Horizon 8 Reviews

We implement VMware Horizon View for clients who want to replace physical site clients with a virtual desktop infrastructure solution, either to enhance geographical performance and reduce site clients or to add a security layer to their desktop environment.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the clone variant. We have been using the linked clone for the past five years, but I am willing to support and take on the function of the instant cloud. 

The clone variant enhances the solution's functionality, making it more beneficial.

In the latest versions, the deployment of certificates on the console has been implemented. Although it is functional, it is not working as well as I would like. I hope this feature can be improved in the future.

To enhance the user experience, it would be beneficial to have the Unified Access Gateway (UAG) integrated within the console. This would eliminate the need to switch to a different VLAN or access the DMZ separately. With a direct link from the connection server to DMZ, users could easily access the UAG website without leaving the console.

I am working with the latest version of VMware Horizon View.

It can be challenging to assess the stability of Horizon because it relies heavily on the underlying infrastructure, including vCenter, network, and storage performance. 

It is important to pay attention to these factors when evaluating the stability of the system.

We rely on vCenter, network, and storage performance, and any weakness in these areas will affect the performance of Horizon. When discussing this with customers, I always emphasize the importance of these factors.

If the foundation is solid, Horizon should not experience any performance issues.

If the fundamentals are weak, we will encounter issues with Horizon on a regular basis. However, the product itself, VMware Horizon, is highly stable.

While the Horizon product itself is very stable, it is important to be well-informed about any potential side effects from using other related products.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

There are adjustments that can be made, potentially resulting in a score of ten.

I have good experience with it, and I find it suitable for all sizes of companies. The POC is starting with 10 or 20.

In all three environments, we haven't had many large-scale deployments. Typically, they range from around a thousand to two thousand desktops. I haven't had any projects in my years of experience where the initial deployment started with a thousand or two thousand desktops. The deployments usually start small and then grow over time. The customer typically wants to test if it fits their needs, so we conduct several POCs before moving to production.

As someone who has been using this solution for a while, I find it to be quite complex. Initially, it was very good and remained so until around 2015-2016. However, in 2018, I noticed that the response time had increased, and I had to escalate the issue to the supervisor. 

There seemed to be a gap in communication that had not existed before, and it was difficult to understand the next steps.

Previously, I had direct communication with a technician until 2018. However, now I am talking to someone who is a classifier and perhaps several tiers away from the actual technicians. 

Therefore, sometimes I don't feel the same level of dependency on a consultant or technician as I used to.

We have a lot of VMware products in our company also converting other companies.

We use Workspace ONE.

Based on my background with Citrix, I have found that Horizon is often a more straightforward solution in many cases.  It's less complex than Citrix.

It's beneficial when the customer has the mindset that the implementation process might take a month or two or three. However, that is not the case with VMware Horizon View POC. We can finish it in just a matter of days.

We implement VMware Horizon View for customers who require application access within their virtual desktop image. When external services are involved, we typically use tools such as ASH for management and integration.

The ASH tool is a standard in the Citrix world, and when we talk about Horizon, we tell customers they don't need LDSH or terminal services. We don't have a license for those and it could cost a lot of traffic. Instead, we can implement the application on the image, which is something the customer should be aware of.

The initial setup is straightforward, and it follows a logical structure both in the cloud and on-premises. I wouldn't want to change anything about it.

Currently, we only have on-premises solutions in-house. However, we have many clients who use hybrid and cloud-only solutions.

It depends. For me, the choice between on-premises and cloud deployment depends on the specific use case. However, I personally grew up using on-premises solutions.

I am primarily focused on on-premises deployments. I am also excited about cloud deployments and their capabilities, I tend to prefer on-premises solutions. When given the choice between cloud or on-premises deployment, I typically choose on-premises.

I would rate the pricing of VMware Horizon View a five out of ten. The price is average.

I would rate VMware Horizon View a nine out of ten.

Nothing is 100%.

I am selling and consulting the product every day. I am behind the product. 

I use the solution for application delivery and data security for external people.

The most valuable feature of VMware Horizon is the VDI service, which helps externals use their own devices while keeping the data inside our data center.

The solution should provide easy configuration.

I have been using VMware Horizon for around one and a half years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

Since the solution is on-premises and we are moving to the cloud, scaling down is very easy. On the other hand, if we would deploy a lot of new VIs, it would be very easy to just add them. VMware Horizon is very flexible when scaling up and scaling down. Around 2,200 users in our organization use VMware Horizon to deploy the main applications.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The solution's technical support is very good. When we face issues with VMware Horizon, the support team creates patches in less than three weeks. If there are issues, the support team is very involved in finding out what's happening and solving the issue.

Positive

We previously used Citrix. We switched to VMware Horizon because Citrix was not as flexible as VMware Horizon was for us. The supplier that won the contract was in favor of using VMware. So, VMware Horizon came with the supplier we selected.

Delivering legacy applications and overall stability was challenging while setting up the solution.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a five out of ten.

The solution's actual deployment before we got into the pilot phase took about six months. The solution's deployment process included design, implementation, testing, and distribution to the end user. We had five people, including two from the supplier and about three internal people, to deploy the solution.

We needed to keep our legacy applications running because the business is reliant on them. If the applications stop, the business stops. In that case, we had no choice but to choose a technology like VMware Horizon.

We paid a lot of money for software that is not really fully operational out of the box. We had to have patches from VMware to get it into production. Hence, we lost a lot of time implementing the solution. We have a three-year contract, for which we pay about ten euros per user per month.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

I am using the latest version of VMware Horizon. I think one person from the supplier does the maintenance for VMware Horizon. We can implement our zero-trust strategy using VMware Horizon. It's a big part of our zero-trust solution. So, external people only have access to Horizon instead of having direct access to our company data with their devices.

Users should make a good comparison between cloud solutions Azure VDI and VMware Horizon, especially now that the company has been sold to a private investor.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We are currently using the solution to engage with our procurement team in a secure manner. If someone uploads tenders using their PC, they can copy the tender to other devices. Using the solution helps restrict access to users. The users' actions are also recorded in the solution.

It is easy to navigate through the product. The product makes it easier for us to manage the user’s expectations. The solution is seamless and easy to use. We can choose to use either the web or the client. We can integrate the solution with other tools using Active Directory.

The product has to improve its performance and connectivity. The product should add security features.

I have been using the solution for four months.

I rate the product’s stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability a ten out of ten. We are planning to onboard around 200 to 1000 users.

It is easy to get support for the solution.

Positive

The initial setup is complicated. I rate the ease of setup a six out of ten. Once the setup is done, everything else is smooth.

The deployment takes two to three months. We need to ensure that all the connectivity and the firewalls are properly configured. If we want to deploy the product, we should have a few prerequisites from VMware. If given to us early, we can deploy the solution very fast. VMware helps us deploy the product.

I am using the latest version of the solution. If we want to integrate with the authentication provider, we should not need any additional servers. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

In VDI, the primary benefit is providing users with a better environment than their endpoint machine by hosting their virtual machines in the server environment, improving performance. However, application virtualization becomes more appealing if specific resource requirements exist for the endpoint. Multiple users can benefit by using dedicated GPU resources, saving resources compared to individual dedications in VDI setups. VMware resources can be efficiently shared among various users in application virtualization, offering significant advantages over traditional VDI implementations.

VMware offers a friendly environment, and it's easy to provide the user with the package. It is a bundled solution that is readily deployable. The advantage lies in its simplicity, it requires minimal expertise. There are instances where Microsoft RDP outperforms due to its integration with the backend operating system. Yet, deploying and managing a Microsoft environment necessitates a specific skill set, typically that of a knowledgeable system administrator. 

On the other hand, Horizon offers a more user-friendly experience; you can quickly deploy applications, access simple documents, and navigate without needing specialized expertise. Additionally, comprehensive support and documentation are readily available to aid in setting up the Horizon environment.

The primary concern lies with licensing. There’s confusion regarding licensing terms following the new management’s takeover. Consequently, our resellers and distributors are confused. The SKUs have been altered. We had planned to include budgetary prices in our upcoming budget, which ends in June. However, during the budget repricing process, the resellers faced difficulties due to their inability to obtain responses regarding the budgetary code. The SKUs have changed due to the transition from one principal to another. 

I have been using VMware Horizon for two to three months.

There has been no downtime in the last four months. Some administrative complexities exist, but they were resolved after learning from the documentation.

The solution’s scalability is good. We require hardware that can scale accordingly. We are beginning with 50 users and scaling out over the next two years.

The initial setup takes a couple of hours, maximum. Everything requires a little knowledge. When it comes to deploying VMware Horizon, some understanding is necessary. Initially, I was confused about which documentation tool to use. I studied by myself and found the documentation provided very good and clear. Then, I deployed it.

When I found the documentation, learning and deploying VMware Horizon took a couple of days.

Initially, I had to test VMware vSphere, configure a Windows Virtual Machine and deploy the Horizon server. After that, we connected, integrated, and tested vSphere and vCenter with Horizon.

I have one vSphere server installed. On that server, I have configured virtual machines for application publication. Additionally, I have two Windows 10 virtual machines for endpoints, which will be provided to the end users. They will log in to the Windows 10 virtual machine, where the published applications will be installed. Initially, we'll start with three users at a time.

According to the technical documentation, they are apparent and easily accessible.

From one point of view, VMware Horizon uses virtualization configurations deployed on Microsoft servers, necessitating compliance with Microsoft's rules. It relies on Microsoft RDP services in the background. One beneficial feature is publishing applications installed on a Windows 10 machine.

You should check whether they aim to provide a VDI environment, and then the VDI option is best. However, GPU usage becomes crucial if they intend to centralize application solutions to conserve server resources. If assigned to a single-user PC, GPUs are hardware resources that might need to be more utilized when the user is not actively using them. Therefore, the optimal approach would be to install all the applications on a server, allocate the necessary hardware resources, and then share them using application virtualization.

There are only two or three products that meet this requirement. It is a very reliable and stable product. On the contrary, there is Microsoft Remote Desktop. These two are the best, both in terms of reliability and finding documentation.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I often use the solution for remote day-to-day work to bring in consultants. We use the Gateway feature, which is a form of security server. We have one port to connect things. It simplifies things.

We do not have to order new laptops or workstations when we bring in new consultants and new hires. The solution simplifies our work. The new hires can start working from day one. The IT team doesn’t have to do all the installations. It’s easier and simpler.

The App Volumes feature is valuable for application automation. We can use what we want inside the solution. VMware has its own troubleshooting tool. We can also use VMware Aria. We can use a lot of applications.

The solution must be faster and smoother.

I have been using the solution since 2003.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight or nine out of ten. It is stable, but it has Microsoft desktops on top of it.

The scalability of the tool provides the ease of adding another connection server or gateway server to ramp up the usage for more users. There can be tens of thousands of users on one server. The tool is very scalable. I rate the product’s scalability a ten out of ten. Our clients are small, medium, and large businesses. Some clients have 10 to 15 desktops. Others have hundreds and thousands. The biggest deployment I have done is of 150,000 desktops. The product is suitable for all sizes of businesses.

The setup is easy for me because I have been working with the product for 20 years. I rate the ease of setup a ten out of ten. For others, the ease of setup might be a five or six out of ten because we must know what we are doing. The time taken for deployment depends on the complexity of the installation. If we just want plain desktops, I can have the infrastructure up in one week. The deployment usually takes a couple of weeks to a couple of months.

The pricing could be improved. The tool is not cheap, but it is not too expensive. I rate the pricing a five out of ten. We get what we pay for.

We are implementers. I will recommend the solution to others. It's a pretty good solution. If our device crashes, it might take up to a week or even more before it is up. With VMware Horizon View, connecting online simplifies the work. It is more cost-effective for companies. Overall, I rate the product a ten out of ten.

The most valuable features of VMware Horizon in our education organization are its Graphics Virtualization Unit (GVU) integration. It helps us with social software for behavioral assignments and research purposes. Its availability is also one of the crucial features.

They could incorporate an application library for application learning and licensing. This feature could centralize all software applications within a licensed manager, allowing for efficient categorization and accessibility based on categories. They should improve similar functionality in VDI. It would enable users to access applications directly from their local machines without navigating to the VDI machine.

We have been using VMware Horizon for the last four or three years. At present, we use the version 7.

The product is stable. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

We have deployed VMware Horizon on 700 machines. However, the costs are expensive. I rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

The technical support services are good. However, we encounter some delays in their responses.

The initial setup is straightforward. We receive good support services for implementation. It takes approximately six months, starting with hardware delivery, including racks, computing units, storage, and switches. The installation involved configuring software, licensing, and addressing aspects like JBOD configurations. It requires one system administrator for maintenance. I rate the process an eight out of ten.

VMware Horizon generates a good return on investment. I rate it a six out of ten.

VMware Horizon has significantly improved our IT management by ensuring the constant availability of our virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) 24/7. The availability has been most valuable in supporting our students and faculty, allowing them to access the virtual environment anytime and from anywhere. With nearly 11 to 1000 VMs deployed, the system's reliability enables us to efficiently meet the diverse computing needs of students, faculty, and even other departments, including the admission department, which can utilize the system during weekends and holidays.

The centralization of VDI allows us to manage all the machines through one portal. We can also add a new portal, secure it, and check logs.

The app publishing feature has impacted our productivity with diverse services in use, including research with the GVU. The accessibility can be extended to weekends and holidays, allowing users to continue their work independently and reducing dependence on the service desk or IT support team.

In comparing the user experience between VMware Horizon and physical desktops, our end users generally find it satisfactory. However, there is a high cost associated with custom GVU. Users emphasize the need for transparent consideration of the applications they plan to use within the VDI, particularly those reliant on GVU capabilities. Some users suggest exploring cloud-based solutions for cost savings, such as hardware expenses. The scalability in the cloud has been easier than on-premises setups.

I rate the product a seven out of ten.

Our current use of the solution involves the two specific projects in Arreaspace Kiasat, which involves catering to both the needs of the client and the server's functionalities with a Linux based approach.

The most valuable feature in this solution which really helped for my use case was the stand out three dimensional acceleration. It was really important for enhancing the performance for certain clients based on their scenarios.

We have used VMware Horizon since 2021.

The stability is also reliable and the solution gives a very constant performance with a rating of 8 out of 10.

In our case, the scalability is average as it serves its purpose effectively but only caters to the needs of 100 clients only, so I will rate it 5 out of 10. Horizon is best suited for enterprise level companies especially considering the benefits in terms of pricing as VMware is now under Broadcom's ownership.

I am incapable of providing direct feedback on the tech support of VMware as we have channelized our support to the first line through Fujitsu, our OEM.

Compared to competitors, Horizon outperforms Citrix in recent years due to Citrix facing security issues. As an alternative, when cost is a concern, we occasionally turn to the open-source solution Waccamola, although it lacks the extensive functionalities of Horizon.

Pricing for Horizon is relatively high, earning a rating of one out of ten.

Overall, the solution itself deserves a solid seven to eight rating out of 10.

The solution has enabled us to offer a secure desktop experience to our remote users. This ensures that our personally identifiable information and HIPAA data remain protected, eliminating the risk of being copied to a local, potentially mobile, device. Everything is contained within a centralized structure.

The tool provides a single pane of glass into all virtual infrastructure.

I would highlight the challenges related to integrating with Microsoft Azure services. Specifically, there are issues with MDM-managed devices and the necessity for MDM-managed compliant devices. In the non-persistent horizon model, there's a delay before each new desktop becomes compliant. Users can access these desktops before fully onboard into the MDM solution.

I have been using the product for 20 years. 

I rate VMware Horizon a ten out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. 

The tool's deployment is complex. 

We had a team of two in-house resources and a couple of consultants. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. 

VMware Horizon's costs are high. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten.