Horizon 8 Reviews

We deploy the solution for our clients.

The solution is very user friendly. 

The solution is very fast and easy to configure.

The solution offers good documentation.

Our customers maintain that they don't face any issues when using the solution and find it very reliable.

The product can really cater to specific customer environments.

Our customers haven't really experienced any issues with the solution. I'm not sure if there are any features that are missing.

The solution is very expensive.

I've been using VMware for about four years. However, I've only been working with Horizon View for just less than one year.

The stability of the solution is great right now. We don't have any complaints about how it's operating for us. We don't experience bugs or glitches. There isn't any crashing or freezing. There might be a minimal report about the disconnection of the agent, however, I would say that it's very minimal.

We have about 500 to 700 users on the solution who use it on a daily basis.

The solution is easy to scale.

I haven't experienced filing anything with technical support. I don't have experience with their services just yet and therefore I can't really speak to the quality of their services. However, in terms of VMware in general, they are quite responsive to issues and resolve out requests in a timely manner.

I have a virtual desktop on Azure.

I did not really switch to Horizon View, but technically speaking, I am also on VDI. I'm not just focusing on the Horizon side. I've tried to explore different VDI solutions, like Azure, just to see what it's like.

With Horizon, the difference is more on the simplicity of the user experience and the speed and delivery of the application. It's also more convenient because some of the users work from home and can work in any place or use any device. 

The solution isn't complex. It's pretty straightforward, largely due to the fact that there's only one application to deploy. We deployed one connection server and one replica. For the external users, I deployed a Unified Access Gateway (UAG). They have volumes and that's it.

With no dependency on the firewall, I think I can deploy the solution in one week. That would be the average amount of time it would take.

At this point, the solution has been running for about 10 months and hasn't required any maintenance whatsoever.

For now, I implement the solution on my own after I have read different documentation, which I find helps me deploy everything effectively. 

I have a team with knowledge of VMware, however, most of the time, I'm the technical lead on the product.

The solution is costly, however, I would argue that it is worth the money as the product can really cater to unique user requirements.

We're partners with VMware.

I'm using versions ranging from 7.9 to 7.12.

I'm not very familiar with the cloud setup and am much more comfortable with the on-premises deployment.

I deployed it to some customers. They needed to use the VDI during the pandemic. I used a setup as a work from home scenario. VDI is our solution for that kind of use case.

I would advise any organization considering the solution to learn more about the product and how it works before starting anything. It's basically not easy to deploy if you're not familiar with the product. It's important to familiarize yourself with it.

It's an excellent solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten.

This solution provides centralized management with a digital platform.

It has improved our business because now we can run applications and it's easier for our students to do their exams.

We learned something new and gained experience regarding single digital platforms including how they work, how it is made into a single platform, and technically how the hybrid conversion works.

The most valuable feature is the graphics facilities.

They have tried to create a solution that is similar to Nutanix Citrix. Nutanix Citrix is the leader with this type of solution, a digital single platform. VMware tried to do the same, it's close but in terms of performance and how they manage a single platform, Nutanix Citrix is much better.

In the next release, the performance, the speed, and the price need to be improved.

I have been using this solution for six months.

There are still many unknowns as we have only been working with this solution for a short time. We don't know the level of support and the servers are new to us, but in the six months that we have been running this solution, we have not run into any problems.

At this early stage, we can't determine whether VMware is able to address any issues or not.

We are still new to this solution and have not run into any issues to be able to access the level of support or response time.

To date, I am doing the support with my team with our limited knowledge.

We haven't created any tickets with VMware technical support to resolve any issues.

So far we have been able to resolve the issues immediately.

Previously we were using Microsoft Terminal Server. 

Microsoft Terminal server did not meet our requirements and we didn't achieve our tasks or what we need in education. The new application now, it's reported to have strong backend, and to have a graphic backend to be able to support new applications, like Photoshop, printers, and video. It has graphics facilities.

Terminal Server does not have these facilities.

The VDI with this solution is now supported and it works for us. The challenge is to have a graphical backend and we get this with VMware, which solves the problem.

The deployment model is on the hybrid cloud.

This solution is expensive.

Nutanix Citrix is the best solution in the world. I have attended a seminar and I like it.

Unfortunately, I am not able to purchase it due to finance. Our recruitment office decided to go with Dell, not Nutanix. If the decision was mine to make I would have gone with Nutanix Citrix, not VMware or Dell VMware.

Area 1 Horizon is a product by VMware. It's centralized management with a digital platform.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten, but to be fair, there have been several improvements to this solution. We can work with this solution. We had issues before, but now they have been resolved. Students can do the lessons that are required and write the exams.
We requested the graphics facilities and now they are available and working fine.

Overall, I would say that we can give them a rating of seven out of ten.

Use as a test center for medical students was the primary purpose of the launch. The number of users seen included was about two hundred. The model was kiosk-mode. Each time, after the end of the virtual machine exam, it was presented. It had to change on the user.

Organizing and integrating is perhaps the most important feature.

Reducing maintenance costs as well as reducing end-time service to end users can be another feature.

Infrastructure equipment and Zero Client. It also has great flexibility in infrastructure changes, both in software and in hardware. You can increase the resources needed by the user or software needed in a few seconds.

Managing all operating systems in a single environment helped a lot in organizing and integrating it. Also, there is no operating system on the user-side hardware.

There is no worry that it will crash and you will be able to recover it in seconds.

Using this solution in medium to large organizations can be justified. Since virtualization is widespread in many organizations today, launching this solution may not require much infrastructure change.

Offices that do not require much processing are a good place to use this solution.

Places such as universities are not suitable for this solution.

The initial startup costs for this solution are relatively high.

Because it's more focused on integration, it's much more flexible and easier to manage.

This solution is Very Scalable

The technical support for this solution is very satisfying.

We tried solutions from Parallels, but it didn't seem right for the organization.

Most organizations have gone to virtualization and VMware clustering. Most of the work is already done.

Our in-house team handled the deployment.

We have seen ROI between two and three years.

The initial startup costs for this solution are relatively high.

Licensing and hardware outsourcing is expensive, but can be cost-effective in the three to five-year range.

We were spread across several offices and with the main production software tool and the weak WAN infrastructure, it was impossible to share data reliably. It seemed the only solution was to centralize the data and make it so the people using the data - the workers - could be anywhere. With past experiences in server virtualization, I investigated VMware View. It was the missing key that made this all work.

At this stage, a couple of iterations later, workers now only come to the office a couple of days a week. The company has been able to eliminate two offices entirely, and in addition, we have a much wider base of operations because employees can live practically anywhere in our "territory".

The ability to reliably virtualize desktops and support them. Simple to say, but complicated nonetheless. 

Almost all VMware products are "designed" for the enterprise and it sometimes takes some wise wrangling to make it financially viable. And VMware doesn't make that easy. I think the SMB market is largely untapped and maybe even ignored.

VMware is incredibly stable. Even when you don't know what you're doing. And for the times you get stuck - that's why they offer support. VMware support is pretty good.

VMware products are almost infinitely scalable. 

Tech support by and large is excellent. There is some swapping out between internal VMware groups sometimes, they are very compartmentalized but they generally can get you out of just about any hole you dig yourself into. 

No. I had used VMware in a "past" life and didn't even consider other solutions as viable.

It's not shake the box easy but if you do your homework, do some rudimentary testing and do a lot of research it's possible, viable - you can even do it yourself.

I did it all in house on my own.

It's not cheap but compared to constant hardware refreshes it doesn't take long to pay itself back. 

Don't be afraid to search out your own solution. It's not that hard to architect a viable virtual desktop environment. You don't have to implement each and every feature. 

No, as stated above.

• Horizon-linked clone desktops
• App Volumes
• UEM

With Horizon view, it requires less administration from us and it provides much more flexibility for our users.

Integration of app volumes with Horizon View and integration of App Volumes with UEM would be nice additions.

I've used it for three years.

App volumes introduces longer login times, printer mapping issues (print spooler crashes), and short cut configuration timing issues.

We didn't encounter any issues with stability.

We didn't encounter any issues with scalability.

Customer service is good.

Horizon: good. App Volumes and UEM: bad. Their support does not have good knowledge of the product.

We previously used Citrix. VMware is a better integrated solution for virtual desktops.

The initial setup was straightforward, but minimal. It takes time to configure all details. The default configuration should be better.

We are a consultancy partner. We implement it.

We evaluated Citrix XenDesktop.

Always use VMware Horizon Enterprise Suite. It has deep integration with the hypervisor. It is total solution.

The ability to spin up desktops as quickly as possible. You just build one image and then set multiple images and be ready quickly.

If you have a training session, you can spin up more very quickly, which helps in the training ability for end-users.

I wish there were more standardized instructions and rules. There are too many gotchas.

We're moving to 6.1 from 5.x, so far it's been good. An older version was unstable, but that was before I got there.

There's some little gotchas with moving some up, and you can only have so many VMs, so it does have limitations.

It’s a little advanced because more gotchas (certificates, different servers in different order).

Make sure you know the product, and do a POC first.

In the past, students had to physically go to labs to access software, but now they can access them from any device anywhere, and don’t have to login via VPN because of the security server part of Horizon.

View Persona, it’s been pushed to the wayside because they acquired UEM, and I’d prefer to use it, but have no budget for it. View Persona has less features than UEM, and it doesn’t seem updated, which makes a difference for standard edition users.

It is stable, but it depends on the use case. For us, we use it to allow students to access their desktops anywhere, at anytime. We just use the standard version, not the full enterprise one. We would like to go enterprise, but don’t the have budget for it. But, the standard version has been stable and addressed by support and updates. No issues that would cause us to turn away.

Recently had issue with the 3D application performance with the release of 6.1, and added VGPU support. All we had to do was add hardware (Nvidia K1 cards).

It's responsive, but a few times we had issues with their tech knowledge and troubleshooting steps. We had to escalate the issue and then it was resolved.

It was complex, and many facets on the networking side sit on top of vSphere, with multiple composer engines, and connection servers.

It loses points becuase I can’t take advantage of enterprise stuff. You should do a POC to make sure it fits the use case, three to four month period, and make sure you involve your networking team.

• Control
• Consolidated way of doing updates
• Security

We had to deal with re-imaging hard drives and managing PCs, so having images and desktops to deploy wherever people are without the hardware was really helpful.

I think that simplifying cross-platform use on different devices could be better. Different client versions sometimes don’t work quite as well.

It’s been great – we haven’t had too many issues at all.

Pretty good – we're a pretty small organization, and we have a few hundred desktops but it's been great for what we do.

It’s been good – no complaints at all.

Nope – we went from straight desktops to virtualization.

It’s a little complex, we missed the initial deployment. They were trying to get the most out of the resources on the servers and it undercut what some users needed.

When choosing VMware, we looked at the cost, and value. If they meet what we need, support is important as well. You should get a demo version and try it – see what it actually does before you buy it. I'd rather see it kick the tires than hear what other people have to say.