VMware vSphere Reviews

VMware vSphere is the virtual platform for our company, where we host all the virtual machines.

We use the solution's vMotion feature to migrate VMs from one host to another across different environments and data centers.

It is not easy to upgrade VMware vSphere from an old version to a new version. We have to work with the support to upgrade the solution.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for scalability.

The initial setup of the solution is not easy, but it's also not very complex. If you don't have experience working with VMware vSphere, it's pretty hard for you.

VMware vSphere is a more mature and stable virtualization tool than Microsoft Hyper-V.

VMware vSphere saved us a lot of costs and easily deployed the server from templates. We use the solution to make capacity changes, increase the memory, and increase the CPU. The reason we use VMware vSphere is its high availability feature.

VMware vSphere integrates well with our existing IT security measures. We have all the agents on the VM and a central console for the security, patching for the security, and monitoring. My team has less than 1,000 VMs, and we have three resources working to support their virtualization.

I would recommend VMware vSphere to other users because it is the best virtualization solution in the market. From what I know, most companies use VMware vSphere.

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

This solution has a very comfortable interface for snapshots for my virtual machines. That's very comfortable.

For example, if I want to make templates to create a certain type of virtual machine, I have it in vSphere. Moreover, it includes things like deployment, implementation of different templates, snapshot deleting snapshot, restoring a machine to snapshot or administrative administration things.

The web console is the most valuable feature for me.  Because no matter what happens with the server, I can still get to it with the web console.

There is room for improvement in Google Cloud. The reason thing there was, like, when I type something in the terminal and then immediately, I need to go to edit the certain like file for Node.js, for the server, or for Kubernetes. So I have to do it from the terminal to the editor.

And for some reason, each time I had to switch, I had to literally switch between the terminal and the editor. I wish I could have it on one screen to have the terminal and on the other to have the editor.  This would greatly improve my experience with this solution. 

I have been using it for a couple of years.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. It is very stable, and I have never had any major problems with it.

There are over a few hundred users using this solution in our organization. 

I would rate the scalability a solid eight out of ten.  It is scalable enough for my needs, but there is always room for improvement.

The initial setup was very easy and intuitive.

If I didn't understand something, this solution provides tons of information,e explanations,  courses, and instructions on their website. We also live in a reality of chatbots and AI, so everything is very easy to set up. 

I would advise you to check out the VMware website and watch some of the initial and fundamental courses. The web console is very intuitive, but it can be helpful to see how it works before you start using it. 

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

Our primary use case is virtualization. All the clients who want to virtualize can use vSphere to do it.

I like stability and the organization of the different functions into the I#M feature which is also quite useful, quite stable. I would prefer the old solution because before, you had to install software on your client's desktop to administrate the environment. Since five or seven years, it's not needed. You can do everything through your web interface. And I prefer when it was more reactive, so when you have a client instead of using your desktop. But it's a good solution, quite stable and quite efficient.

In future releases, I would like to see less pricing. The license can be improved. 

I have used this solution for over 15 years. So it's one of the first products we've used with a client.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. Around 20 to 30 customers are using this solution. 

The customer service and support are good. However, it could be faster and more qualified. 

Positive

The initial setup is easy. It is intuitive-- Next. Next. Next. Next. Finish. Easy. Great.

For the deployment process involves materials, equipment, licenses, and the availability of the client team.

It took about one or two hours for one server; it's okay. The deployment was super quick. 

A team of engineers and admins is required to deploy and maintain the solution. We have a team of ten people. 

The licensing model is yearly-based. It is quite expensive.  Moreover, there are extra costs to the standard licensing fees. 

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

I would advise to be sure that the functionality brought by VMware aligns with the good functionality because there are other products in the market like ISPs, KV M, Oracle, Microsoft, and some other stuff. And VMware is a well-known product. But to be sure that the functionality provided by VMware is needed.

We use the solution for virtual machine virtualization and as a hypervisor. 

The tool's most valuable features are CPU virtualization and RAM allocation, which are better than those of other hypervisors. 

VMware vSphere requires a lot of paid add-ons that need to be integrated into it. 

The solution is highly stable. It is stable as long as there are no hardware and software issues. 

My company has hundreds of customers who use the product. 

I am very satisfied with the tool's technical support. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. To implement it, you need to plan, deploy, and migrate the solution. 

The solution's licensing is costlier than other hypervisors. 

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. It doesn't have any significant security features, and you can only get it through add-ons. 

We use the product for server virtualization.

VMware vSphere has a user-friendly GUI. It is easy to deploy and find troubleshooting articles as well.

There could be an inbuilt dashboard for reporting purposes. At present, we have to use another paid solution for the same.

We have been using VMware vSphere for the last ten years.

I rate the product's stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten. We have a huge environment with VMware infrastructure for multiple users.

We encountered some delays with the responses from the technical support team. The resolutions could be more informative.

Neutral

We used Citrix before. It could be more stable. Comparing both the solutions, VMware is better than Citrix.

The initial setup process is straightforward. It takes around four to five hours for end-to-end configuration. We have 60 to 70 engineers to manage the deployment. 

The product helps us save around 20% to 30% of costs.

The product is expensive. I rate the pricing a three out of ten. They have multiple products with extra services. It increases the cost.

I recommend VMware vSphere and rate it an eight out of ten.

We use it exclusively for internal purposes within our company, managing our office infrastructure as a private cloud solution.

It stands out as a comprehensive and advantageous solution, providing a full package that effectively caters to our needs for managing our private cloud.

The most significant aspects for us are the invaluable features of High Availability and vMotion in VMware. Additionally, the seamless sharing of resources and numerous other robust features make it highly commendable. Specifically, the capability to implement a load balancer between hosted environments without any downtime is particularly appreciated, underscoring the platform's reliability and advanced functionality.

The current concern revolves around the pricing as it might be less affordable for certain regions. In countries like Tunisia and many others in Africa, there seems to be a challenge regarding the cost of licensing.

I have been working with it for ten years.

It is robust and stable, rating it a perfect score of ten out of ten.

It offers good scalability. I would rate it eight out of ten. It's a small organization, with one hundred users.

It boasts robust support. I've collaborated with local partners in Tunisia, and their operations, coupled with same-day support, have proven highly responsive. I would rate the support experience a solid ten out of ten.

Positive

I have experience working with Hyper-V, and when comparing stability, VMware surpasses it across various generations. While Hyper-V has shown improvement in newer versions, it hasn't reached the level of stability that VMware consistently delivers.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward. I would rate it eight out of ten.

For deployment, it typically takes around two to three days with minimal configuration. One person is often sufficient for handling such setups. It's worth noting that if we opt for solutions like Analytics or other complex configurations, the need for additional personnel may arise, but for straightforward deployments, a single person can effectively manage the process.

I find it highly expensive. I would rate it ten out of ten. It would be highly beneficial for VMware to collaborate with local hosts and partners in countries like those in Africa to establish specific pricing that would align with the economic conditions of countries in Africa, ensuring suitability and compatibility with our consumption capabilities.

In instances where organizations operate on robust infrastructures and budget constraints are not a significant concern, my usual recommendation is VMware. This is especially true for financial companies that prioritize investing in and managing critical software solutions without financial constraints. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

The focus is more on simulating various PM (Performance Management) products. This involves tasks like identifying bugs or testing new updates.

As for the workflow, it primarily revolves around working remotely due to the pandemic. Unlike having a physical lab where reconfiguration is feasible, I have taken advantage of VMware solutions, including VMware vSphere and related products. I have adapted them to match the specific configurations.

The emphasis isn't specifically on a particular feature, but rather on the ease of use. For instance, when building a test lab or setting up an entire environment from scratch, VMware products are notably more user-friendly compared to alternatives like Nutanix. I've had prior experience with Nutanix.

From my personal perspective, I found it easier to adapt to using VMware than when I started using Dynamics. This ease of use is a strong point. It's largely about how straightforward it is to navigate through VMware's user interface. In contrast, with Nutanix, there's a need to delve into smaller configurations and navigate vendor-specific settings. VMware, on the other hand, offers a more accessible management page. This difference primarily centres around usability and the overall user-friendliness of the interface.

Given that I've been using version seven, it seems that some of the bugs I faced during that version have already been addressed in subsequent updates. Although I haven't personally tested them yet, it appears that these issues have been resolved. In version seven, there was a problem with the network interface not responding due to certain configurations not being properly filtered. However, in version eight, this requirement has been minimized, so the mentioned bug is less likely to occur. Instead of solely addressing these fixes in newer versions, it might be beneficial for them to consider applying these improvements to the older versions as well. This approach could prevent users from feeling compelled to upgrade to version eight solely to avoid encountering the issue, and instead provide updates for version seven users.

I have been using VMware vSphere for sometime.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The case of scalability of this solution is easy in a hybrid setup so I would rate it nine out of ten. 

I lack substantial experience with technical support, as my past interactions mainly pertained to license-related matters. When it comes to addressing actual technical issues, I haven't had the opportunity to gain significant experience yet.

Positive

I would rate the initial setup eight or nine out of ten because of its easy navigation and setup.The deployment takes almost half an hour. Essentially, having the network configuration prepared is crucial, as it often represents the most time-consuming aspect when setting up an environment, whether it's on-premises, in the cloud, or anywhere else. Once the network configuration is in place, the process becomes smoother and more straightforward.

It's a common trend as many progressive IT firms are transitioning towards cloud or virtual environments due to factors like pricing, SMAX, and VMatter. In this regard, I would rate VMware as moderately satisfactory. I would rate it seven out of ten.

VMware vSphere is a very stable solution that can be used to host your virtual services. If you want to host a virtual machine, VMware vSphere is the best tool available on the market.

The most valuable features of the solution are the overall virtualization technology and the new features that allow you to move servers from one system to another. The solution's newer technologies allow you to do network-level isolation.

It would be good if the licensing cost of the solution could be cheaper.

I have been using VMware vSphere for five to ten years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

The solution's scalability is also good because you can scale using your required hardware. At the same time, the VMware vSphere and VMware vCenter combination can allow you to scale up to a decent level. Around 100 users were using the solution in our organization.

The solution's technical support was good and fast enough. The technical support team was able to help us with most of the problems we experienced.

The installation and initial setup of the solution were simple because we had a team of people already familiar with VMware. Learning a newer version was never difficult for them. They could easily streamline into the newer versions and use them effectively. So, the learning curve was not that high for the team.

The biggest benefit we had with VMware vSphere is that we could provide effective service to our end customers. I was able to support multiple operating systems on VMware, which was the biggest value of the product.

VMware vSphere on-premises is still cheaper than the cloud. It's the kind of technology you can always count on.

VMware vSphere has helped us provide better services to our customers because we were able to provide them with stable service. The availability of our systems increased by using VMware products. The solution's security was adequate, but we were not using it extensively.

The solution's High Availability is definitely the factor that comes into the picture because you cannot have downtime in today's IT world. VMware becomes a core strength of the product. It gives you the required availability, scalability, and stability for the environment.

I have always been looking for a seamless cloud migration strategy, which has already been implemented. Now, you can easily migrate systems from on-premises to AWS or Azure cloud. It is easy to integrate VMware vSphere with other products.

Many people using the infrastructure on-premise sometimes want to use the additional capacity in the cloud for additional functionality. The version I used earlier did not have the functionality to move the server from on-premises to the cloud seamlessly. In the newer version, they already have established that part.

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