Workspace ONE UEM Reviews

A user can leverage the solution if they basically want to integrate the system with two-factor authentication or multifactor authentication to access desktops and sessions. 

Users also leverage the access portal from a remote host and gain access to the system.

The authentication integration is great. It can be combined with basically different kinds of authentication mechanisms and provide a single sign-on. That's a typical use case that I see as a solution provider.

The solution is stable. 

My understanding is it is not too hard to set up. 

The solution can scale. 

There are a lot of difficulties whenever people have a lot of configurations in it, basically related to security certificate configurations and integration with VMware Horizon. I see technical people are sometimes struggling to do this. I don't know whether it is some knowledge gap or whether it is the difficulty of the product. However, there have been some cases where we've had issues, and the knowledge is not ubiquitous. You cannot find it easily. Not many engineers have the right training or knowledge to deal with it correctly.

Technical support could be better.

It would be great if it had some sort of password wallet integrated within it.

I've been familiar with the solution for two or three years. I was a customer, and now I am a presales manager working as a reseller. 

We've seen no issues with stability or reliability. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

While I have never tried to scale the solution, and we don't have many requirements for that functionality, my understanding it can scale. 

Technical support could be better. Sometimes, when we raise a ticket, it takes time for the engineers to assist.

Neutral

I haven't actually been part of a live deployment. That said, it's my understanding that it is not that difficult. New users should be aware that integrating it with multiple other things will take time. 

You only need one expert to handle the deployment since it's a one-time task. However, they need to be knowledgable to handle the process. In our case, we have two or three people who can handle deployment tasks.

We are a reseller and a partner. 

We are using an older version in a deployment right now. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

If you have a use case and if you have VMware products already, it'll come along with some of the licenses, so you do not have to pay additional fees. That is one advantage. It'll also be easy to integrate with VMware Horizon, Horizon Stack Workspace, VMware Workspace One, and other related products.

VMware Workspace ONE can be deployed in the cloud and on-premise.

The main use case for VMware Workspace ONE is for customers who are looking for a single tool for all their device management needs and have had limitations with respect to Mac specifically and virtual reality devices with other solutions such as Intune. They can move to VMware Workspace ONE, where they can have all kinds of support.

The most valuable feature of VMware Workspace ONE is the support for multiple devices. Not only iOS, and Android, but all kinds of platforms, including VR device management. Additionally, it has a tunneling feature, which no other solution provides. Other solutions have to integrate with other tools to have this functionality, whereas VMware Workspace ONE has its own application gateway tunnel.

VMware Workspace ONE can improve in virtual reality. Customers are now looking toward virtual reality devices. Though it supports virtual reality, it's treated as an Android device. Customers want to deal with VR devices, they want a specific VR tool. Not an Android device VR tool.

I have been using VMware Workspace ONE for approximately eight years.

VMware Workspace ONE is stable.

The scalability of VMware Workspace ONE is good.

The support of VMware Workspace ONE is good. When we opened a ticket we had a quick response.

The deployment of VMware Workspace ONE is easy. The time it takes for the deployment depends on the environment totally. If it is only a small environment, with no integration, with the cloud instance, and no set of a separate instance or sub-component is required, it can be set up in approximately a week.

In the use case scenarios, for example, where there is an on-premise instance where there are unified access gateway components required, then it takes a little longer because the firewall ports and setting up the infrastructure will take some time.

The solution can be costly when the customer is dealing with multiple platforms. If a customer is only dealing with iOS, Windows, and Android then Intune is the better choice because there are free licenses.

I suggest to others if they have multiple device platforms, especially in Apple and the VR device area. VMware Workspace ONE is the best tool where they can receive not only the VR and Mac support but in order to manage the Microsoft Windows devices as well, they will have good functionality. 

I rate VMware Workspace ONE an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for the secure email gateway. This solution is deployed on-premises. 

There are about 500 people using this solution in my company.

The solution is used to secure corporate data for end-users.

If an end-user has an issue with a device, the administration has the ability to remote access the device after approval from the end-user.

There could be improvement with processing the environment to be more user friendly for the end user.

The solution is stable.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I would rate technical support a 3.

Setup is easy.

The license is paid annually.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

It's a very complex solution. It's used to manage any operating system devices with internet connections. I would recommend this solution because it's simple for end-users.

We use AirWatch for mobility management. We leverage all the basic functionalities this solution provides, such as MDM, MAM, MCM, MBM, and MIM.

Our company provides managed services to customers. We are a partner and managed services provider, and we help with the installation, implementation, and configuration of VMware solutions.

We are working with its latest version. In terms of deployment, it is a mix. Some of our customers opt for the on-prem model, and some of our customers want a site-based model.

Remote management is most valuable. It allows you to manage multiple types of devices. It is not just limited to laptops or desktops. You can also manage IoT devices. If a device is lost or stolen, you can easily take control of the device without letting any information get leaked.

Feature-wise, it is fine, but its pricing could be better, given that Microsoft is on a bundling spree. AirWatch would benefit from reducing the license pricing per user per month.

It has been a couple of years.

It is very reliable.

It is easy to scale. We deal with all kinds of companies, but it is mainly used for large companies.

I don't get involved with the installation or administration of VMware. There is a different team that looks into all these things. They might have been in touch with VMware's technical team. I am in touch with their alliance team.

For mobility management, we deal with VMware AirWatch and Microsoft Intune. Both products are more or less the same. Intune is just a basic solution, and feature-wise, AirWatch is better. Security-wise, AirWatch is better, but Intune is catching up. The benefit of Intune over AirWatch is the bundling and the pricing. 

I don't handle the technical bit. I am a product manager, and I'm not the one who installs this product. 

AirWatch would benefit from reducing the license pricing per user per month. Microsoft bundles everything, and then that bundling makes the product free for the customers.

It completely depends on the use case and what a company is looking for. For example, if they are an SMB and already have Microsoft products, then I would suggest they upgrade the licenses so that they get Intune or device management complimentary. For a big organization, we need to do some feasibility study to understand the customer requirements, and based on that, we can suggest a product. 

AirWatch has been a leader, and it has always been in the top category. I would rate it a solid nine out of 10.

Workspace ONE has a pretty broad range of features and capabilities. It's like a market-wide buffet that hasn't yet spread out. However, when compared to its competitors, such as Microsoft Intune, Intune is behind the game, but it has been catching up in terms of the capabilities and features that it now has to offer.

The Identity component of this solution is its most valuable feature.

VMware provides a wide range of services that are second to none.

They need a more flexible pricing model.

I have been working with VMware Workspace ONE for four years.

In terms of stability, I would say VMware Workspace ONE is fairly stable, but not every OEM vendor in the world can provide products that are error-free. When it comes to fixing errors, I believe VMware is on the right track. The problems aren't bothering the customers.

There are some errors but nothing that is of concern and it gets corrected quickly.

When compared to its competitors such as Microsoft, VMware is a much more scalable product, in my opinion.

When it comes to their SaaS offering, I would say the product is a little more flexible and scalable.

In terms of support, I would say it is adequate. When compared to Microsoft, I would say VMware support is excellent. However, there are times when you need to escalate certain issues in order to gain traction. And if you're not getting anywhere with your support cases, you may need to escalate internally.

Previously, I worked with Microsoft Intune.

Microsoft's licensing is more flexible and adaptive, in my opinion. In Microsoft, you pay for whatever you use. In terms of services, it is more evenly distributed. You only need to pay for one license to get access to a suite of products. From your office to your endpoint, you are essentially managing your endpoint. Everything is combined into a single console. somewhat more flexible on the Microsoft side, which is lacking on the VMware side.

In terms of features, I believe VMware has struck the right chord. However, there are some features in Microsoft that are lacking. I'm confident that Microsoft will try to catch up over time, and it will be there, within the next year or two.

I would say it was a straightforward process because if you are a potential lead for the product, the relevant stakeholders, such as the sales team, take action and then convert it. They perform POCs.

I would say that at the very least the pricing needs to be revised. Workspace ONE is on the higher end of the pricing band when compared to other players in the market.

Pricing may need to be subsidized.

The price is reasonable given the features that Workspace ONE provides. 

Not every company or every organization in the world can afford the VMware Workspace ONE just for the features. Some companies might be using some of the features, and they will have to pay for the rest of the features, even if they are not utilizing them.

I am not currently affiliated with any company, such as a solution provider, an MSP, or a product company that sells this product. I'm now more interested in DevOps.

I haven't been in touch with MDM technology in about six to eight months. We were gold-certified partners with VMware, as well as Microsoft.

I was a partner selling services and developing solutions for their customers.

I would advise them to first prioritize what they want to achieve. Rather than wandering aimlessly through the market in search of a specific product. First, they must understand or, more likely, articulate their use cases. And then, based on the pricing model, decide whether they want a lot more features so that they can use the services later on, rather than just going with whatever players are available in the market.

Make certain that it is the solution you require.

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

We recently integrated Workspace ONE with our intelligence report, and this is a great tool from a reporting point of view. In our daily business, we get several requests from businesses to provide an Adobe request for monitoring, whether it is for Android or iOS devices. The main benefit of this tool is that we can exclude the report for applications. Another benefit of Workspace ONE is that it supports many devices, which is a major benefit for us.

There are some bugs that our team needs to work around. It required some API integration required because visitor integration was not there. For example, we are currently working on a tunnel issue, and VMware doesn't have this solution. I think the R&D team is working on this, and I think this is something they need to look into because from the Android point of view, this is the major security tool, and these features need to work as expected.

Workspace ONE is stable.

Once Workspace ONE is configured, the scalability is good.

I rate VMware technical support eight out of 10.

Setting up Workspace ONE is straightforward. In December 2020, I worked with the VMware deployment team, and we deployed this in 10 to 15 days for all components, whether it is Workspace ONE Access or Okta integration. It's easy to use, migrate, and configure. Deployment and maintenance require four to five people, including two solution architects and two or three engineers. 

I rate Workspace ONE eight out of 10. If someone comes to me, I would advise them to go with this tool rather than Intune. There are several benefits, and it doesn't cost much compared to Intune. Intune doesn't have all the components and integration we require.

It's a SIEM solution. It's a solution used to manage the identity of the users. It also makes a federation for the data applications and gives access to the users, and provisions the users in other applications, including SaaS applications (for example, Microsoft 365, SoundDesk, or Salesforce). 

We use it to provide the users a smooth authentication to the applications with, for example, mobile, or a log in with a certificate from the Windows machines.

Our users have a lot of cloud applications. To manage those, you have to manage all these passwords and users' names and provide access to a lot of services. Potentially, the users could forget their user names and passwords and everything like that. We provide smooth access with mobile SSO to these solutions with one click. The user just opens the catalog applications in the device, and those devices could be, for example, iOS or Android or Windows or macOS or Chrome OS, et cetera. They open the catalog and with just one click on they have access. They don't need separate passwords, user names, et cetera.

Its value is when you use it with a Workspace ONE UEM solution as it is part of the ecosystem for VMware Workspace ONE.

Technically speaking, it's a very good product.

The setup of the product is not complex.

The license could be better. You can't simply license access to services for devices - you have to license the product to users. The problem with that is some companies don't have licenses for the whole user catalog and just offer licenses for the devices themselves, meaning they aren't directly attached to a user. That's the main problem of Identity Manager.

In terms of stability, the performance in the SaaS environment is pretty good. The problem is, with the on-premises version, there can be hardware problems. That said, it depends on the machines that the customer use. Usually, the service is fast and you don't have any problem with the performance. It uses sometimes a lot of resources though.

It's not easy to scale it if you have a setup on-premises as it's necessary to build a cluster, and clusters are not easy to build. However, in the SaaS environment, there is no problem, it's very scalable.

Our company is a small company. We are 200 people. However, I have a lot of customers and a lot of Identity Managers deployed; there are maybe millions of people. 

Technical support is not bad, however, they are not as good as it could be. 

We are currently migrating to Okta, a different product. 

Most clients did not previously use a different solution. Identity Manager was their first. 

The initial setup of the product is very simple and quite straightforward. 

The deployment process does not require a big team. For a big company with, for example, 10,000 users or more, you can manage it with three or four people. It's enough. The amount of time it takes can range from a few days to a few weeks depending on the size of the project. It's usually less than a month. 

If it's an on-premises deployment, you do have a bit of maintenance, however, if you have a SaaS deployment, there is no maintenance required. With on-premises, you just make some changes or add new applications or new users, and that is quite simple. The problems come when you need to upgrade versions if you have the solution on-premise.

In terms of pricing, it's reasonable if you have the Workspace ONE solution. If you don't have the full solution, it's quite expensive.

There are no extra costs beyond the standard licensing fee. 

We have a partnership with this product.

We use both Software as a Service and also on-premises deployment models. That said, the on-premises version is not exactly the same as the SaaS one. 

I would recommend people to use it only if they have Workspace ONE, Workspace ONE UEM, the Unified Endpoint Management.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. 

At the time, our primary use case was for the purpose of having single authentication around endpoints. Every single endpoint was managed by Workspace ONE: iOS, Android devices, and Windows standard devices. We were provisioning payloads. We had a trust relationship between Workspace ONE and the vIDM console, and we were handling certificates around those, to provide seamless certification. In the end, a user with specific applications wouldn't be required to type in any username, password, etc. 

vIDM was a SaaS-based solution, at the time, where you had the vIDM connectors in case you were required to have LDAP Synchronization. It was completely on a dedicated cloud from VMware. 

One of the main benefits was end user experience. Imagine that your business apps on your mobile device, for instance, no longer require you to type in your username, password, or second factor of authentication—as long as you're handling a managed and trustworthy device, you can seamlessly log in to applications. In the past, I personally integrated it with applications like SAT and Salesforce. As long as the application offered integration, we could easily do this. 

One of the features that I enjoyed most was the integration with Azure AD because I could use VMware Identity Manager to standardize the User Principal Name coming from Active Directory. You have Azure AD Connect to do that. In between, if you have vIDM handling it, you can easily get the synchronization of users into your VM and standardize the User Principal Name. If you require quality assurance for handling it, you can actually count on the vIDM to do so. That was one of the main things I enjoyed about the product. 

vIDM could be improved with the multi-tenant capabilities that VMware tends to offer—features like customization branding and the integration of the app catalog based on the branding. Since the integration has been at top-level OGs, you were not able to then do rebranding if you were required to use specific user groups to highlight specific applications. At the time, I was personally opening feature requests for these things. I haven't worked with the latest release, so I don't know if these features were already deployed or not. 

I used vIDM for about four years, though the last time I worked with it was about a year ago. 

I can't recall having any problems with stability or performance. 

The maintenance, regarding the core system, was provided by VMware directly. For the connectors hosted on our on-prem infrastructure, maintenance was handled by the team responsible for the product. 

It's easy to scale, since it's in the cloud. We never had to worry about scalability. 

At the time, there were about 120,000 people in the company using this solution. 

VMware has the standard support, and then they have enterprise support or special contracts for enterprise support with dedicated teams. We never had to deal with the default, but nonetheless, there will always be glitches around tech support. We were quite knowledgeable about the products, so if we actually raised a ticket, it was because something was definitely not working and there was a bug on the product itself. It was mostly the case that it would be dropped at the product management team directly. 

The deployment was complex, considering the infrastructure. Our organization has more than 400,000 users, so the complexity of the in-house infrastructure is quite high, which implies some complexity during the deployment process as well. You need to interact with several teams regarding identity management or identity access management. On a small-sized company, it may be quite straightforward. 

We first collected the requirements, which was straightforward. Then—this will depend on the size of the organization—we had five or six people around the required services. They came from Active Directory, the main identity provider, the application owners for service provider integration, and it took them a few days. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. 

I rate vIDM a nine out of ten. During the time I worked with it, it was a really nice product, and it was straightforward and reliable.