VMware Aria Operations Reviews

I use the solution in my company for the virtualization purpose. Basically, the server virtualization is the main purpose. Other purposes are for the cloud part, which is the private cloud. My company has a local telco customer in Pakistan who works on public cloud infrastructure, and they also have VMware Cloud Director product deployed in their environment.

The most valuable feature of the solution revolves around vRealize Operations, which is a good tool. The product is highly reliable, and it is easy to deploy and manage.

There are some challenges with the tool right now after Broadcom's acquisition.

The major challenges associated with the product stem from the fact that after Broadcom's acquisition of VMware, all partners are no longer VMware partners. One has to reapply for Broadcom's partnership, which is a very time-consuming process. Broadcom seems to be confused since it does not have the exact partner strategies that a product needs to have in place. Broadcom does not provide a good pricing mechanism, and it also has some other issues in areas like distribution. Previously, VMware used to use Aptec, an Ingram Micro company. Broadcom has some issues with Aptec, so currently, it does not have a deal with Aptec, and everything is messed up. Broadcom does not have a proper distribution mechanism, so we have delays in getting codes and all that. After so many reminders, once we get the codes, things are still very time-consuming, and the prices are still not good. My colleagues who work with VMware products were opening support cases on VMware's portal, which has now become Broadcom's portal, which does not have enough information like VMware's portal. Although Broadcom has been trying to integrate all of it with its own portal while also attempting the existing VMware portal with the Broadcom portal, the migration does not seem to be successful. Broadcom has missed out on a lot of data, which means that previous service tickets that were generated under VMware won't have any records. You cannot use a learning mechanism from existing information, which makes it a time-consuming process. We have to go back to the existing information from VMware to figure out what the solution is for a problem. With the acquisition of Vmware by Broadcom, we have to do all things from scratch, and all such things are very painful, and customers, partners, and our company feel troubled. Everyone is trying to see how to get rid of the vendor. We are just trying to find an alternate product.

The pricing mechanism is not available here. There are some distribution issues, and there is not enough information on the portal. The migration process from VMware to Broadcom actually messes up a lot of data.

I believe that the scalability area of the product has scope for improvement, and I say this based on the feedback received from my team.

I have been using VMware Aria Operations for ten years or more. My company has a partnership with VMware. My company is a customer of VMware.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I don't think that the product has any mechanism in the area of analytics.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The time required to deploy the product is something that varies from one customer's environment to another customer's environment or site. I can say that the product is not a single table that can cure everything.

The solution is easy to maintain.

For a small environment, only one person is required to maintain the product. If the size of the cluster is big, then a few people are required to maintain the product.

I have experienced an ROI from the use of the solution, but the prices are still not much economical.

If one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the product price a ten.

I don't think that the product has any mechanism in the area of analytics.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

I use VMware Aria Operations for logs in my company. I just use it to manage the logs and to see what is happening in the security logs. VMware vCenter is used to deploy virtual machines.

I specifically use the tool for logging and looking over the various traffic flows happening within VMware. It is easy to track and see what is happening where, and it can easily figure out solutions if there are any problems inside VMware's access management tools.

As VMware is moving to Broadcom, I feel the support is becoming really bad. There are some areas VMware needs to look into, specifically regarding the connectivity provided by the tool. My company has been facing the aforementioned problem with Aria Operations, and I think it has been more than two months now, and still VMware hasn't found any patches for it. My company is not able to figure out what exactly the problem is with the tool. I am not sure if there is some problem because of the movements. I think that in terms of where the customer experience lies, I feel I have had a bad experience for two or three months, and it keeps on happening, which is impacting my production. I am not sure if VMware is able to find a solution with the product I use or if there is some other problem. There are some current issues with the support provided by Broadcom, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using VMware Aria Operations for three years. I am a customer of the product.

The stability of the product is something that depends on how much work a user has with the tool. If you have a very good experience with the tool, then you can do things in a very good procedure. The tool's initial deployment went well with the support from VMware. VMware's support is really good, but because of Broadcom there are some problems. Initially, the new product's implementation and deployment went well with the support from the solution.

Scalability is easy in VMware Aria Operations. The only things you need to manage are the backups and how much expansion you want with the tool. If you take a product from Microsoft or VMware, both work really well for an initial three or four years. Adding something new would mean taking a different approach, and that would depend upon the company's expansion.

My company uses just one function of the product, which is specific to our environment. There might be some other functionalities in the product that might help with certain enhancements in the area of logs, but we don't have the exact scenarios for which we can use the tool's certain functionalities.

If I specifically talk about VMware's support, then the support offered is very good, especially if I don't consider VMware's integration with Broadcom. I rate the tool's support a nine out of ten. I am not sure if I can comment on Broadcom's support services since it is still in the initial stages.

Positive

VMware vCenter is used to deploy virtual machines.

VMware solutions are easy to install. There are some available steps to install the tool and if we follow the steps, I think it is a good solution to work with for anyone.

The tool doesn't take much time to deploy. I am not sure of the time required to deploy the product because our company uses the solution for a specific function, so I believe that it might also have some other functions. The functions my company uses for logs are very easy to deploy since, just after connecting the solution, it starts getting all the logs.

It is an easy solution to use, and you need to invest in it only one time by looking at your personal usage and expansion plans. Getting a machine and everything within the solutions and bringing in the tool where you have some availability shortage need to be done only once, after which you can expand it instead of buying a fresh machine for A certain period of time, which can be an expensive affair. A product starts from the day you create a machine in the cloud solution. The solution also provides users with some features and facilities that are specific to the licensing models you have from the tool. Considering how much and what type of licenses you have, the cost might be reduced. For expansion purposes, you don't need to think about new tools because you already have the solution you purchased from VMware. With whatever expansion scope is available in the tool, it is easy to expand the solution to a few more servers. If you are going with other solutions for expansion purposes apart from VMware, then there is a cost involved. The tool is easy to use, but from the cost perspective, there might be a huge difference between other tools and VMware. You have to invest less in cloud solutions because you pay as you work with the tool. You can deploy one machine and then deploy another machine tomorrow. With VMware, you need to invest just once, after which expansion options are already available in it.

If we talk about the cloud solutions that are available in the market, I think that instead of collaborating with VMware and Microsoft or with some other solutions, VMware should focus on providing good cloud solutions. VMware should not take advantage of any other products in the market to provide the cloud version of its products since its pricing might change. For people who don't want to move away from VMware, it can be a pricey product. If you compare the prices of VMware and the cloud solutions along with the components that you may use, I feel that it may be costly.

There is no specific maintenance required for the product, and usually you get an advance notice if something like that is required. It is up to the user to schedule the maintenance as per their timeline.

I have not specifically faced any challenges in managing the solution in our virtual environment. Earlier, there were some problems with the tool.

If the product is able to fulfill your requirements, then I would say that VMware is a good product for you.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

VMware Aria Operations is a new platform that provides visibility into different areas of the infrastructure, reduces or eliminates downtime, and makes customers more proactive. It gives customers the insights they need to be proactive rather than not active, and it helps them plan for capacity needs, ensuring that they are doing their best to avoid over-provisioning or experiencing contention. It also has a self-service option so that end users can be more independent from the infrastructure team and monitor their needs.

Avoiding problems in the monitoring area is our strength. We use real-time monitoring models and real-time monitoring to do this. We also provide other capabilities, such as seeing changes in the environment.

The VMware Aria Operations solution is a very technical product and is not for everyone. As a top-of-the-chain VMware tool, it is only normal that it has a learning curve. While the UI has been improved, it may still be difficult for some users. The solution has a lot of functionality and can monitor all areas of infrastructure, such as storage and network.

I have been using VMware Aria Operations as a partner for seven years.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

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

The documentation is perfect.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. The setup time depends on the scale, but it can be as short as a few hours. Once the valet solution is deployed, you must link it to the infrastructure. This process takes a few hours, as the key must pull data from all the infrastructure components. In most cases, the valet solution will remove the entire infrastructure into CRM within a few hours or less.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. 

Most small users don't adopt VMware Aria Operations until it's necessary. Small businesses are looking for it, too. We need more monitoring and insights, so we're analyzing solutions to help us out here.

I rate the solution’s pricing a five out of ten.

VMware Aria Operations has many hands-on plug-ins that can help you monitor all the elements in your infrastructure, such as storage, networks, and more, beyond VMware infrastructure itself.

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

In many cases, I have worked with vCenter within our virtualization environment. Some problems result in vCenter becoming corrupted, making it unusable. Consequently, I resort to utilizing it as a standalone server for each issue. This is the primary problem I've faced over the past two years, and for every problem that arises, I manage to resolve it. I've observed that using each server independently is the standard practice, and I occasionally utilize it for various purposes.

I have found the backup extremely useful in my use cases.               

In this vCenter, my wish is to establish a backup system that doesn't require VIN. It involves creating a backup ticket directly from the vCenter for the virtual machines and performing the backup task for each server, ensuring redundancy without the need for additional software. This would be a preferable solution if all of this could be accomplished within vCenter itself.

I have been using VMware Aria Operations for the last two years.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

I would rate it seven out of ten. Based on my experience, there have been occasional issues with vCenter. One of the recurring problems involves vCenter going offline, and when that happens, I'm unable to resolve it, necessitating the installation and reintegration into the system. This has been an ongoing challenge throughout its entire lifespan. However, when it comes to accessing the servers individually, there's a different issue. While using the solution, there are frequent occurrences where, when I make changes to a machine, such as adjusting RAM or other resources, I sometimes encounter a situation where the data doesn't load properly, resulting in a yellow screen. To rectify this, I have to refresh the page and then make the necessary changes to the machine. While this can be somewhat frustrating, it's not overly difficult for me to manage, and I've learned to handle it without considering it a significant problem.

I haven't taken any formal courses on vCenter, yet I've managed to install and troubleshoot them successfully. I've relied heavily on online resources, and the wealth of information available on the Internet has proven to be a valuable asset. I haven't sought support from any specific company. However, it's possible that in the future, I might encounter a problem that I can't resolve on my own, even with online resources. At that point, reaching out to a company for assistance might be necessary.

It is not difficult but sometimes requires extensive reading and knowledge to install it. It's not a complex task, but I need to fully comprehend everything in order to install it. Sometimes network-related issues can complicate matters, and having a strong background in network infrastructure, including switches and routing, is crucial for successful execution. If there's a preference, I'd appreciate guidance on which one to install. Also, it would be convenient if I didn't have to create everything from scratch on the switch. Some elements may need to be set up physically, and then I can connect them to two switches for network installation, requiring a three-step installation process. The deployment is scheduled for two months to complete the installation and server replacement. This timeframe should encompass all aspects of the solution.

It's not particularly challenging, but it's important to remain close to the users, ensuring that the data is functioning correctly. We need to verify its operation for a week. Out of ten servers, everything is working fine. Then, I'll proceed to another server, following a similar approach, to ensure it is safely set up. We won't be dealing with desktop servers; it's more about efficient and timely execution.  

I would rate it six out of ten.

There's a smaller category that stands out due to its affordability, especially for recent versions, which I rate as four or five in terms of value. However, if you're looking for a vCenter with older, more advanced features, it comes at a significantly higher cost, and I would rate it around ten. They provide us with a choice between a recent version and one integrated, and I lean towards the former.

I would rate it overall an eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for the solution is troubleshooting and performance monitoring.

It has allowed us to identify problems sooner and helps us with problems and issues.

The troubleshooting and performance monitoring features are valuable.

Administration and growth can be improved. For instance, if we're a large organization, the metrics continue to get collected in this environment and continually fill up, so we need to expand the cluster. Hence, more resources are always required.

We have been using the solution for five years and are currently using version 8.62.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable to a degree. The problem is that it goes back to the solution or management packs. The more you collect, the larger you need to expand the environment. Approximately 12 to 24 people are using it in the organization.

We previously used Densify.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented it through a vendor team. Two to three people are required for deployment.

We have seen a return on investment.

I do not have information on the licensing costs.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but administration and growth can be improved.

I've been using this for managing our company's infrastructure. We have a cluster of somewhere around six nodes. 

We're using it in a hybrid mode. We have our on-premise data centers and we are operating on AWS as well. We have multiple legacy apps which require a certain type of monitoring to be enabled and we kept that enabled from the on-premise, but the advanced features for monitoring are being explored on AWS.

Primarily I have found it very useful from the compliance perspective and for control and agility. These are the three main things which are helping us to have a more proactive approach in managing the infrastructure.

We used to have COTS products for monitoring our ESXi hosts. We had a team that would check on alerts and then go on to our approach for remediating the problems. vROps has helped us to reduce the costs and increase the efficiency, because it has a lot of features that tell you where things are going wrong. We have been able to cut down on the cost of resources and we have a smaller team to manage the infrastructure now. The solution helped us to reach a level where we have low resources but high efficiency. Its gives you the most accurate alerts and remediation processes for closing problems.

We have a support operations center where we have a dashboard running 24/7 and that is where vROps manages things and tells us about the health of the infrastructure. If something is going wrong, if it picks up any anomalies, the team takes care of it, remediating based on the recommendation of vROps in the dashboard.

Since incorporating vRealize Operations over the last two years, I don't recollect there being a big concern in regards to downtime. We have not had any downtime happening in the last two years, since we put vROps in place. If we correlate it to the other models we were using earlier, we had certain incidents where we were not even aware of what was going on, on the ESX level. vROps has helped us to reduce our downtime by 90 percent. I'm taking the 10 percent off to account for planned maintenance, because sometimes we need to go offline for maintenance done for our entire infrastructure. But downtime has been reduced 90 or 95 percent since we incorporated vROps.

It has also increased our efficiency and decreased our mean time to resolution. Infrastructure agility has gone up and we're much more efficiently handling the infrastructure now, whether on-premise or Amazon. It provides the agility to do the deployments, but even then, deployment has to be initiated at a user level. Overall, it has increased our efficiency by 30 to 40 percent, in terms of deployment.

The solution has also played a very vital role in workload placements and we have been able to manage workloads and capacity planning, among other things, in a very efficient manner. We are 70 to 80 percent more efficient in regards to management and capacity planning. It gives you visibility into the infrastructure so that you never go beyond the sources that you have and it has helped increase our VM density by around 70 percent. In addition, performance has definitely increased by a similar rate of 70 to 75 percent compared to the previous product we used. There was a leap forward when we used vROps.

Regarding hardware costs, what we used to do before we had vRealize Operations was to buy things in chunks. If we needed storage or additional memory, we might procure 10 TB of storage at one go and then start using it, despite the fact that only 4 of the 10 TB was being used. That's how we would do hardware resource allocation: we would have to buy that item and put it into the system. But now, because of the visibility with vROps, we know how much storage we will require six months down the line. That means we do procurement in smaller chunks. We save hardware costs and, at the same time, resources are planned in such a way that we never run out of resources. Because we have six- or seven-node cluster, from the power perspective, we are not seeing that much in savings, but definitely due to the capacity planning and the visibility, we have seen a cost benefit.

There's a feature known as Smart Alerts in vRealize Operations, which I have found to be useful if there's anything going wrong in the infrastructure. What usually happens is that you get so many alerts that you become confused. Smart Alerts give you visibility into your infrastructure and also recommend how to fix the situation. That's a feature which I'm really a fan of.

Control, from the compliance perspective, is also helpful because we are a PCI DSS-certified company. It keeps us in compliance so that all of our servers and other things are not breaching any of the baseline protocols and baseline policies which we have laid down for the company. That's another thing which I like about the VMware vROps.

For the initial setup, there should be some sort of auto discovery of the environment. That should be enabled. It has the ability to discover a main node, but it could still be made easier, to reduce the initial configuration and setup time.

We have been using VMware vRealize Operations (vROps) for the last two years.

After incorporating it during the initial phase, there was a discovery period for the infrastructure and for vROps to adopt our set of configurations and advanced policies. Since then, it has been pretty stable. We haven't had any issues.

The scalability is fine. When we started using vROps, we only had a three-node cluster. Over the last two years, we have gone up to a six-node cluster. It is pretty scalable. The good part is that adding nodes to vRealize Ops is a pretty straightforward thing. It has given us the visibility to plan and to scale to the level we are at now.

We have over 3,000 people, out of an employee base of 10,000, using the apps that are running on the ESXi that is managed by vROps.

In terms of increasing our usage, as of now there are no plans because it widely depends on the expectations of the business. It's a global thing now because of COVID-19. We still don't know how we are going to grow this over time because the business is in a "back seat" right now. But I'm positive, down the line, of the possibility that we will go further with this.

We have had a couple of cases where we have reached out to VMware support and the tech support has always been awesome from all perspectives. Their problem-solving attitude has always helped. We have been using VMware for seven to eight years now and we have gradually grown but support has been awesome during that time.

In the past we used Paessler PRTG as well as other tools.

The initial setup is straightforward, not complex.

Initially, because we were not familiar with vRealize Operations, it took us a while to get it set up. Our infrastructure is dependent on multiple volumes, ESX clusters and the storage. It took us seven to 10 days to have a fully functional deployment of the solution. The initial setup took us less time, but setting out and defining the policies, the baseline and advanced policies, happened within 15 days of the deployment.

For deployment, we used a team of four onboard resources and we got in touch with local consultants who are VMware Certified partners for doing the deployment. The initial deployment was done by the certified partner and then a knowledge transfer to the resource team took place. After a month or two, our team was able to be 100 percent hands-on with it and started using it.

I rate VMware vRealize Operations very highly because it gives you multiple features such as compliance, agility, and staying hybrid, although if you want you can do it on-prem or on the cloud. I would recommend it regardless of the deployment, whether it's on-prem or AWS or hybrid.

It is user-friendly, but it definitely requires a little tweaking in the environment when you're doing the installation to set it per your requirements, your infrastructure, and per your expectations. What are you trying to monitor? Once you're done with setting up vROps for your cluster or nodes, then it's very easy to use. It will really help you out to get to the stage of automation for your infrastructure, so you don't need to depend on manual processes at all. 

We are not using Kubernetes or Tanzu as of now, but we are planning to incorporate it down the line, maybe in three to six months.

Overall, I would rate vROps as a nine out of 10. The one point I'm leaving out is because there is room for improvement, as I mentioned earlier.

We use VMware Aria Operations for the provisioning of the servers.

The solution gives suggestions regarding whether resources are underutilized or overutilized. It can also do automatic rescheduling like we do in the cloud. The solution's predictive analysis helps us in our future planning for procurement of the server, provisioning of the server, and capacity planning.

The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using VMware Aria Operations for a couple of years.

VMware Aria Operations is a stable solution.

VMware Aria Operations is a scalable solution. More than 10,000 users are using the solution, and we have plans to increase the usage.

The solution’s technical support is good.

The solution is easy to deploy and doesn't require much effort. The solution's documentation helped us to do the installation and configuration.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. For deployment, we consider doing some certifications, which is the best place to keep some items, whether on-premises or on the cloud, the cost, and compliance. After that, we make a plan and then do the deployment.

The solution is slightly expensive.

VMware Aria Operations is deployed on the cloud in our organization. If users have a valid case, they should go for the solution. Users need to pay more if they go for the premium support.

The solution's integration with other tools is good. Sometimes, we need to connect the solution with different tools, and all the tools are easily integrable.

Overall, I rate VMware Aria Operations ten out of ten.

Our clients use VROps to monitor their virtual machine performance, create reports, do capacity planning, and do project planning. We also use the tenant-student app for billing purposes.

I've found the reporting and analytics features to be the most valuable. 

The latest release of VMware Aria Operations has some great new automation features, but I think the pricing could be improved. It's quite expensive, especially for the entire VM workload.

In future releases, I would like to see VMware Aria Operations integrate with Ansible. I understand that VMware has their own orchestration and automation product, but I think it would be valuable to be able to integrate with Ansible as well. This would give users the flexibility to choose the best tool for the job, without having to invest in two separate products.

I have been using VROps for about eight years.

It is a very stable solution. But it requires a lot of knowledge to manage. For example, if you are collecting a lot of data for analysis, the virtual appliance drive spaces can fill up. In this case, you need engineers who know how to expand those spaces. The procedure is simple: you just add a new VMDK and start the appliance. The appliance will automatically expand the drives with the NVMe and stuff. However, the problem is that you need engineers who know how to manage and clear up the logs and ensure that they are sent as a stop.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.  I did have some scalability issues when working with the VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) stack. For example, if I deployed one instance and needed to scale out to a second instance, I would sometimes run into problems. 

VROps is most suitable for enterprise-level companies.

The initial setup process is fairly simple, especially if you are only setting up a standalone instance. However, if you are setting up a multi-tenant or multi-cluster environment, the setup process can take longer.

Our clients have hosted it on cloud as well as on-premises. 

The licensing is quite expensive for our company. I would probably give it a rating of seven out of ten, where one being expensive and ten being affordable.

I've used both VMware Aria Operations and Veeam ONE.

If I need to troubleshoot a problem, I would use VMware Aria Operations. If I need to get a complete overview of my environment and generate reports, I would use Veeam ONE.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. There is only one area of improvement for me.