Horizon 8 Reviews

We use this solution for our virtual desktop infrastructure where the user's desktops are running the data center using Horizon. With the increase in the number of people working from home, we wanted a solution like Horizon. We are customers and I'm a resident consultant. 

The major advantage of this solution is that users can log in from anywhere and from a variety of devices. Previously, it was difficult for us to manage but when we moved to VDI and people were able to log in from anywhere, it made a huge difference. I like that we're able to take a snapshot of the desktop. 

Reporting could be improved. We have 200-300 users and it's difficult to know who has logged in and when. We have to do this manually so having a tool that would enable the export of reporting would be useful and save a lot of time.

I've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable and highly reliable. We haven't had any issues with bugs, users are able to plug in properly, and the VMs are working fine.

Scalability is good. We initially started with four servers and within a month we have scaled it up, adding an additional four servers. We initially purchased 100 licenses and then another 100. It was simple and straightforward to scale up.

We contacted support for implementing the SSL certificate and for enabling the MFA. The support was good and we were able to resolve our issues. 

The initial setup was simple and straightforward although it will be more difficult for anyone who doesn't have experience. We have around 200 users and deployment took about three days. We have one admin for patching and updating.

Licensing is on an annual basis and quite costly. 

We use this solution heavily and I would definitely recommend it. 

I'd like to rate this solution more highly, but because of the issue with reporting, I rate it eight out of 10. 

We are using it to provide our users with a personalized desktop experience when they're working remotely, especially during the pandemic.

We are using its latest version. We usually deploy it on-prem, but I know that there is a possibility to put it on the cloud.

It is simpler and faster to deploy new versions and updates. It is also easier to make sure that everybody is using a standard image or a standard setup.

One of the most interesting features in the enterprise version is the ability to do some support. There is a feature for remote control and debugging, which is something we didn't have before having Horizon 7 and the enterprise version.

It is safer in terms of viruses and other types of attacks. If a machine ever becomes compromised, you can just destroy it immediately by logging off and having it recomposed.

The most important feature that is missing is the ability to do some remote support on the client itself. For example, if somebody has a Horizon client installed on his machine, there should be a way to support his local machine as well. That's because most of the problems can't be solved very often due to the computer or the setup that someone is using on his personal machine. Because a Horizon client is already installed on the machine to access the environment, it would be nice if the client itself possessed some sort of remote control tool in it so that if needed, we could support both the virtual setup and the actual setup of the machine. It pretty much does everything well. It is mostly the support aspect that can be improved. You have perfect control over your in-house environment. You have a solution that can pretty much be used anywhere, but you have no control over the machine that's being used to access your environment. Definitely, that's where most of the features are lacking. There should be an option for remote control and maybe some options for conformity. For example, if somebody installed the Horizon client on their shared computer, there could be some safety features or safety checks that were implemented in the client itself to make sure that the person using it is not using a compromised machine or something like that.

Its integration with third parties can be improved. Sometimes, there is a lack of integration with third parties. For example, we had issues at some point with Adobe products running in virtualization. I know they have a very hard time running in a virtualized environment and performing correctly. They work, but they're very slow, and they're hard to support.

I have been using this solution for probably close to two years.

The solution is very stable. It is very robust. The most fragile factor is the actual VM or the OS that you run on it. You might have a good virtual desktop solution, but if your VM that is running has an actual bug in it, such as a faulty patch or a problem that has to do more with software, then you're stuck with it anyway. 

Its scalability is very good based on what I have seen so far. It is easy to scale it up or down, and I haven't seen any constraints of any kind.

Usually, at any given time, there are close to a hundred users who are using it. It is used by all departments. We use it everywhere, and it is used extensively. We don't really plan to extend it because it is already fulfilling all of our needs, so we don't need to upscale or downscale it. It is just perfect right now for our needs.

It often depends on who you end up with. I've seen some people who go the extra mile and solve your problems really easily and quickly. If they don't have a solution, they'll make sure that somebody is able to help you. I've also seen the complete opposite at times where you have trouble trying to get follow-ups. It really depends on who's handling your case, and the fact that their support center is in India doesn't always help. I don't know if it's a language barrier or a social barrier or something else, but it's not easy. They are on the better side than the worst, but there is definitely room for improvement.

We were using Horizon 5. Before that, I've used different technologies but not in this environment. I've used a Citrix Metaframe in a different environment and not at this job.

It was very straightforward. It was a lot simpler than previous versions.

It was an in-house job. We were using Horizon 5, so we already had some experience with the product.

For its maintenance, one or two people are enough.

We have definitely got an ROI.

It is hard to know for sure. It is definitely in the $20,000 to $30,000 range. It is quite expensive, but you do save money on desktop power, desktop upgrades, etc. You're able to extend the useful life of your previous desktops. Previously, we used to change desktops regularly, and now we just change them when they break.

If you're currently looking for a solution that's in-house, it's a great solution. If you're looking into something that's more cloud-based, then you should definitely try a successor, which is a Horizon 8 or Horizon Air.

I would rate Horizon 7 an eight out of 10.

I am a system engineer and this is one of the products that I assist people with by providing support.

The most valuable features are Instant Clones and AppStacks.

Sometimes when we log on, there are applications that are not visible.

Technical support is only average and can be improved.

In general, there are many things that can be improved.

I have been using VMware Horizon View for about three months.

As much as I have used this product, the stability looks good. We don't have many issues that require support.

I feel that Horizon is more for a small business, rather than a large organization.

In our organization with 250 users, it works fine but if you're talking about 10,000 to 15,000 users then I don't know whether it would support a scale at that size.

Technical support from VMware is all right, although I would not say that they're great. Overall, they are average.

I am much more familiar with Citrix and work with it regularly. I have only been working with Horizon View for fine-tuning. I also use a similar product from Microsoft.

Ranking these, I would say that Citrix is first with a mark of 80%, Microsoft is second with a mark of 60%, and VMware is third with a mark of 50%.

The installation process is really fast.

We use a team that sets up solutions and then moves on. They remain only for the deployment.

In my short experience, I would say that this is a really good product that can be installed quickly for a small scale organization with not many users.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

The administrative console – it allows us to do a lot from the back-end where we don’t have to impact the users at all.

We can spin up a virtual machine real quick for any solutions that any end-user needs. That’s what I really like.

Well, one of the features we would like to have (even though it was released last year), was NSX. We’re providing a web portal services so that we can spin out any servers that they need, so those things would help. The NSX is something that we are looking at right now.

It’s very stable. We have a very stable environment. We use a cloud provider to provision our desktop, just trying to get our servers to collaborate together takes a bit of a challenge. It’s an ongoing transition, so the knowledge transition takes a bit of time.

We’ve scaled up a lot. When we first started out, we’re fairly young using a virtual environment. We started with 130, and moved to over 500 now. It’s great and it’s not time consuming at all or difficult. It’s been rewarding to us.

The only downfall in our organization is the budget constraints, as we’re a nonprofit organization, so using a third party cloud provider is not free, so we have to let our user community know about the costs associated with using the environment. It’s a direct cost.

They’re great. They use the case number customer support, and the technician will contact you and you tell them your issues. They give you a knowledge based article, and then if you can’t resolve the issue they will get back with you. They also do a WebEx session with you in figuring our problems. They’re able to resolve it right away. When I have to call them, they’re very good at what they do, and especially talking to somebody on the phone, they’re very knowledgeable in diagnosing issues. They share information, they communicate well, and they give you a comfort zone to make sure you’re ok with everything.

We were using an HP appliance, and we were trying to get away and use what VMware recommended. Our HP appliance was out of warranty and old, and we just needed o upgrade.

The design was complex to understand. When we set it up on our environment, I went through the classes but doing it hands on was a little different. However, after that initial hurdle, it was very clear.

Dependability, stability, and ease of use are what we look for. We looked at Citrix and Microsoft, we went with VMware as we had been using VMWare for the last ten years in our tech lab, so it was easy to just have it across the board.

Definitely. Peer reviews are one of the first things I take a look at before creating my vendor list.

We would have to be completely VMware, i.e every product we have from VMware to have it working perfectly. However, it is great for us right now though.

We put our client-server applications on Horizon.

The product helped us deploy complex applications.

The product’s scalability makes the deployment easy. It is important to us. The product handles security and compliance in the virtual infrastructure well.

The tool is not future-proof anymore.

I have been working with the product for about ten years.

I have a good impression of the tool’s stability.

I have a good impression of the tool’s scalability. We have five users.

The initial setup is complex. It is not easy to deploy. It could be much easier. The vendor must build a SaaS solution. The deployment takes too long.

The license could be cheaper.

Everyone is working with Teams after COVID-19. Relatively, Teams is a bit better than VMware Horizon View. I believe there is no future for VMware Horizon View.

I will not recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

It is a method of providing a user with access to centralized resources in the form of either a full desktop session or a hosted application, whether it is Windows or Linux.

Horizon is known for its simplicity, security and flexibility in its deployment. It allows for simplified management, advanced user configuration and apllication deployment, all at speed and at scale.

The most valuable feature of this solution is secure remote access to resources.

A simple way to load-balance components has been missing for several years. Because VMware Horizon lacks a load-balancing component, you must always use a third-party solution. VMware recommends that since you have VMware vSphere underneath, you run NSX to get your load balancer from there. However, not every customer can afford to run NSX.

A simple way, particularly for smaller environments, would be to have load balance connection servers and unified access gateways would be extremely beneficial.

The backlog of the development team is extensive. We know the load-balancing is in the roadmap somewhere but it's unknown when it will get addressed.

I would like to see simple load-balancing for smaller environments that lack large solutions like F5, or NSX; it should be redundant or unavailable but in a simple way.

Perhaps limited to only two components; if more are required, a paid load balancing solution can be used.

Load balancing for simple environments, or simple redundancy, is sorely lacking.

I have been working with VMware Horizon for approximately eleven years.

The first one I sold was version four.

We are working with version eight, and our customers run version seven and some are already on version eight. 

Version seven is already out of support.

The most recent version is 8.11, but they no longer use that numbering; it is now 2312. The new numbering reflects the month and year of release.

The stability of VMware Horizon is incredible for both Horizon version seven and version eight.

The only reason the basic component connection server failed was that there was something broken underneath, either storage or compute. Horizon itself rarely has any issues.

At present, VMware Horizon scales up to 250,000 concurrent sessions.

In my opinion, VMware Horizon is a very scalable product. The most prominent companies in the world use it. Some require it to scale to that level, which is why it is capable of doing so.

I would rate the technical support a three and a half out of five. 

It has become a very large organization with many procedures and layers. It usually takes a long time to get to the right person who can actually solve your problem, if you get there at all.

I was better in the past, but it was also smaller, and that would have made it easier.

The response times are not an issue, but you must go through a couple of layers, especially if you have a more complicated problem, to get the right person involved. It takes time.

The future with KKR is uncertain, due to the fact that EUC has now split up and has left VMware/Broadcom. It could be very positive, as it will now be a focused group that only supports the EUC stack.

It can be deployed in your private cloud, a public cloud, or a hybrid of the two. 

VMware Horizon only has one license, which is a license to run desktops. They don't care if you run them on Azure, Google Cloud, Alibaba, your own Data Center, or a combination of those.

There is a cloud platform included to be able to govern it, the Horizon Cloud Console.

The initial setup is dependent on what you compare it to. 

When referring to an on-premises installation, the infrastructure isn't that complex; otherwise, it's just the cloud, which is a service that you use, and that is not necessarily complex.

On-premises you have some components, and there is some designing involved, especially if the environment is medium to large.

The complexity is in your data, and your applications, not in VMware Horizon.

A PoC is set up in a couple of days.

The basic environment depends on the organization; for example, a complete infrastructure for a large company can take two weeks to set up. You are dealing with a lot of integration with other components, and setting up load balancers and certificates.

It is worth the investment. We have customer success stories about how great VMware Horizon is as a product and how it has solved problems for them.

One of the things I try to do as an architect is to give or provide the customer with a solution that actually fits.

There are numerous methods for delivering a digital workplace to you; it does not have to be a virtual desktop; there are other options.

I am aware of the license models, but not the prices. There are multiple licensing options, please refer to Understanding Horizon Licenses (87490) (vmware.com) for more information.

Our company became a VMware partner because they already had Airwatch as a very large product, and VMware purchased Airwatch.

We then did some Digital Workspace and complimented it with Horizon. We do infrastructure as well as network virtualization.

I would advise using a trial first. You can use a free trial version for 60 days for almost every VMware product that is available. Register for a trial, download the bits and you are ready to go. For two months you can spend some quality time to see if the solution is what you need.

There are also the VMware hands-on labs that VMware provides. 

VMware provides live labs that you can use. They are built on request just by clicking a button and one minute later you have an environment that you want to get acquainted with.

It allows you to open the console, change the configuration and do whatever you want, and when you are done, the lab gets destroyed and rebuilt for another person free of charge.

It's a friendly way to get to know a product and to get acquainted with the look and feel to see if it is something that would fit with your environment. Then you could try a trial in your environment.

I would rate VMware Horizon an eight out of ten. 

It is a complete product.

It is fully mature, easy to manage, and it is easy to design if you know what you are doing. 

It is stable and there are new features that come from the new release twice a year.

I work in a public school where some teachers and staff work from home. We use the product in the home office. 

I like the tool's security. It is also easier to roll out the software updates. 

I like VMware Horizon's ability and performance. 

VMware Horizon needs to integrate with Azure, Teams, and Zoom. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I rate VMware Horizon's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has over 150 users. 

We contact our partner for first-level support. 

I rate the tool's deployment a nine out of ten. It can be completed in a few hours. 

VMware Horizon is expensive. It should provide a special price for more user licenses. 

I rate VMware Horizon a nine out of ten. 

My use case is to try from the customer experience because right now, we work from home and anywhere. So, and also the power consumption of the desktop and IT security are concerns. 

I find the virtual desktop and its spacious capacity to be the most valuable aspect of VMware Horizon View in my experience.

There is room for improvement in security features. In the next release, perhaps they could add some 3D features to Horizon View, especially considering the concerns around ransomware and security. 

I have been using this solution for two years. 

It's stable; we haven't experienced any major issues or glitches.

We can scale it easily. There are around 200 users in my company who use Horizon View. 

In terms of technical support, it's easier to contact the support team with Horizon View.

The initial setup is very simple. 

The solution has a higher price than competitors. The price could be more flexible for clients.

In my experience, the deployment process is better with Horizon View than with other solutions. The GUI is also better and it's easier to operate. And in terms of technical support, it's easier to contact the support team with Horizon View.

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