VMware Aria Automation Reviews

Primary use case is building a self-service portal for students at our university. It has performed quite well up until now.

We are able to provision VMs much faster than before. Therefore, students can click VMs, submit their form, and VMs will be provisioned automatically.

It's quite user friendly. Everyone can use it, even non-technical people. This is good, since we use it to build a self-service portal which even users with not a lot of technical background can use.

We upgraded twice. The last upgrade was a bit problematic. 

Up until now, it has been quite stable. However, we have not pushed it to its boundaries.

Its scalability looks good, but we have not experienced it yet. 

So far, technical support has been quite good. I have reached quite competent employees of VMware who have helped me a lot.

We did not use another product previously.

We had to invest in a new solution because we had to react faster to customer demands. Previously, it took a long time from requesting a new virtual machine to provisioning it. Now, it is much quicker for the customer. 

The initial setup was straightforward.

We deployed it ourselves.

It made the provisioning of the virtual machines easier and faster. We can react more quickly to customers' demands.

We did not evaluate anything else. We have so many VMware products that it was a logical conclusion for us to chose this one.

We are overall satisfied with the product.

Give it a try. Try it out in the labs from VMware. Evaluate it quite deeply, and see if it fits for your purpose or company.

We use it for automating the deployment of multiple virtual machines.

Our purchase unit had a lot fears in upgrading their environment into production, so we customized it for them. What we did was virtualized the production environment and set it up to the Lab Manager. Then, they could test on Lab Manager on the application, including upgrades, updates, etc.

The customer can set up multiple machine blueprints. Therefore, we are able to customize the template of three machines, then the customer can deploy without knowing anything about the IT business. 

It is not intuitive nor easy to use. Lab Manager was very intuitive, and it was built with VMware functions. However, VMware vRealize Automation bought it, and we have not been happy with it. We would like them to go back to the Lab Manager that we used to use.

The stability on the 6.2 version is very bad. It crashes. VMware tech support knows the IIS component is a bit buggy.

We have 30 virtual machines.

The technical support is okay.

The initial setup is very complex because we have a bunch of customization workflows. They were built-in features that we had to program as code with Orchestration. 

We haven't upgraded because we had to set up the entire environment with the vRealize Orchestration scripts. We have to do it again from the scratch.

We used a reseller for the deployment who was great.

I think we will be leaving the platform. 

For our business case, it was the wrong product, but there was nothing else on the market at the time. When we deployed our virtual machines, we had a very big template with 30 to 40 machines. It was difficult to configure all the virtual machines and blueprints. It was locked when it was deployed with vShield, and now, there is NSX and vShield is no longer supported.

It is similar to a lab system for testing our software versions. We also use it for cloning customer environments for troubleshooting.

It is mostly for our tech support to test new versions, find bugs, and troubleshoot what is happening at customer sites.

It has made it easier for IT to support developers. Our tech support people are happy with it.

I can make a blueprint with an Active Directory deployment. With everything prepared, people can start installing our products.

It is bleeding edge technology, but at times, it is buggy. 

It is too broad scale and complicated. It takes too many clicks to do things.

I would like a simplified version of the interface for small businesses. We started with Lab Manager. For us, Lab Manager was the perfect tool. It was easy and simple. It had all the screens for machines right up. vRA is too many clicks for the normal, simple user.

Stability is okay. However, this is one of the products which I have had support work on the most.

Scalability is endless. What I would like to see in vRealize Automation is an SMB version, a simplified version, but still have the advanced options. For example, we use a lot of fenced deployments. We have five virtual machines deployed to fenced environments, which is our most common scenario. 

We are a small office with only 600 people and about 16 technical support personnel.

Technical support is very good. I recently had a tech support case last week, and I got the answers that I needed.

We switched because VMware canceled the Lab Manager products. So, we were looking for something, then we started with vCloud, but VMware canceled vCloud too. Thus, it has been a very rocky road. My one message to VMware, "Stick with one direction and stop cancelling products all the time."

I have done all the version setups. For one year, we could not get the first version to work. I think this was version 6.0, but the latest version 7 is good.

I had a consultant help me a little bit. I did most of the work myself because I like owning the products.

Before, we had the vCloud suites, then suddenly we split out to NSX and had to pay two licenses extra just fenced because we don't use microsegmentation for firewall rollouts. Therefore, a simplified version for small businesses would be good.

We are embedded with VMware. We also use OpenStack, but it requires a lot more investment from IT.

It is a complicated product, but you can do anything with it.

Our primary use case is to automate deployments of virtual machines and data actions. We have automated everything using vRA.

We have several customer teams that serve external customers. Previously, each team, when it received a change request to deploy a single virtual machine, had to create a ticket in our ticketing system. Then it had to go through a couple of departments. The time to get that all done was quite long, on the order of days. vRA has helped reduce the amount of time it takes to create a ticket in our ticketing system. We have been able to reduce the process to around 30 minutes. Obviously, it has reduced the cost and amount of work.

The automation part is valuable, especially where vRA integrates with vRO, because it reduces the amount of effort we have to make.

This solution is intuitive for the end user. For the guys who need to manage it, it is a bit more complex. It is quite hard to maintain, especially since a lot of work has to be custom-built, which takes a lot of effort.

Stability is not great, although, the latest release has been better.

Scalability is good.

I would rate their technical support as a six out of ten, but that's not completely their fault. A lot of our tickets have to be transferred to engineering. GSS has not been able to solve a lot of our issues.

We work a lot with VMware and were using vCloud Director previously. VMware architects came to our office and, after much discussion, vRA popped up as the best solution that fit our needs.

The setup, the installation, is straightforward, but only with the latest releases.

Upgrades are one of the points where incidents are happening. Every time we want to upgrade, a ticket needs to be created and moved to engineering because GSS is not able to help us. We are able to upgrade, but it takes quite a number of retries, which are very costly.

It's not a smooth upgrade process. For a DTA environment, which is very simple, it is a smooth process, but for our production environment, which is quite enhanced and has a lot of dependencies, it's not easy at all, and it results in a lot of errors.

We did it on our own.

We did not evaluate other vendors.

vRA 8, from what I have seen of it, in a session here at VMworld 2018 Europe, fulfills every need we have. The Service Broker is better. vRA simply speaks with all my other endpoints and I see a lot of benefits in that.

I would rate this solution as an eight because the way we set it up reduces the effort which would normally have been needed to deploy a virtual machine or perform data actions. I'm not giving it a higher score simply because of the difficulties we have run into in the past with it as well as the difficulties we continuously face during upgrades.

We are currently discussing if we should stay on vRA or move back to vCloud Director. For now, I would recommend vRA, having seen the roadmap of vRA 8, which, in my opinion, is really good.

The primary use case is the automation of the cyber functionalities. Right now, it is performing well.

For the cyber functionalities, we used to set up the functionalities manually using templates. Now, using the VMware vRealize self-service portal, the user can request a server, and we can better manage the lifecycle.

• Manageability of the blueprints.
• Integration with the rest of VMware solutions.
• Availability of the Orchestrator.
• It is intuitive and user-friendly.

Stability is fine. Though, we have seen some issues with upgrades or installations. This means we have to raise a call every time with VMware.

Scalability is good. It has been fine. We have been using it for quite some time and haven't seen any issues.

Normally, on the first call to technical support, you don't get the right person. The log analysis takes a long time. This is something which should be improved.

We were not using anything previously. We have been using VMware for quite some time.

We are trying to set up this new 7.4 in a distributed environment. Every time it was failing with different errors. Finally, we were able to finish it with notes that we had taken, and the help of VMware. However, later on in the product cycle, when applying the same procedure into our production environment, we followed all the guidelines and it still failed. This used to be a one day job, and it has been a one week job.

I would recommend use the solution.

We're moving from our normal IT support platform to be a service provider to our hospital. I am with a medical corporation managing more than 95 percent of the healthcare services in Qatar. There are many big hospitals under our IT Operations, and we're trying to move and be a service provider to them.

All the feedback that I have received so far from our administrators is very positive. The solution is user-friendly and intuitive.

1. Virtualization
2. The replication to our remote R&D data centers.

We would like them to improve the automation part. This is an upcoming area that we would like to focus on. We used to rely on other technologies to help us with VMware monitoring, but now, we're coming back to VMware technology. Hopefully, they will not take us down and provide something good. We have been watching their roadmaps, and it's promising. Therefore, I think it will be fine.

So far, stability has been good.

Scalability has been working fine.

Technical support is supportive. We are one of VMware's major customers in Qatar, so we receive good attention from them.

For the virtualization part, we have previously used Veeam.

We licensed VMware a long time ago. Now, we are moving from our legacy infrastructure to have a proper, private cloud environment.

Our upgrade experience was good.

We are a government service provider, so ROI is not a main KPI. However, we do plan to see ROI with any new implementation of new technologies being implemented within our environment.

We do regular technology refreshment from all our suppliers to be aware of the latest trends in the market and to select the most suitable ones which fit our needs.

We recommend VMware technologies to any of our colleagues or anyone asking to compare to other virtualization technologies in the market.

We have had VMware for more than twenty years. We are very old VMware customers and have a big setup.

We use it for the automation of VMs. It is performing okay.

We use it to deploy databases and testing environments. It spins up quickly and breaks down fast.

The automation is consistent.

The front-end is user-friendly and intuitive.

It is very difficult to make the automation work well. This is not product specific, but more due to environment and procedures that we have in our company.

The back-end has a steep learning curve.

The stability is good.

I used the technical support during upgrades. They came onsite and are very technical. They are very good

I am not aware of a previous solution. We moved to vRA because the business wanted quick, repetitive deployments.

It was a complex setup. We had to use the consultant from VMware to make the solution work well.

The upgrade was a very difficult task. We had to break everything down and build it up new in a new version.

We used a consultant from VMware for the deployment.

We use it to deploy virtual machines and integrate them into our structured environment.

The quick provisioning: We get a lot of things done automatically within hours. These things lasts days or weeks in further situations.

The solution is intuitive and user-friendly. E.g., you have less number of logins.

The stability is okay, but could be improved. We sometimes receive strange errors, which can only be solved with specialists.

We don't use the scalability.

The technical support will handle our requests quickly if understood. However, there are often misunderstandings depending on the information that we provide and they request.

We had another product before this, but we moved away from it to use vRealize Automation. The UI, administration possibilities, and the integration of the overall system were better than the former system, which was not up-to-date.

It improves the work, making it better. It also makes daily work much easier.