VMware Cloud Director Reviews

I am satisfied with the use of the product in my company.

As my company started off with the product a few months ago, we have not faced any issues and are still exploring the tool's functionalities.

The interface of the product is okay. Sometimes, there is a disconnection that happens between vCloud Director and its underlying VMware vCenter, where the actions are supposed to be taking place, making it an area where improvements are required. My company is still exploring the aforementioned area of the product. I feel the product is continuously evolving.

I can't comment on whether VMware needs to focus on marketing efforts to promote its products since it is in the transition phase after Broadcom purchased it. My company is waiting to see what is going to happen next. VMware purchases Broadcom, and I don't know if, under the new management, the changes that will be made are going to be beneficial to customers or not, so it depends on how Broadcom is going to play the game.

I have been using vCloud Director for several months now. I don't remember the version of the solution. My company is an end user of the product.

I have faced no stability issues with the product.

My company has faced no issues with the technical support offered by VMware.

I use VMware vCenter and VMware vSphere 7.0, as they provide another level of management.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

My company has no problems with the pricing of the product as we got good discounts from VMware.

My company did not evaluate other options in the market since we mostly use VMware-based products.

I have not encountered any issues, difficulties, or weaknesses with the product.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

In the beginning, we were using VMware, also combined with AirWatch and Boxer. We configured corporate emails on mobiles and used them for MDM applications on tablets, like the launcher.

We are not using AirWatch for mobiles anymore. We are using it only for MDM for tablets with the launcher so we can control the applications our users use.

The reason we moved to Microsoft Intune was because of the license cost of VMware. It's very expensive.

So, there is room for improvement in terms of pricing. 

Another thing that could be improved is the support. Sometimes, the response takes a long time, and the advice they provide could be better.

We have been using it for ten years. 

We do use the cloud, and we also have the console—the CN 504.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. We don't have many issues related to the software. It's more on the hardware side.  

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. It's a good solution. And I wish that we could stay on AirWatch because I was more familiar with it than Microsoft Intune. But because of the pandemic, we had to cut costs, and Intune was part of our O365 package. So, we had to leverage Intune. And because the license of VMware was very expensive, we had to move.

We used to have a thousand users, but now we have moved the users to the Internet. So what we left was just the hardware, the tablets.

We're just using AirWatch now for the tablets for hotel rooms. So, there are around 3000 end users.

There is room for improvement in customer service and support. In the past, I've had some issues with some tickets.

This is because the support engineer wasn't able to resolve the issue, and they just kept wasting my time. Sometimes, the support engineer would leave the chat and another one would come in, and I had to repeat everything all over again. I had a couple of tickets that are still pending. 

Negative

We use vCloud and Microsoft.

One thing I like about AirWatch is that we can create different profiles and assign them to the devices. And when some application is not being deployed from the console, we can select and manually push for it. 

In Intune, we don't have these options. So, we create a profile, and then we hope that the other profiles are landing on the devices. And if there are some devices not running, then we are not able to force or reinstall. This is one of the big differences that I see between one and another.

Intune is more complex than AirWatch. AirWatch is more accessible. It's easier than than Intune.

The initial setup is not that simple. One of the issues we faced in the beginning was that most of our devices were enrolled on legacy profiles, and we were advised to migrate to the enterprise. 

However, because we have templates that are used in the hotel rooms and we have around 3000 tablets, it's not convenient for us to go into each room and reenroll the tablets to Android Enterprise. So, we have a lot of tablets still on legacy mode.

Usually, when there's an issue, the first thing that the engineers tell me is that legacy support is no longer in end-of-life and that I should move to enterprise. However, support for legacy mode is very limited.

We use SaaS, managed by VMware.

I manage this product in our company. 

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

Our company uses the solution to create private clouds for customers. The workload editor is applicable for large infrastructures or providers of cloud services. 

The solution is a very robust tool. 

The orchestration and automation are very valuable. 

The GUI console is very easy to use. 

The solution allows for multi-tenants in a single, shared space and that is valuable to customers.  

The blueprint that allows customers to create their own images for deployment services needs some improvement. 

The solution should add other hypervisors so things like hover wizards can be automated. Currently, the solution only offers this option for their own VMware. Other products like Red Hat allow you to automate anything. 

I have been using the solution for six years. 

The solution is very stable with no issues. 

The scalability is rated a nine out of ten. 

The support staff used to be very inexperienced but now they are good and the process is simple. 

The initial setup was very complex but now it is very simple.

We implement the solution for customers. 

The solution is expensive so pricing is rated a four out of ten. 

I recommend the solution and rate it an eight out of ten. 

VMware Cloud Director is the same as VMware Cloud Foundation, so it is almost the same product that we are using across our use cases. One of the tools is used for the public cloud, while the other one is for the private cloud. Overall, my company is happy with this product. VMware Cloud Director is used for the public cloud.

It is a good product when dealing in a multi-tenancy environment.

It lacks some of the capabilities offered by storage tools like Amazon S3, making it an area that needs improvement. Having features related to Amazon S3 in VMware Cloud Director is one of the areas our company desires.

The tool's price is one of the challenges we faced with the solution, making it an area requiring improvement.

I have two years of experience working with VMware Cloud Director.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is an easily scalable solution, and it is a feature that is present in the tool by default. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

The tool is easy to install.

The solution can be deployed in a maximum of two days with two people.

The tool's ROI is not more than five to ten percent.

If ten is very expensive, I rate the tool's price as a four out of ten. The tool's new pricing is really bad, considering the way the product's cost has changed, resulting in an increase in the cost by five to ten times from what it was previously.

The use cases and the advantages of VMware Cloud Director and VMware Cloud Foundation are the same, but the only thing is our users are different. We are using the tool for our customers.

In our company, we are using it to create our multi-tenancy environment, as it is easy to use and can easily integrate with other solutions.

We don't use any security features of the tool.

Around 50 people are required to maintain the tool. We have a big team, which is a common one managing both,

VMware Cloud Foundation and VMware Cloud Director. The tool's maintenance is easy.

The tool's GUI is good and easy to use.

When it comes to reporting, documentation, and analytics, the tool is good. Overall, from the product perspective, it is a good product, so you can keep a high rating for everything related to the solution, including the support area.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I own a hosting company and use vCloud Director for my customers.

The most valuable feature of vCloud Director is its ability to host customers on their own cloud.

vCloud Director should include better billing options for businesses like mine or more options for customers to see their usage and billing situation regarding the usage of vCloud Director. vCloud Director's graphical user interface should be made easier.

I have been using vCloud Director for around 12 years.

I rate vCloud Director ten out of ten for stability.

vCloud Director has good scalability. I rate vCloud Director a nine out of ten for scalability.

Compared to its competitors, the initial setup of vCloud Director is more difficult than it should be.

We have seen a return on investment with vCloud Director.

We are paying around $ 15,000 per month for vCloud Director, and it would be nice if it could be made cheaper.

Users need to be educated to use vCloud Director.

Overall, I rate vCloud Director an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to connect clouds to different clouds. 

It would be great if Microsoft and VMware come together and become a common tool. 

I have been working with the product for ten years. 

The solution is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

The solution's support depends on the partnership. We do not attend to level 1 and level 2 support cases but level 3 support cases. 

Positive

The solution's price is the market standard and depends on usage. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. The tool is simple and easy to use. The solution provides API and GUI interfaces. 

We use VMware Cloud Director on our big service providers that allow different tenants to coexist from the same operational infrastructure. Each of our customers has their own tenant, so we can manage their workloads separately.

Offloading workloads to such large platforms allows for better economies of scale, facilitating management from a customer perspective that does not need to maintain their own infrastructure.

The reliability and flexibility of networking are valuable. You can do a lot with NSX, which is the VMware component that manages all networking. It integrates well with enterprise-level backup solutions, like Veeam or Vault.

VMware should simplify the whole solution as it comprises many different components, making management hard. Reducing the number of components would make it easier to manage.

Currently, it's more or less a year.

It is really reliable and works well.

As a technician, it's easier to work on VMware because there are many online sources for support, and it has more maturity on the market. At Nutanix, you need a lot of support from a partner, whereas the engagement with a partner for VMware is much less.

Positive

I'm considering that it might be worth looking into Nutanix since they are new in the market.

We work hand in hand with our customers to work on primarily Big Cloud Director platforms.

Since Broadcom's acquisition, the prices of VMware solutions have changed a lot. I'm mostly technical and don't deal much with budgeting and billing, so I can't really judge them.

I did evaluate other solutions like Nutanix.

Starting from scratch, it could be worth looking into Nutanix. The VMware acquisition by Broadcom has left some uncertainty, and Broadcom did a terrible PR job following the acquisition.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our company uses the solution as a cloud service provider for our virtual data center that serves 100 customers. 

We create demands and assign them to customers who run the workloads, access virtual machines, and perform network operations. 

The solution has more capabilities than OpenStack and integrates well with NSX and vCenter. 

Multiple events can be managed in the solution's environment.

It is easy to leverage the capabilities for server and network virtualization. 

The solution should integrate with other cloud systems such as Azure ARC and OpenStack. 

I have been using the solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support is good and I rate them a ten out of ten. 

Positive

Our company previously used OpenStack. 

The setup and deployment are rather complex because all networking and storage components need to be included. 

We partnered with the vendor for initial deployment. Our internal team of four included server, network, and VMware administrators. 

The solution provides us with the capability to offer managed services where we realize ROI. 

I recommend using the Enterprise or Enterprise Plus licenses because they unlock all of the solution's capabilities from the operational, networking, and log-in sides. A mid-high or high license will allow you to deliver all of the features available.

We evaluated the solution against OpenStack and decided to switch. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.