Horizon 8 Reviews

In my previous project, we used Horizon to connect three remote offices with the main headquarters for centralized business applications.

It's centralized and secure, making it great for business.

There is room for improvement in support. The response time could be faster.

Configuration and driver support could be simplified. Integrating profiles with Active Directory [AD] is still complex.

I have experience with this product for five to six years. I have worked with v5, v6, v7 and v8.

It is a very stable product.

We can upgrade it and even add new features. So, it is a scalable product.

There are delays. When you're stuck, they answer the call and find someone, but resolving the issue might take one or two days.

We used Citrix in non-production environments. But for production, we prefer VMware.

As a technical expert, it was easy to implement. I have a technical background spanning over 17 years. 

But for someone less experienced, it could be trickier, especially setting up client-side agents and drivers and integrating with AD services. But those issues can be fixed. So, deployment is easy.

The pricing depends on the use cases. It depends on the company's needs and budget. For us, it was okay, not too expensive.

Our company is a vendor for over 200 clients. We specialize in migrating infrastructure, on-prem data centers, Hyper-V, VMware, Boxmark, Citrix, any platform, any server, any application database, Oracle, Postgres, SQL Server, EDS, and anything. We move it all to Azure for replication, backup, and high availability.

Just find the right vendor. Check for local experts and certified vendors. You might need their technical help later.

Local vendors usually have technical guys and certified experts who can help with any scenario. I've dealt with upgrades and daily issues for over six years now.

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

I work in a public school where some teachers and staff work from home. We use the product in the home office. 

I like the tool's security. It is also easier to roll out the software updates. 

I like VMware Horizon's ability and performance. 

VMware Horizon needs to integrate with Azure, Teams, and Zoom. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I rate VMware Horizon's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has over 150 users. 

We contact our partner for first-level support. 

I rate the tool's deployment a nine out of ten. It can be completed in a few hours. 

VMware Horizon is expensive. It should provide a special price for more user licenses. 

I rate VMware Horizon a nine out of ten. 

My company uses VMware Horizon View for educational institutions and for the student lists maintained. My company also uses the solution in the healthcare industry.

VMware Horizon View offers something called a security gateway, which allows users to get access to VDI without a VPN. The user experience provided by VMware Blast Extreme is also good. The USB redirection from the client to VDI is another good feature of VMware Horizon View.

In VMware Horizon View, app volume is an area of concern where improvements are required. For certain applications, a lot of tremendous effort from my company's end had to be put in to configure the app volume, making it one of the most difficult parts of the product. In VMware Horizon View, for a stateless VDI, the configuration part of app volume is straightforward, as it can be done in a. When a user needs some type of persistent VDI, some more configurations need to be done.

There are some shortcomings in VMware's support team, where improvements are required. My company can only use emails and not directly contact VMware's support engineer. Even if some issues suddenly crop up in the solution, my company is not in a position to contact VMware's support team.

I have been using VMware Horizon View for five years. My company operates as an integrator of the solution.

It is a very stable solution.

It is a very scalable solution.

Owing to the VDI part in VMware Horizon View, my company caters to the requirements of enterprise-sized companies.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have past experience with Citrix. I feel that VMware is better than Citrix. Citrix requires its users to have a bit of technical skill to carry out the deployment process.

The product's deployment phase is difficult as it contains a lot of components, which requires a technician to have a technical understanding of integrations.

The solution can be deployed in a week, but it may vary depending on the requirements of a customer.

One architect and two engineers are required to take care of the deployment part of VMware Horizon View.

VMware Horizon View is an expensive product. My company needs to opt for a subscription-based pricing model when it comes to the licensing costs attached to the product.

The maintenance phase of VMware Horizon View is easy.

Two people are required to take care of the maintenance phase of VMware Horizon View as there are more than 100 VDIs.

I think that VMware Horizon View presently has a SaaS offering, an option with which the maintenance part can be made much easier. VMware and Azure have a partnership to offer a SaaS-based solution. If you are open to a product deployed on the cloud model, you can choose VMware Horizon View.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

The solution's most valuable features are its ease of deployment and ease of distribution of the desktops and the applications. It is quite an easy product since the end user does not have to go through much of a learning curve.

I have not come across many of the product's weaknesses. Considering the tool's weaknesses, the product probably has scope for some improvement in the context of how the applications or Linux operating systems are delivered using VMware Horizon View. In general, I want VMware Horizon View's compatibility with Linux to improve.

I have experience with VMware Horizon View. I am a technical trainer who teaches others VMware technologies. My company has a partnership with VMware.

I find the product to be quite stable.

It is a scalable solution.

I have used Citrix VDI in the past.

I have lost track of Citrix VDI since I have not used it for a few years.

Some detailed and in-depth documentation on the protocols, like Blast and PCoIP, would be good.

The time taken for deployments completely depends on the customer's call.

I have seen a lot of improvement in VMware Horizon View over the years because I have been teaching it to others for quite a few years now.

I don't find any issues with the product's interface since it is easy to use and does not pose any issues.

The documentation of VMware Horizon View is quite good.

Most of the environments have many implementations going forward, and then our company regularly comes across the need for VMware Horizon View training. My company is not into advisory roles. We just get or receive and deliver the training.

The product is easy to use.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My use case is to try from the customer experience because right now, we work from home and anywhere. So, and also the power consumption of the desktop and IT security are concerns. 

I find the virtual desktop and its spacious capacity to be the most valuable aspect of VMware Horizon View in my experience.

There is room for improvement in security features. In the next release, perhaps they could add some 3D features to Horizon View, especially considering the concerns around ransomware and security. 

I have been using this solution for two years. 

It's stable; we haven't experienced any major issues or glitches.

We can scale it easily. There are around 200 users in my company who use Horizon View. 

In terms of technical support, it's easier to contact the support team with Horizon View.

The initial setup is very simple. 

The solution has a higher price than competitors. The price could be more flexible for clients.

In my experience, the deployment process is better with Horizon View than with other solutions. The GUI is also better and it's easier to operate. And in terms of technical support, it's easier to contact the support team with Horizon View.

I would definitely recommend using this solution. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We are using VMware Horizon View for R&D. We use it like a machine that we need 24/7 at any cost. It should be accessible from anywhere, whether on an office premise or over the internet. But there are a few locations such as in the case of contractors, where we are not allowed to provide our machine. Here, we provide VDI infrastructure to them. They then connect the VDI and work. We integrate their system with Microsoft's Remote Desktop Service. Further, we tag the RDS with the solution. It acts as a connecting bridge between Microsoft hardware and the remote server.

VMware's most helpful feature is its ability to work like a centralized management system. When I say centralized management, it includes everything from vulnerability to application management, and much more. Regarding an R&D environment, we can quickly roll out VDI on their customized operating system. VMware is beneficial for customized platforms that offer auto-promotion and auto-deprovision. 

Initially, they had a VMware security server, which they replaced with a UAE server. The reason was to include more security features. They also included a load balancer feature on customers' demand. But, the paging server should have security enhancement features, which we can rely on and configure for small-scale businesses. They should provide high-end security at the initial stage. They are coming up with a hybrid cloud as well. There should be a function where one can connect and work; whenever not required, one can deprovision it. They should add things like voice interfaces. Whenever you need VDI, it should be a seamless experience. So those are the features I would like them to improve.

If I want to do any upgrade, in case of a zero-day vulnerability, I have to log out of every system. Then, it could be CCM, or it could be patching, or some other solution. We need to wait for the user to come online. To tackle this issue, they should include a feature like Golden Image management. So that we can build multiple VMs.

We used to work with VMware 3.2 and were the first to implement it back then. We used it for over two to three years. Recently, during the COVID time, we again implemented VMware for the remote management of VDIs. So, we have been using the solution for nearly twelve months now. We were testing and using it.

We need to understand every component, from the first tool to the last, and make a call accordingly. We must implement all the best practices and have a backend storage connection transfer. We need to specify how many VDIs and storage are required. If you calculate everything perfectly, it is a stable product. I don't see any issues in our environment other than a slight issue regarding an agent. Because when the VM agent starts to run from and talk to the different VMware servers, there could be a network interruption. We need to make the changes according to the review of the five users. It's a stable product.

It is a scalable product. We have around 50-80 people in our company using the solution.

I contacted them for a query about one of the zero-day vulnerabilities. They provided some assistance but it didn't help with the security scanner. Again, we interacted with the level two team; they immediately released a fix for that. They are doing it well. They have a proper installation matrix in place. They will do it easily if you ask them to escalate to the next level. You just need to instruct about the engineering level for assistance.

Positive

I had experience working with Citrix. But, I needed more confidence in the product because it depends on the active directory. Its value of profile and image management depends on Microsoft group policy. You cannot use the Citrix hypervisor because it is not stable. Comparatively, VMware is a good product. You get a bundle of features with VMware. With it, you don't have to depend on any other vendor for authentication.

The setup depends on the requirement. Implementing VMware 3.2 was a critical setup, as we were the first to deploy it. With the current setup, the site for deployment, even if it's a dedicated VDI, an automated VDI, or some golden image-based VDI, has no redundancies. The only thing is we need to have some networking knowledge. We need to know which port must be open from where to where and see the proxy and direct model. Also, we need to have a basic understanding of firewalls and networking. It helps us do an implementation faster.

Then it comes to redundant CR architecture, which includes the UA layer, the other view, and different standpoints. If we don't understand the account, we can implement it from an infrastructure standpoint. When it comes to a VDI, we get multiple ways out. Sometimes, auto-provisioning becomes complicated. When you need more automation to meet the requirements, it becomes redundant. We need an end-to-end understanding of the security networks, AD architecture, profiling, group policy, etc. We need to know how the authentication standpoint works. The port must be kept open from one authentication server to capture all the details and complete implementation.

I have been working with Microsoft products for twenty years. I advise others to be clear about their requirements, the use cases, and the kind of VDIs they need. They should know whether they want a centralized management system, out of provisioning, or if they want to build a VIN. They should also decide which purchasing programs to opt for. VMware is the best fix for the organization because they are prevalent in the hypervisor.

I would rate it as a nine. The reason is the number of tickets we have raised to VMware compared to the Microsoft product.

Our primary use case for the solution is to give end users clone desktops, and they can use their applications. So instead of providing a desktop, we give them a computer with just a client, and everything is loaded in that VDI session and not directly on that workstation. We deploy the solution on-premises.

The solution has provided flexibility by allowing an end user to remote in, log in, and get their VM. VDI session and have all the icons and applications they need to use and retain the same booking view regardless of location.

We have found the link loans for desktops most valuable.

The customer service and support team could be better.

We have been using the solution for approximately six years and are currently using version 7.0.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 800 users are utilizing the solution in our organization.

I rate customer service and support a six out of ten.

Neutral

We did not previously use other solutions.

The initial setup was straightforward, and two people were required for deployment and maintenance.

We have seen a return on investments.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the technical support team can be improved. My advice to new users considering the solution is that it is a good option. It is easy to set up and not that difficult to implement.

We use it in our call center, in the warehouse where we prepare products for stores, and in the warehouse.

We have 1,000 users in my organization. It's deployed on-premises. We stopped updating it in 2013 and 2017 because we used Windows 7. 

When COVID-19 started, we organized our call center remotely. The solution allowed our users to work from home.

I like that it updates quickly and allows users to have virtual desktops.

I would like to see more useful monitoring within users and a more useful help desk. 

I have used this solution for about six years.

We haven't had any problems with the infrastructure. There haven't been any bugs, but there have been glitches in the newer versions.

We haven't had any problems with scalability. It works quickly and we can scale up our infrastructure within about 10 minutes.

For technical problems, support has been fast. They were critical for implementation and installation.

I have also used Citrix.

When we started using Horizon, Citrix was more user-friendly and integrate-able. But we've found that the new version of Horizon is more useful and user-friendly with each new feature.

For Horizon and all other VMware products, setup isn't easy, but it isn't hard. Maybe the problem is with the documentation and consultation. After consultation with my colleagues in other companies, they gave me answers to all my questions.

In previous years, the documentation was not a problem. With the latest version,  there's too much documentation compared to their last available version.

It took about two or three weeks to set up. We worked to prepare images and tools for our several user groups, which was used as a test to prepare for switching.

There were two people involved in deployment: me and a network administrator.

There haven't been any maintenance requirements.

I would rate this solution nine out of ten. 

My advice is that users are interested in relevancy, and the version is not important to integration.