VMware vSphere Reviews

VMware is good for virtualization.

The licensing costs are expensive and most of the important features require a license. 

For example, we would like to use DRS but there is an additional license for that. If it were free then it would be very helpful. 

I have been working with VMware vSphere for three years.

This product is very stable. It gives you good visibility of your hardware and the loads on it.

Up to now, I haven't had a problem that caused me to contact the technical support team.

I have experience with using Proxmox on a single host for about two months, with Hyper-V. This setup is only in a lab and not for production.

For my initial setup, I am not using the entire functionality. We are using vMotion, storage, and clustering.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is server virtualization and it brings stability to our workloads.

The most valuable features are stability and support. The stability of this product is very good, and I have not seen an issue for many years. It is very stable for all of the features that are available today.

I would like to see support for endpoint virtualization.

Another thing that I would like to see are improvements with respect to performance.

I have been using VMware vSphere for at least seven or eight years.

The stability is very good and should be a top priority for choosing this product.

This is definitely a scalable product and it is used in a virtualized environment.

The support is very good and we have had no issues with them.

Compared to other products, vSphere is number one in terms of flexibility and scalability.

Pricing is a little bit on the higher side, compared to other products.

Basically, this is a good solution and most of the features are already there. I can recommend it to others. That said, I would like to see better performance.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

It's virtualization software. We are using it to virtualize virtual machines.

It cuts down on hardware costs by being able to virtualize multiple hardware and multiple machines on a single piece of hardware.

The primary use is the most valuable feature. Being able to virtualize virtual machines on one set of hardware is essentially what it does.

The user interface could use some improvement.

I have been using VMware vSphere for approximately five years.

This product has been very stable.

The version that I have is not very scalable, although overall, the product is. I bought a limited version. We do not plan to increase our usage within the next year. There may be, later on.

I really haven't had much need for technical support.

Prior to using vSphere, I was working strictly with individual machines.

I thought that the initial setup was very straightforward.

We deployed with our in-house team.

I and another person are in charge of administration and maintenance. There is routine maintenance needed for virtual machines. This includes maintaining existing virtual machines, as well as creating new ones when required.

Considering that this solution has cut down on the number of real machines that I have, I would expect there to have been cost savings.

My advice for anybody who is looking into using vSphere is that there are a lot more options out there now, but this product has worked well for me.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this product is that it's too easy to create new machines.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The virtualization is set by itself. vSphere is the best way to have a non-host based fixed solution. We always try to find an agnostic environment where we can restore agnostics or just say, "I need resources capacity." That's why VMware vSphere in particular, has been the best in the past but now also with the evolution of their product. Nowadays, you don't have to use any STEM infrastructure anymore because the bandwidth and the LAN speeds are getting steeper. 

If you look at the interconnection if you have a dark fiber connection, you can have data sent between locations. It's getting much cheaper.

If you use Zerto on top of that, then you are protected against any cyber threats or attacks. If you do it right, if you configure it from the hypervisor layer to external storage and then you have always a way back. It's blocked by the application of the journal. You can always go back to a point in time if you want to restore. If the point in time is as short as possible then you have the best solution. You can leave any additional solutions like CrowdStrike.

The only way for it to be a complete product is if you integrate all the functionalities. Then you don't need any backup solution anymore and you can do it by yourself. Integration needs improvement. They should improve a lot of the functionality because normally it's half of a product. You're only protecting yourself against technical failures but not against any cyber threats or any other stuff. It's not about prevention, it's about time to recovery because it's going to happen anyway. 

I have been using vSphere for twelve years. 

It was very easy to install. If you have the right piece of hardware or blade server in place, you can use it in a VM where you try XYZ and then install it. You go forward with that and it's ready to install, so it's not a big problem.

I would rate vSphere and 9.5 out of ten. 

I really like it because it's a storage restoration additional add-on but it's really expensive now. 

We are using vSphere to virtualize our workloads.

The most valuable features are the resilience of the solution and vMotion.

I would like to have replication between sites available in the standard version.

We have been using vSphere for more than five years.

We use it on a daily basis and it seems stable most of the time.

All of our servers and products run using vSphere. It is easy to scale.

Support for the product is not good enough. It should be faster and more efficient.

This is the only solution of this type that we have used.

The initial setup was simple, but you have to develop it before you begin to install it.

The deployment took us approximately one week.

We shared the implementation with a partner.

We do the maintenance, although we did have a problem one time that we escalated to the vendor.

The price of this solution is mid-range. There are additional features that can be purchased for an extra charge. For example, if you want replication between sites then you have to pay more.

In summary, this is a good product and I recommend it because it's resilient and you do not have many products to install.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are resellers and consultants who provide solutions for our clients.

They manage the virtual machines, such as CPU usage, or memory usage, or disk space.

The most valuable features are the vMotion, the storage vMotion, the DRS, and the high availability function.

The way that vSphere manages the alerts on the data machine is not easy to configure.

I have been working with vSphere for approximately 15 years.

We started with version 4.

It's a stable solution.

VMware vSphere is scalable.

Our clients are medium size companies.

We have not used technical support.

The initial setup was easy.

In my opinion, the essential version is a good price.

This is a good solution and I will recommend it. They are choosing a good product.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We primarily use VMware vSphere just for hosting purposes. We are data center. We create virtual machines and give them to our clients. We deal mostly in gaming.

We only have one virtual machine and we're still exploring it. Overall, it's a super product.

The initial setup is easy.

The product offers good stability.

The solution is too expensive for us and we don't have any funds to direct towards it. We just started the company, which makes it hard to explore the solution the way we want to with the amount of cost involved to do so. They should work to make the licensing more affordable.

I want to be able to use OpenStack, however, I can't do that without vCenter, and it's so cost-prohibitive for us, it's become a problem.

We've only faced one technical issue. That is downloading the virtual machines and uploading the virtual machines. It takes a lot of time and we cannot transfer the VMware from one machine or directly from one server to another. That action requires vCenter. That may only be an issue on the free version and not the pro version. On the pro version, you have much better features. 

It would be ideal if they could integrate billing software so that clients can customize it directly on the virtual machine. Billing should also be done automatically. Perhaps this is already the case, however, I haven't really had a chance to explore it fully.

While I'm currently on the free version, I'd like to have the ability to explore the pro version to see what is on offer there.

I've been working with the solution for the last three years.

The product is very stable. We don't have issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't fail or crash. It's reliable.

The solution may be scalable. However, we haven't personally attempted to scale anything due to our general lack of funds and the expansiveness of the product. Therefore, I can't really speak to scalability so much.

I'm currently also working with another product called KVM. It's much more affordable than vSphere.

The initial setup is not difficult or complex. We found it to be straightforward and easy.

The solution is extremely expensive, especially for startups such as ours, who don't have the capacity to invest so much in such a product.

Overall, I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. Everything it does, it does very well, even among all of the competition that exists in India. However, price-wise, for us, it's not ideal.

I haven't explored much, however, from what I have seen, they really do cover everything.

I use VMware vSphere to run all my applications in a private cloud. I had all the applications in the standalone mode. I migrated them to the cloud. 

VMware vSphere is the best private-cloud solution.

It is expensive. They can improve the licensing cost for Cloud Director.

They can also improve the integration with other applications and the metering feature, which is currently not flexible.

I have been using VMware vSphere for more than seven years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. We have 100 users, and we plan to increase the usage.

The price is very high for professional services. I don't know why.

It is expensive in terms of cost, licensing, and professional services.

I would recommend it for big enterprises. I would rate VMware vSphere a nine out of ten. It is the best solution.