Workspace ONE UEM Reviews

I'm using the solution to manage all cabinets in our company. It's essential for our business. 

We chose this solution as it's more in line with the business solution security of devices in our company. We moved devices to this solution to experiment with it to see if it's the best possible solution in terms of security. So far, it's been good. 

It's a more secure solution to manage all tablets or mobile devices. It helps us stay organized and integrates well with mobile devices and tablets. 

It's stable and reliable.

The solution can scale.

We'd like the customization to be better.

It would be ideal if the interface was better to make it easier to manage all devices. 

We'd always like more features and functionality in the future as the solution continues to progress. 

I've used the solution for one year. 

The solution was stable. There were no bugs or glitches and it didn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable. 

We started by managing 200 tablets. We'll be expanding usage in the coming months. We'll likely reach a maximum of 400 tablets.

We have 150 people on the solution currently.

I get support from a third party, not directly from the product. The support I get is in my country, in Egypt, and that's better as it's local. 

I used Microsoft Intune previously, and it was difficult for me. I switched as this solution was simpler. 

The initial setup was not complicated. There may be a bit of difficulty in connecting all the components together. However, I have a year of experience, so, for me, it wasn't hard. It gets easier with time. Likely in five more years, it will be even simpler to deploy. I had some additional documentation as well that helped. 

The deployment itself took about one month. That is a typical timeframe.

Our strategy was to mainly manage all tablets and mobile devices from a single platform. Our main strategy was to connect all devices and be able to track them in case they were stolen or they were losing data. With this solution, we are able to set up and manage everything centrally.

We handled the initial setup in-house. There was no outside assistance.

We have a three-year contract that we pay on a yearly basis. The pricing is on the website. For big users, it's around $500.

We looked at a variety of different products, including some from Microsoft.

I'm a customer and reseller.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I'm a reseller and help our customers implement the solution. We're using version 20.

Most of our customers deploy the solution on a public cloud. It's the VMware shared cloud. Most of our customers are small enterprises because most of the businesses in Hong Kong are small. Our customers usually have 20 to 100 devices.

There are two distributors in Hong Kong. We buy from the distributor, resell the solution, and we help other IT or telecom companies to implement the solution for their customers because they don't have professionals to do it.

Our customers request this solution because they like the repetition.

The solution is too complicated. A lot of end customers don't know how to start when they go into the console. They request our service to help them implement the MDM policy.

The distributor and VMware's people can't tell me what's the differentiation or the spec, because MDM products are very similar these days. Some of that might be because the vendor thinks it's good but it's not what the customer wants. That's why it's very difficult.

I have used this solution for about three years.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten.

I would rate technical support as six out of ten.

Usually, we solve most of the problems that our customers have. If they have a problem and need us to raise a ticket to VMware, then usually it's a very serious problem, and it takes time to find the right person to solve it.

Last time, it took three to four weeks for technical support to find the right person to solve the problem.

I'm also working with SOTI and Samsung Knox.

If it's the government center, we usually recommend that they use SOTI. If it's a commercial center, what we recommend depends on their budget. Depending on the budget and the type of device that the customer uses, we would recommend either Samsung Knox or Workspace ONE.

Most of our customers deploy the solution on the cloud, not on-premises. The most complicated part of the installation is installing the server.

Implementation can take six weeks to two months.

First, we get the requirement from the customers. They tell us what they want on the mobile and the features or result that they want. Then, we input and create the policy for them. After that, we test the result on the device. If it's okay, then we do the training after implementing the policy.

For deployment, usually one project manager and two engineers are needed.

If you lower the price too much, then the reseller and distributor don't earn money and they won't promote your product because software is a service.

The solution is about $45 per device for a 12 month subscription. The price is standard across the world. 

For the enrollment service, if the project is too big and there are too many devices, sometimes a customer will outsource the enrollment service or the professional service.

I am also working with SOTI and Samsung Knox.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.

My advice is to find a company that knows MDM. For example, the team in my company mainly specializes in MDM, which is why we can help customers. Not many companies in Hong Kong can help customers to implement.

We have multiple use cases for VMware Workspace ONE. The main use case for VMware Workspace ONE is offline domain drawing. 

We don't have any limits for Windows 10 Enterprise, because if you want to go for the endpoint management, it's a need to have Enterprise Edition for Windows 10 devices.

You can upgrade and migrate the existing group policies that we use for VMware Workspace ONE for the active directory. We can push the policies and group policies. We can migrate it and manage it from VMware Workspace ONE.

VMware Workspace ONE for the new users or the new clients that they try to procure and learn it, there can have difficulties. It does not have user-friendly portals. The portal seems to be more user-friendly in Microsoft solutions.

We don't have the availability of sharing with other platforms, such as social platforms, or YouTube. We don't find those learning materials. It is very difficult to learn. 

I have used VMware Workspace ONE within 12 months.

VMware Workspace ONE is stable.

The scalability of VMware Workspace ONE is good. If we want to scale we only need to purchase more licenses.

We have approximately 50,000 users using this solution.

I rate the support from VMware Workspace ONE a four out of five.

Positive

I have used other solutions, such as Microsoft Intune. I have found VMware Workspace One better than Microsoft Intune.

VMware Workspace ONE is not straightforward, but we had tested for the on-premise setup. It worked very well and we also tried the SaaS solution. We have tried both solutions. It took us five months to do.

Even though we were not aware of a lot of things and there were dependencies that were the challenge. We had to address all of them. If we want to test it now, it would be two months maximum, we can test it and onboard it.

We did the deployment with the help of the VMware team.

VMware Workspace ONE licensing price is good with their supportability. The price of VMware Workspace ONE is reasonable. We are using an enterprise license.

I rate VMware Workspace ONE a nine out of ten.

We use the product to manage virtual machines and services within a company's infrastructure. Over time, the focus has shifted towards incorporating additional features like container services.

The platform provides a stable environment for operations and quickly creates new environments. Additionally, it offers efficient flexibility.

The product's stability for certain instances needs improvement.

I've been using VMware Workspace ONE under guidance for about two years.

Workspace ONE's stability is eight out of ten. While it's considered stable in general, there are situations where it feels somewhat risky, especially when pushing the limits of its capabilities. In these instances, there may be concerns about stability, particularly when the environment runs slower.

The number of users fluctuates depending on the project's stability and requirements.

The deployment duration of Workspace ONE can vary depending on several factors. For example, converting and testing could take some time if an organization has a VMware environment with approximately ten Linux servers. However, leveraging Azure offerings may streamline certain aspects of the deployment process, such as copying virtual machines directly into the Azure environment. Additionally, organizations working with government or ministry clients, who often utilize specialized environments, may require additional time for meticulous preparation and replicating the environment.

While the platform offers comprehensive solutions, it can be expensive, especially if you only need it for occasional testing and deployment.

We prioritize integrating new applications and platforms into Workspace ONE and replicating the client environment, facilitating our development process. We typically develop, test, and then restore environments, which covers most of our cases.

We have clients with proprietary systems, and it's more convenient for us to upload their virtual machines to Azure. Instead of installing everything, I prefer copying their virtual machines from on-premises VMware environments. However, when updating these virtual machines on Azure, I have to install agents and other components each time. I would like to have a mobile solution in the cloud to streamline this process.

As someone who works in a development environment without stringent production requirements, someone other than me might be the target user for Workspace ONE. Before deciding, assessing whether the features and capabilities align with the individual or organization's requirements is important.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use the product to manage the device.

The platform makes the mobile device management process straightforward to handle.

The product’s most valuable feature is the instant synchronization. It swiftly synchronizes changes made on mobile devices.

They could provide DLP integration for applications and specific user account security. Additionally, they should enable data copy-paste restrictions for professional accounts.

We have been using VMware Workspace ONE for nine years.

I rate the platform’s stability a nine out of ten. I have encountered a few downtime issues.

The platform has good scalability. We have installed it on nine endpoints in our organization.

The technical support team takes a longer time to respond to queries.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy. I follow the user guide for installation steps. It takes a month to complete. It is not very complicated to maintain.

I implement the product myself.

Compared to Intune, Workspace ONE provides a faster synchronization feature.

The product’s feature that significantly improved employee productivity is the seamless access to documents from anywhere.

The platform’s unified endpoint management capability significantly aids in simplifying IT operations. It enables centralized management of application updates. Moreover, the security features, especially the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) functionality, have significantly impacted our data protection strategy.

We have integrated the application with Office 365 for compliance purposes. It helps us manage conditional access to the services. It has improved the security status.

I recommend VMware Workspace ONE to others and rate it an eight out of ten.

We used AirWatch or VMware Workspace ONE to protect mobile devices on a large scale. They were known for being focused on mobile, more than desktops. They may not be as good on desktops, but the main use case is to monitor and manage mobile endpoints, e.g. wireless devices such as  tablets and phones. AirWatch became well known for being really good at monitoring and managing mobile endpoints.

VMware Workspace ONE isn't that good with patching and fixing, especially when compared to BigFix. This is an area for improvement. BigFix did a really good job in terms of patching and fixing, but it had a lot to do with IBM's integration to virtually every other platform out there. That integration really helped from just a server patching and endpoint management situation.

They (IBM) are very good at doing discovery, which is basically surveying the endpoint asset and finding out what vulnerability was there. It might be you're running Windows 10.647, and there are known vulnerabilities below that, so the prioritization of that patching became easy to create rules for, and make sure that you patched all devices with that current OS expeditiously.

Training for VMware Workspace ONE could also be improved, especially when compared to HCL who did a good job, either remote or self-paced.

VMware support has always been good, even if they became a really large company. They have what I call "Amazonitus", e.g. there's a lot of level two triage or level one triage, but you definitely get a response back, though a lot of people have moved away towards self-service. The goal is never to take a phone call if they don't have to, which I understand.

Their tech support is still rock solid on both sides, but would really depend on the kind of problem you have.

The setup for VMware Workspace ONE is good, e.g. there are no complexities, and they all have good discovery now. You plug them in, make sure the nodes are aligned on the network, then you can get to them. The setup process for VMware Workspace ONE and one of its competitors IBM, is very good. They've both done a very good job of it.

I was able to evaluate HCL (BigFix), Microsoft, Blackberry, and Ivanti.

AirWatch evolved into VMware Workspace ONE, so it's the same product. AirWatch was more of a competitor of mobile device management and security, so they weren't as good in patching and fixing.

There's another type of solution now that we call unified endpoint management (UEM), and that's a whole new category. I actually have quadrants in that. I know that AirWatch, even when they were acquired by VMware, e.g. it's now VMware Workspace ONE, was still highly rated. HCL is still highly rated. Microsoft was also good. Ironically, another company that was very good for mobile device management and one of the security companies out there is BlackBerry. They're still alive.

I've worked on most of the UEM solutions, including VMware Workspace ONE. For Blackberry, we haven't touched that lately. We have touched BigFix. I do have customers that are still running BlackBerry Spark®. I know even Google is trying to get in the game. Ivanti is also another UEM solution we've been dealing with. There are a number of different ones, e.g. even IBM has moved their MaaS360® platform to try to do unified endpoint management now.

The advice I'd like to give to others looking into implementing VMware Workspace ONE, is for them not to have any qualms about implementing it. Things are quick to set up, even if our team does some very hardcore security things, e.g. identity and access management, all kinds of threat landscape stuff, attack surface monitoring and modeling, etc. VMware Workspace ONE is one of the easier technologies that can be implemented for what we do, so I'm recommending it to others.

In terms of rating VMware Workspace ONE, there are a lot of "mini-categories", so they don't do some of the things I was talking about, or they're just newer into it. If I look at unified endpoint management, e.g. mobile, desktop, and everything combined, I would probably put BigFix high up there. For mobile, I would put VMware Workspace ONE high up there along with some others. Some of the SaaS ones, e.g. Tanium, do a good job, too. BlackBerry actually does a really good job with unified endpoint management, too. They just don't have billions of their devices out there, but in terms of managing their own devices, they were really the best in the early days, with a very secure platform.

HCL for UEM could be rated the best. For mobile, VMware Workspace ONE would rate the best, because they were really focused on that from the very beginning. They led the way, even if in that space you'll see 500 competitors, with people jumping up and jumping down, and constantly moving. VMware Workspace ONE in the mobile space has been very sustained in terms of how they've been rated and how they've grown over time. They owned the market with four or five of these solutions, and they were able to maintain the lead.

I could rate VMware Workspace ONE eight out of ten, but it would still depend on the use cases. BigFix is better for unified endpoint management, the ability to patch all assets, etc. VMware, on the other hand, is more focused on mobile. VMware being an infrastructure company and everybody inexpensively spinning up VMs all over the place: they've tried to pull that side a little more toward the infrastructure side, desktops, and PCs, and even on the networks, but both of them have grown tremendously.

In the last two or three years, for obvious reasons, with all the resiliency planning we do now for mobile workforces, it's really important for them to develop new capabilities, which I think they have, but this has been really good for their development. They've seen everything at this point.

I use VMware Workspace ONE for client and device management. This includes managing mobile devices and laptops.

The Client Control feature in VMware Workspace ONE is most valuable for managing client devices, including mobile devices and laptops. Another impactful feature is the per-service tooling, allowing access to the data centre on a per-application basis. We use the complete VMware stack, integrating Horizon for application delivery and Carbon Black for endpoint protection. We have outsourced our device management, which streamlines our IT tasks as our supplier handles them competitively.

VMware Workspace ONE sometimes has bugs that prevent it from working as intended or expected. Generally, these bugs can lead to unexpected results and hinder effectiveness.

I have been using VMware Workspace ONE for four years.

I would rate it a seven out of ten in terms of stability. It is challenging to stabilise it, but once it's running, it runs well. The challenge comes from the complexity of our organisation and some unexpected results from VMware. A more straightforward environment would likely experience fewer stability issues.

It delivers as expected, providing what you would anticipate from such a tool. Currently, we have about four thousand devices under management, and we use it extensively as our primary tool for application delivery. If it doesn't work, the whole organization comes to a halt.

I would rate the scalability of VMware Workspace ONE as an eight out of ten.

VMware's support organization is speedy, providing fixes quickly. I've mostly had positive interactions with them.

Positive

Before using VMware Workspace ONE, we used the Microsoft SCCM solution, but it was getting old. We decided to switch to Workspace ONE because of its capabilities and pricing. We also evaluated the Microsoft suite before choosing VMware.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup of VMware Workspace ONE as a five out of ten.

It's a mix between the complexity of our environment and the complexity of the tool. Our challenges were stability in the environment and ensuring all functional use cases were delivered through Workspace ONE.

The solution is deployed in a hybrid environment, with VMware Workspace ONE in the cloud and tunnelling in our on-premises data centre. We are also transitioning to Microsoft Azure for our cloud solutions.

We have noticed a return on investment, as it is easier for users to use, provides more flexibility, and offers better security compliance with regulations.

 We pay approximately thirty to thirty-five euros per device per month for the complete suite, and this is a fixed cost with one, three, or five-year licensing in advance.

I would rate the pricing a four out of ten, making it affordable.

I would rate VMware Workspace ONE as a seven out of ten. I advise others to look into usingWorkspace ONE to find a suitable partner with extensive product knowledge.

The primary use case was to containerize data and allow us to deploy applications securely. That was the use case that was predicated on and funded as a security initiative.

We had no MDM in place before, and we had one after the fact. When we had a departing employee, we were able to close off their access immediately.

Basically, the data containerization and the ability to publish and consistently push apps is the most valuable aspect of the product.

It has good stability.

The product can scale. 

There was nothing that the product couldn't do except force upgrades of iOS on iPhones.

The management interface needs to be better.

We'd like more useful support.

The scripting language is all very unique to the product as opposed to using any kind of industry-standard methods. That might be frustrating for some teams. 

The initial setup can be complex.

I've worked with the solution for three years. 

The solution seems to be stable. 

This product scales well. 

At the high water mark, we had 3,200 users. We're down to about 2,100 now.

We do not have plans to expand the solution for a few reasons. Number one is cost. Number two is the management interface is poor. Number three is the absence of support from the vendor. Number four would be how hard it is to support Gene Pool. Finding people with expertise with the product are few and far between.

Support is absolutely horrible. 

If I was not escalating through the account team that I've got, I would have practically no support on it whatsoever. In terms of quality, it's an absolute one out of ten.

Negative

Initially, the setup itself is quite complex. We had bought what VMware called a starter kit, which came with some professional services to get us up and running with the product. I'd rate it a four out of five in terms of ease of deployment as we did have those professional services to help us.

Unfortunately, the implementation, I would have to call a fail. We had several existing devices, and installing the product properly involved wiping the phone and installing and then restoring the user's information. And we had a very large resistance to that approach from our client community. We ended up installing more of a BYOD model, which limited the value of the platform to our organization.

We had the help of VMware professional services. 

While they were helpful, we were not prepared for the amount of change it would be inflicting on our user base, and as a result, it was not as successful as we would've liked.

The ROI was predicated on a more secure environment. That was achieved.

It's a subscription from VMware. We have a hybrid setup with a physical gateway on site, however, beyond that, it's subscription-based.

We are paying about $145,000 a year on a three-year subscription with no ability to scale up or scale down within that class model.

I was not here when the initial purchase was made, so I don't have that comparative analysis from three years ago. It does not strike me as particularly expensive, however, given that Intune is now included with my E3 subscription, it's on the expensive side now.

Typically, the solution comes as part of a package deal. 

We are end-users. 

I'd warn future users not to underestimate the impact on an existing environment.

I'd rate the solution three out of ten. It's hard to use in the absence of support. It does what it needs to do. However, I don't like it.