to support it from a server standpoint. The training time as well as the adoption rate, for a junior technician or somebody coming right out of college, is very good."
                        • "In the last couple of years, the breaking apart of specific added benefits and charging license upcharges for them. That would be the only negative thing that I have to say: As a large consumer of the Hypervisor, we have a hard time justifying the cost of utilizing the extra products, especially when it's a couple of grand here and there, a couple of hundred dollars here and there. It's hard for an IT administrator or an architect to sell to upper management. When they're seeing so much ROI from the Hypervisor, it's hard to show them that there is extra value in the additional products that can be tied on top."

                        What is our primary use case?

                        The primary use case is for virtualization of the Windows environment for our organization. 

                        It has performed wonderfully. Over the course of the last 10 years, we have implemented vSphere Hypervisor and moved from five percent virtualization up to a current rate of about 85 percent, for our Windows environment.

                        The mission-critical apps we use it for are for production facilities, as well as optimizers for the machine equipment that is at those production facilities. There are ancillary systems in our corporate data centers that are used for the internal customer-facing apps, to work with the business intelligence piece, which can monitor metrics as well as capacity planning, ordering, and business warehousing. All of these business-critical functions run on vSphere Hypervisor.

                        How has it helped my organization?

                        We are able to increase the density of the virtualized servers and, with the increased density we have a lot of page sharing as well as memory sharing. We see performance increases from Server 2012 and forward; 2003 is debatable. There were negligible differences in 2012 but we did see benchmark performance improvement from utilizing Hypervisor and the increased density that comes with it.

                        What is most valuable?

                        The most valuable feature is its stability. There are a lot of product enhancements that come out regularly but, generally, the stability the solution provides is the most important to me, as I like to go home and sleep at night.

                        It is absolutely simple and efficient to manage. We can bring in people who have never been exposed to vSphere or virtualized environments and they're still able to support it from a server standpoint. The training time as well as the adoption rate, for a junior technician or somebody coming right out of college, is very good.

                        Sometimes, the talent pool is hard to fill so having that stability and ease of use is very important to us.

                        What needs improvement?

                        VMware has expanded, from a corporate standpoint, to where they have gotten very large. I have noticed, in the last couple of years, the breaking apart of specific added benefits and charging license upcharges for them. That would be the only negative thing that I have to say: As a large consumer of the Hypervisor, we have a hard time justifying the cost of utilizing the extra products, especially when it's a couple of grand here and there, a couple of hundred dollars here and there. It's hard for an IT administrator or an architect to sell to upper management. When they're seeing so much ROI from the Hypervisor, it's hard to show them that there is extra value in the additional products that can be tied on top.

                        I would really like to see an assessment of which products are actually going to be beneficial to charge for, and that they then continue to keep some of the products bundled in with the initial Hypervisor.

                        There are some competitive vendors out there who are sticking to the original model that VMware seemed to have, which includes a lot of additional features and functionality in the initial pricing, and I think they are gaining a lot of market share based on the fact that they are keeping their licensing simple. The only argument I have with VMware is that, when I ask our VMware team about a new solution, I hear comments like, "For a nominal fee we can upgrade your license and you can have that." For the large number of Hypervisors and the scale we have, it's frustrating to hear that I have to go ask for additional money for very small, additional features that I think should be included.

                        I respect that VMware has to grow and there are some features that they should not bundle in and that they should ask more money for. So I would like to see an analysis of sales and what's included and what the consumption rate is. I think they could dial it in a little bit better to where they have more bundled solutions. 

                        Unfortunately, I think the type of model that VMware is moving toward is having an a la carte type of fee list. There are so many products that start with a "v" that I tend to get drowned with all the capabilities and I have to pick the particular thing I want to go after. Whereas, if there were more bundled services, or a package that included more bundled services, I might be able to swing that more easily than asking for money here and there. 

                        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                        We're able to scale with density. I think that's the most important part. The clusters are allowed to go to so many nodes. We don't even touch the number of nodes per cluster. We traditionally have multiple fault zones in the data center, really for a comfort level, not because of a technological level. I know we could push the equipment a little bit harder but we generally like to keep things in a comfort zone that is constantly moving northward. So scalability is limitless and we have not really touched the capabilities yet, but we know the capabilities are there when we are ready to use them.

                        How was the initial setup?

                        The environment has changed hands several times over the years. Currently, I work to architect any new deployments but I was not involved in the initial bringing in of GSX, when the company first adopted virtualization, roughly 10 years ago. I have turned the environment over two or three times since I've been here. Now we have new staff in my group who are constantly evolving and changing with the adoption of new architecture and business cases for the Hypevisor and other products in the suite that complement it.

                        What was our ROI?

                        It's hard to calculate the ROI but I know that in our main, corporate data center we have gone from 700-plus Hewlett Packard servers down to fewer than 50 physical servers for the Hypervisor. We still have some legacy physicals that have not been virtualized yet but, over the course of this current refresh and into next year, those should go away.

                        In addition, in our paper mills and pulp mills we have heavily adopted virtualization, and in our box plants, where we make container boxes for shipments, we have seen a ratio of five servers down to one, and that's over a couple of hundred sites.

                        While an actual ROI number is hard to calculate, if you think about the yearly maintenance on all of those systems, it's very vast and deep. It also allows us the portability to expand rapidly and add virtual machines with virtually no overhead, once the initial architecture has been built.

                        What other advice do I have?

                        If you are not already virtualizing, existing-wise, you are doing yourself a severe disservice. Anybody who is continuing down the road of physical servers, any justifications that they think they have, should be challenged. If you have an environment that is all physical servers, a very easy win would be to present virtualization and denser workloads to your management. That would definitely make you look good in your career. I really don't see any negatives to moving to virtualization, even at a 100-percent adoption rate. We have yet to find a workload that is unable to run successfully in a virtualized manner, with the proper configurations and tuning.

                        We have not quite adopted vSphere 6.5 or 6.7. We do have some locations that have 6.5. On the radar will be utilizing the encryption capabilities, but as of yet, we have not really implemented that. We have a large organization so we move at a little bit of a slower pace. But implementing that is on the very near horizon, at least for our external-facing systems, as well as some internal.

                        We are also investigating the VMware Cloud on AWS initiative. That will probably be in the 2019 forum for dabbling or moving a percentage. With our being a manufacturing company, we move a little bit slower in adopting newer technologies and we have not really built the framework for a cloud initiative yet, but that will be something we investigate shortly.

                        I would definitely rate vSphere a 10. If you rate the Hypervisor alone, it's a 10. It has been one of the staples of technology for the last 15 years, and the key player for virtualization, for the whole industry during that time - or since Dell spun VMware off, or created the organization. It has been the premium, platinum product for Hypervisor. There are a few other players in the industry, but they are nipping at the heels, and that's about it. I do think that VMware is going to continue to lead, as far as Hypervisor goes, for the foreseeable future.

                        Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                        PeerSpot user
                        Shaikh Jamal Uddin - PeerSpot reviewer
                        Shaikh Jamal UddinCybersecurity Architecture and Technology Lead at Appxone
                        Consultant

                        Nice Article.

                        Professional ICT at a non-tech company with 11-50 employees
                        Real User
                        Gives me the most options for integration with other software solutions
                        Pros and Cons
                          • "When I use VMware and Citrix there are conflicts."

                          What is our primary use case?

                          I have the whole server park in VMware and I have about 14 VDI desktops for Windows 7. I'm not happy with the performance. It's slow. Maybe it's the graphics, because I don't have a graphics card in this server.

                          What is most valuable?

                          It's easy to use.

                          What needs improvement?

                          The problem often is that when I use VMware and Citrix there are conflicts.

                          For how long have I used the solution?

                          More than five years.

                          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                          The stability is very good.

                          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                          The scalability is also very good.

                          How is customer service and technical support?

                          It's easy to get support.

                          How was the initial setup?

                          The setup is pretty easy.

                          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                          About two years ago I tried XenServer, but it stopped because I tried to use Veeam's software which wasn't compatible with XenServer. So I chose VMware.

                          What other advice do I have?

                          VMware is a safe solution and it's a stable solution. I would recommend it.

                          The most important criterion when selecting a vendor is integration. VMware has the most support for other software solutions, such as backup. That's important to me.

                          I would rate VMware at eight out of 10. It's good but it's too expensive.

                          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                          PeerSpot user
                          it_user882975 - PeerSpot reviewer
                          System Developer/Engineer at Navy Network Information Center (NNIC)
                          Real User
                          Saves us significantly on the cost of physical infrastructure, as well as space and energy
                          Pros and Cons
                            • "In the next release, I would like to see programming. I'd like to see a lot more about customization for people who want to customize programming API, SDK."

                            How has it helped my organization?

                            It saves us a lot of money on physical infrastructure through virtualization. Also, you can roll back in case a machine crashes. That saves a lot of money and time. It also saves physical space, energy, and it removes physical limitations, with virtualization you can go anywhere in the world.

                            What is most valuable?

                            vSphere is very stable, reliable.

                            What needs improvement?

                            In the next release, I would like to see programming. I'd like to see a lot more about customization for people who want to customize programming API, SDK.

                            For how long have I used the solution?

                            More than five years.

                            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                            So far, so good. So far it's very reliable and stable.

                            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                            Scalability depends on the infrastructure. The software can handle a heavy load.

                            How is customer service and technical support?

                            Technical support is excellent.

                            How was the initial setup?

                            It's not complex but I have a lot of experience.

                            Which other solutions did I evaluate?

                            vSphere is fantastic but the reason I'm doing research is that I deal with different vendors, they use different technology, they use Red Hat KVM. The other one is using Hyper-V, so that's why I want to do some research. vSphere is the most popular virtualization technology worldwide. Ninety percent of the world uses vSphere.

                            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                            PeerSpot user
                            it_user851001 - PeerSpot reviewer
                            Senior Architect at Art Van Furniture
                            Real User
                            Enables the creation of template-based servers very quickly, through a very intuitive UI
                            Pros and Cons
                            • "The benefit of the solution is that you can create template-based servers within minutes. If you were to use a physical server, it would probably take several hours, if not a whole day, to get everything set up the way you need."
                            • "The UI is very intuitive, you don't have to spend hours before you figure it out. All in all, compared to other environments, like Hyper-V, we find vSphere a lot more user-friendly and intuitive to use."
                            • "These days we have an environment where we are often using clouds as well. A solution that would be a little more cloud-aware would be really helpful. I know there is a product from VMware that is more specifically for the cloud, but it would be nice if VMware Cloud Manager would be cloud-aware. It would simplify certain processes."

                            What is our primary use case?

                            vSphere is managing virtual machines in VMware infrastructure, ESXi, and it has performed very well. It's actually an excellent product.

                            How has it helped my organization?

                            The benefit of the solution is that you can create template-based servers within minutes. If you were to use a physical server, it would probably take several hours, if not a whole day, to get everything set up the way you need.

                            What is most valuable?

                            The UI is very intuitive, you don't have to spend hours before you figure it out. All in all, compared to other environments, like Hyper-V, we find vSphere a lot more user-friendly and intuitive to use.

                            What needs improvement?

                            One thing that would be helpful is, these days we have an environment where we are often using clouds as well. A solution that would be a little more cloud-aware would be really helpful. I know there is a product from VMware that is more specifically for the cloud, but it would be nice if VMware Cloud Manager would be cloud-aware. It would simplify certain processes. It's all about doing things faster. If it were more cloud-aware it would be easier to work it into a hybrid environment and literally have seamless interfacing with the leading cloud solution. That would be nice.

                            What do I think about the stability of the solution?

                            I've been using it for years. It's super stable. There are a few glitches, but really nothing major. The stability is one of the reasons we selected this solution.

                            What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

                            It's scalable. It's comparable to other similar products. 

                            How are customer service and technical support?

                            I do use VMware support but not for vSphere. Full disclosure: I'm a VMware developer. I've been working with VMware for many years. But their support is excellent.

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

                            We had straight physical before. Of course, it is clear that when you use physical infrastructure, depending upon the type of application you're implementing on that infrastructure, often you do not use the infrastructure's capability to the maximum. You use anywhere between 10 and 25 percent of the potential of the infrastructure, and that has to do with the specifics of what application you're implementing and how well this application plays with other applications. A typical example is SQL Server and SharePoint. They both try to steal resources from each other so it's very hard to have those components sharing the same hardware. There are many other examples. This is just to illustrate, a little bit, the benefit of the virtualization solution.

                            Our most important criteria when selecting a vendor are a reasonably priced solution that the vendor maintains well, one they stand behind, so that when we use their solution, we keep up with the state of the art. Some vendors - and I'm not going to cite names - tend to invest in creating a solution, and then they don't stand behind it, and the customer is left to fend for himself. The solution has never been improved, it's no longer a key part of the vendor's line of business. At this point, for us, the important point is that the vendor keeps pushing the state-of-the-art and keeps improving the solution while maintaining a top level of support for the customer.

                            What other advice do I have?

                            I would rate this solution at around nine out of 10. There are ups and downs, but essentially it is an excellent solution.

                            My advice: Just go for it. At this point, I have had a lot of experience with competing products, but in terms of finish, in terms of flexibility, in terms of user-friendliness again, I would say vSphere, in my book, is still about as good as a solution can be. They are near the top. There is always room for improvement, but they are in front of the pack.

                            Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
                            PeerSpot user
                            Alex - PeerSpot reviewer
                            AlexDirector at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
                            Vendor

                            What is the purpose of this article? To announce to the World that vSphere is good? We already know. I expected a review, a description of pecularities, not merely "just go for it" proclamation.

                            it_user862539 - PeerSpot reviewer
                            Infrastracture Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 501-1,000 employees
                            Real User