Workspace ONE UEM Reviews

Our primary use cases are mobile device tracking and corporate email push.

It provides a central repository of the corporation's different mobile devices.

The feature that we find most valuable is the corporate email pushing. It seems quite straightforward and efficient (most of the time).

The mobile device repository is somewhat difficult to manage with a large user base.

I would like to see support for "remote wipe" in the case device of theft.

We are a large school managing Mac devices on all levels. We manage the iPads, push education through the iPads, and AirWatch works great. We use it to do a lot of tasks for the school work - manage teachers devices, student devices, and lab computer devices.

We used to have a system before, Mac OS Open Directory server and this open directory became obsolete because Apple decided to stop the enterprise market, so there was no other alternative for us to use. We chose this to replace the open directory and we found that it has many more features than the previous solution. We totally rely on it right now to manage all the devices on campus.

Managing Mac Devices with profiles. Pushing Apps to iOS devices.

The accuracy of the management function has room for improvement. It's important to us because sometimes we send a profile to the machine and it's pending but doesn't reach. And we have to go manually and push it. Also, Chromebook management needs a lot to be improved. 

It's very stable despite the accuracy component that I want them to focus on improving.

Scalability is great for us. When we evaluated other solutions, they didn't meet our scalability needs. 

We have it deployed have on our entire server. All of our accounts propagate to 1500 users. It's great to have all of our users being managed by one central service.

It's a newer solution and I use it at school so I always rely on their technical support. Sometimes they are great, but sometimes they are not.

I switched to AirWatch because it is compatible with different platforms like Windows, Mac, iOS devices, Chromebooks devices. The previous solution we were using did support Mac ONLY.

The initial setup was straightforward with the consultant's help, but without, I couldn't do it by myself. The documentation is not enough to do the implementation of the product. You still need a consultant to guide you. 

The deployment changes every year and the policies change every year. The time it takes to deploy depends on how many devices you have. If you're like ourselves and have a ton of devices, it takes a month to finish the deployment.

For our implementation strategy, we moved on the groups of the policies that were assigned for each. Our strategy was to bend different policies on each so we can get the most of the features we needed to apply to each group.

We used a consultant from France. He was excellent and guided us through the setup of the contact and the implementation. 

If you purchase it for one year, it is very expensive. If you get it for three years or up to five years, then you can bargain a better price.

Jamf Casper.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. They need to make it so that you can add more tools to work so that it can cover all of the management tools that you need to manage all of the devices. 

I highly recommend AirWatch because it covers the compatibility issue. For an organization like us, we have the same platform and want to manage multiple devices, and it is the best solution for us right now. 

We use it for device management. We have an on-premise environment, we are looking to go to cloud, and we want to manage the device, manage the applications of the device, manage the contents, and of course, manage e-mail on the device.

There are various MDM vendors, and I've used at least five of them. The reason I prefer AirWatch is simply because it helps me to think more in terms of a future perspective. It has given me the right tools for my enterprise. That's the key thing. It aligns with our IT strategy in a very good way.

For me, the integration of AirWatch with various enterprise components is something I like. The way they are partnering with various services, like security services, or some of the big guys like Google, Android, Apple, and including Microsoft; that's really awesome. And the way they look at providing functionality to create self-service and automation, that's really usefully and beneficial. That's where I see they differentiate themselves.

AirWatch has all the features. One of the things that I want them to improve on, if possible, is the management of Mac devices, MacBook Pro, for example. They do it, but they have scope for improvement, in my opinion. It's not that it's that bad, it's just a small need. They have set the bar very high already so that's the expectation.

It's absolutely stable, no issues.

We have a large instance. We have tens of thousands of devices already, and I don't think there are any issues at that scale. We are probably one of the top-10 customers in terms of scale.

Technical support is really awesome. They follow up, they have it 24/7, they handle things in multiple regions. It's not like just one person will be there and they're not responsive. They are responsive, they ensure that they give the right priority to their customers. If it's a critical item, which means it's a showstopper, they do help us immediately and ensure that there is proper follow-up among the team members. It's not like they leave you hanging there. There are very good documented records in terms of what actions have been taken, and what the next engineer is going to come in and do.

I was the one who set it up. It was not complex, it was an appliance-based setup and it was pretty easy. AirWatch was there, but I was the one who was there from day one.

It's important to understand your requirements: What is important, what is your environment, and what are you looking for? If you are a government company, that means you are looking at a lot of data protection, security is the highest priority. If your back office is Microsoft and you are looking at an integration with your Microsoft products, that would be a different thing. If you are a salesperson, with Salesforce and you're application oriented... it all depends. Each organization has different needs. It depends on your priorities, what you need in terms of making sure your productivity, your top line and the bottom line, grow. It's nothing like one size fits all.

When selecting a vendor, there are multiple things to consider, there is not just one. But one of the things I would really look at this moment, because so many vendors already give that, is the ability to do discovery/self-services analytics: How the solution is going to help. It should give some kind of a blueprint in terms of what's happening in an enterprise, so that you can take an informed decision. I would make analytics a key decision point.

I rate AirWatch at about nine out of 10. I would not give them 10 because there is always room for improvement. I have had no issues and it has been really awesome for me. I have been using it for five years, and I have seen how they have moved up on the ladder, how they've integrated, how they have gone forward moving into the enterprise, and the rate of change, of transformations. It's really excellent.

A user can leverage the solution if they basically want to integrate the system with two-factor authentication or multifactor authentication to access desktops and sessions. 

Users also leverage the access portal from a remote host and gain access to the system.

The authentication integration is great. It can be combined with basically different kinds of authentication mechanisms and provide a single sign-on. That's a typical use case that I see as a solution provider.

The solution is stable. 

My understanding is it is not too hard to set up. 

The solution can scale. 

There are a lot of difficulties whenever people have a lot of configurations in it, basically related to security certificate configurations and integration with VMware Horizon. I see technical people are sometimes struggling to do this. I don't know whether it is some knowledge gap or whether it is the difficulty of the product. However, there have been some cases where we've had issues, and the knowledge is not ubiquitous. You cannot find it easily. Not many engineers have the right training or knowledge to deal with it correctly.

Technical support could be better.

It would be great if it had some sort of password wallet integrated within it.

I've been familiar with the solution for two or three years. I was a customer, and now I am a presales manager working as a reseller. 

We've seen no issues with stability or reliability. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

While I have never tried to scale the solution, and we don't have many requirements for that functionality, my understanding it can scale. 

Technical support could be better. Sometimes, when we raise a ticket, it takes time for the engineers to assist.

Neutral

I haven't actually been part of a live deployment. That said, it's my understanding that it is not that difficult. New users should be aware that integrating it with multiple other things will take time. 

You only need one expert to handle the deployment since it's a one-time task. However, they need to be knowledgable to handle the process. In our case, we have two or three people who can handle deployment tasks.

We are a reseller and a partner. 

We are using an older version in a deployment right now. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

If you have a use case and if you have VMware products already, it'll come along with some of the licenses, so you do not have to pay additional fees. That is one advantage. It'll also be easy to integrate with VMware Horizon, Horizon Stack Workspace, VMware Workspace One, and other related products.

We recently integrated Workspace ONE with our intelligence report, and this is a great tool from a reporting point of view. In our daily business, we get several requests from businesses to provide an Adobe request for monitoring, whether it is for Android or iOS devices. The main benefit of this tool is that we can exclude the report for applications. Another benefit of Workspace ONE is that it supports many devices, which is a major benefit for us.

There are some bugs that our team needs to work around. It required some API integration required because visitor integration was not there. For example, we are currently working on a tunnel issue, and VMware doesn't have this solution. I think the R&D team is working on this, and I think this is something they need to look into because from the Android point of view, this is the major security tool, and these features need to work as expected.

Workspace ONE is stable.

Once Workspace ONE is configured, the scalability is good.

I rate VMware technical support eight out of 10.

Setting up Workspace ONE is straightforward. In December 2020, I worked with the VMware deployment team, and we deployed this in 10 to 15 days for all components, whether it is Workspace ONE Access or Okta integration. It's easy to use, migrate, and configure. Deployment and maintenance require four to five people, including two solution architects and two or three engineers. 

I rate Workspace ONE eight out of 10. If someone comes to me, I would advise them to go with this tool rather than Intune. There are several benefits, and it doesn't cost much compared to Intune. Intune doesn't have all the components and integration we require.

We use it for handheld devices that have been corporately issued. They can include recognized devices whether they are connected to inventory, sales, or route delivery.

The benefit is that it helps our remote connections be as secure as possible. Also, being able to issue mobile devices increases productivity.

• Antivirus 
• The ability to push security policies down to the device

I think the stability is adequate, but I don't know for certain because we haven't actually stress tested it.

In terms of scalability, it has served our purposes, but I don't know if we go larger enterprise if it would be as satisfactory.

Our licensing is coming up, so we want to make sure that we either renew our current license or we go in another direction.

The most important criteria when selecting a vendor include reliability, the ease of obtaining technical support, and responsiveness. And of course, price.

I rate it at seven out of 10 because it doesn't fit perfectly into our framework.

My advice would be, look for the right sizing and the right use cases. It may be that the solution we're using is perfect for another vertical.

• Easy to navigate interface for admins
• Integration with Cisco ISE and other third party applications utilizing REST and SOAP APIs.
• AD/SMTP/Certificate Integration (SCEP/DCOM)
• Feature-rich, including integration with other VMware products (Content Management/Mail/VPN/SandPit).
• Zero day support for new Mobile OS firmware – fast to market on new API’s available.

By allowing us to centrally manage cross-platform mobile devices for corporate and BYOD.

• QA – better code execution
• Apple Mac management is troublesome
• Documentation prerequisites often leave out important information.
• Support in general; We have many issues that have never been fixed.

I've used this solution for six years.

• On-premise comes with challenges with upgrades and new features (SEG/Powershell)
• Many bugs with every version release of both the console and AirWatch Apps/products. Often bringing back old documented issues in new releases.

Yes. Way too many servers needed for additional functionality which becomes very complex.

If you want decent support mechanisms, expect to pay and pay well. Otherwise, the process is time consuming often covering the same processors multiples times. The first point of contact takes notes of the issue with no product knowledge.

The next escalation is slow and often just asks for logs and is not helpful. If you are implementing a new service or upgrading expect to be charged for professional services even if you believe this is a support issue.

I have used many solutions over the past five years. They all have pros and cons and, unfortunately, no silver bullet.

Setup is complex in a large or on-premise environment. Recommend SaaS model for most scenarios, but still complex once you start plugging in the additional features.

VMware is expensive and continues to raise licensing costs year on year. Business model is to separate services so you need more servers which if you are a VMWare customer cost you more in licensing costs.

Also, I've noticed that the minimum hardware specs for your servers continue to be raised.

I have evaluated the other main players. MobileIron is built by engineers, not sales teams. Infrastructure is relatively simple and does what it says on the tin well.

AirWatch has many more features but is not always implemented well. The rest are all trying to catch up or are specialized for particular use cases.

Scope out your functional requirements, HA and DR. You will need to plan for upgrades continually to any on-premise infrastructure. Lots of bad code so never go latest releases. If you want support, expect to pay. Managed services can be a good option. Test, test and test.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

Our customers use it as a single catalog for all of the resources. 

The most valuable feature is single sign-on. It is a true SSO. For example, you can use fingerprint authorization from your Apple iPhone to unlock all of your desktops, corporate applications, and so on.

Our customers primarily use cataloging features.

VMware provides a good user experience in terms of the interface.

There is an application authorization process, where a user will request an application and it will go through a process. It follows a workflow and will request authorization from the user's superior, or perhaps the IT department. It makes it really easy when it comes to application management.

We have a lot of problems when it comes to integrating with Active Directory. Simply, it is not consistent when you configure it.

When I compare this with other solutions, the customization is really limited when it comes to cataloging.

Scaling this solution is difficult and it should be easier to do.

It would be really great if, in the future, endpoint management was integrated into the Identity Manager dashboard. It would mean that a single dashboard could be used to control all of the features in this space.

I have been working with VMware Identity Manager for three years.

VMware Identity Manager is really stable. It is smooth and works really nicely.

When it comes to scalability, VMware Identity Manager is more complicated than other solutions. You need to have a second connector to get high availability, for example. When you want to scale vertically or horizontally, it is going to take some effort.

All of my clients are enterprise-level organizations.

Our very first contact with technical support was really bad. After the engineering stuff had been completed, I had to implement it again from scratch.

Since that time, technical support has been fine and all of our subsequent cases went smoothly.

The initial setup is straight forward is the most recent version. In the past, in version 17 for example, we had a lot of problems during installation. Nowadays, there are just a few things to do. It is a virtual appliance and it is really easy to deploy.

If the prerequisites are done correctly, to deploy the product and complete the integration will take at most three hours.

It is usually two people who deploy this solution. Most of the time, I handle the implementation. I normally have one person involved from the client site, who will take care of the prerequisites.

There are two ways that you can license the Identity Manager and you can choose the one that works best for you. You can pay on a monthly basis, which is called VCPP (VMware Cloud Provider Program), or you can buy a perpetual license that you pay for only once.

When it comes to usage licensing, you can pay for concurrent usage, pay on a per-user basis, or pay on a per-device basis.

We pay approximately $6.50 per user for the standard version. If you are paying for an enterprise license that includes VDI then it will cost approximately $25 per user on a monthly basis.

In addition to the standard licensing fees, you need some kind of database that you need a separate license for. Also, if you are using the cloud-based deployment then you will have to license a connector.

The biggest lesson that I have learned when working with this product is that you can publish to a repository, rather than using a simple network share. Our customer was very happy with this.

Overall, this is a pretty good product that can do many things.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.