Microsoft Virtual Server Reviews

We are a bookmaking firm. The solution is quite good for collaboration across multiple teams.

The product is reliable.

The product must provide better data analytics.

I have been using the solution for 15 years.

The tool is stable and accessible. It’s a robust and reliable solution.

The tool is scalable. We have 15 users. We use it every minute of the day.

The initial setup is simple. It is a cloud solution. Our operating system is server-based. To deploy the tool, we spoke to our software provider and linked up with a company that offers hosting services to deploy it on the cloud.

A third-party vendor helped us implement the solution. They also help us with maintenance and support.

The product’s reliability and accessibility are valuable to us.

I will recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use Microsoft Virtual Server to centralize and access all Active Directory and file servers. Additionally, we regulate the computers within the domain and manage user access to the systems.

Microsoft Virtual Server can be deployed on-premises, in the cloud, or in a hybrid environment, depending on the specific business requirements of each organization.

The most valuable feature is the ability to share folders and run Active Directory.

Server security can always be improved.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for five years.

Microsoft Virtual Server is stable.

I give the scalability of Microsoft Virtual Server a ten out of ten.

Technical support is available anywhere in the world, but we haven't needed to contact them because our Microsoft Virtual Servers are functioning as expected.

The initial setup is straightforward. Anyone who has experience with Microsoft servers can set up their environment including the shared folders quickly.

For the deployment, we must first understand the organization's requirements and determine whether there will be external users accessing the system or if it will be limited to internal use only. We need to define the goals and then consider all the necessary components to facilitate the process. It is crucial to establish a centralized location, and depending on the complexity of the network topology, we can determine how it can serve external users effectively. Finally, we can begin testing the security measures and take note of the advantages and disadvantages that arise.

I give Microsoft Virtual Server a ten out of ten.

The number of people required for deployment and maintenance depends on the size of the organization. A small company can manage with one person, but I have also seen large organizations that required fifteen people.

Microsoft Virtual Servers can offer a secure, reliable, and scalable network environment, catering to the specific roles of servers for organizations of any size. I highly recommend utilizing Microsoft Virtual Servers.

In my organization, we have three physical servers running Windows Server 2015. We are also using Hyper-V to create virtual servers on these physical servers. We currently have seven virtual servers running on these three physical servers. These virtual servers are running properly and we have not had any issues with them. One of the advantages of using virtual servers is that we can back up a VM and restore it to any physical server in one to two hours.

Microsoft Virtual Server is stable. There is no issue there. Our customers are running two virtual terminal servers, one ERP server, and one antivirus server. All four servers are running properly, and a maximum of 60 users can log in.

The solution should be more user-friendly and cheaper. It will be charged through databases, which means that when I use the server, I will be charged, but when I don't use the server, I won't be charged. To use a physical server, you need to purchase one at a certain price. After three years, you need to purchase AMC for the server which is a recurring cost. Additionally, there are electricity and maintenance costs. Virtual servers in the cloud can be cheaper than physical servers, especially if the monthly cost is lower. Therefore, many clients and organizations will choose to use virtual servers.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for ten years.

The product is stable.

The product is not scalable. We have 60 primary users using this solution. Upon migration, it will be 100.

The initial setup is easy. To require a certain specification of the server, we need to clear the cloud first. We need at least a six-core server for our backup process. A Cisco server with 48GB of primary storage and two 1TB SSDs is sufficient for our needs for ERP. After six months, if the end of support is reached, we will move to our turn server and use the data server. The first step will be server migration, then it will be the terminal server migration.

The solution has a yearly license. If we switch to a yearly subscription plan for Microsoft Virtual Server, it would be cheaper in the long run. The price per month would be higher, but the overall cost for the year would be lower.

We want to move our ERP server to the cloud. We need to prepare our users and the ERP system itself, as well as develop a digital plan. We have two partners that we need to collaborate with, and we need to discuss the move with them. We believe that we can complete the migration within this year, and we plan to be fully operational in the cloud by January 2024. Around four technical staff is enough for maintenance. If a client is having a problem, they need to be able to contact the vendor (the end user) in order to provide support. Microsoft should have a portal or make it easy for customers to contact them if they are having any technical issues or addressing problems. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use this product for virtualizing all of our environment.

We have between 80 and 85 apps that run our core services. We are an insurance company and we have a lot of internal apps.

This solution helps us because our data center is in another part of the country, and we do not have to travel to work on it. I can do things remotely from my desk.

The most valuable features are monitoring, and the self-service that they have for a customized environment. 

The administration is very good.

The response time from technical support could be faster.

The price of this product could be better.

Our offices began using Microsoft Virtual Server about five years ago.

This is a stable product and we use it on a daily basis. For the most part, it works very quickly.

For our environment, the level of scalability is fine. We have approximately 50 users.

I would rate technical support a nine out of ten. If the response time were quicker then it might be perfect.

The initial setup was really easy.

We hired an integrator to assist us with the implementation and deployment.

It is a one-time cost and there are no licensing fees. 

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to hire external, trained professionals with the correct skills for these specific products.

In summary, this is a good product and although it has issues, they are minimal. From my perspective, I think that everything is going well.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are embarking on a virtual environment for our disaster recovery before embarking on our production. We tested several virtual servers. When they are successful during the DR environment, we plan for our production environment with a very small-scale noncritical production environment.

When everything stabilizes after a few months, we return to the production environment for critical systems. We migrate from the physical to the virtual. It takes about one and a half years to do that with help from our local vendor.

The solution provides easy monitoring and easy troubleshooting.

The solution’s pricing could be improved. When embarking on a virtual environment, the sizing is not done properly. Capacity planning should be comprehensively done before embarking on any virtualized environment.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for 11 years.

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

Around ten users use the solution in our organization.

Microsoft Virtual Server is a scalable solution.

A feasibility study needs to be done properly for the solution's deployment.

Microsoft Virtual Server’s licensing is expensive.

Users must read everything about their virtual environment before they go for any enhancement on the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use the solution in my company depending on our client's problems. My company has used Visual Studio Code based Modeler along with Microsoft Virtual Server.

In my company, we have been using Microsoft SQL Server on virtual machines to help us decide if we want to use the tool as a PaaS solution offering or if we want to use it as an offering meant for virtual machines. Microsoft SQL Server on a virtual machine is known as Microsoft Virtual Server.

Microsoft Virtual Server has already been improved since Microsoft Fabric is available. Microsoft SQL's data warehouse is available as a component within Microsoft Fabric.

Microsoft Virtual Server's cost was an area of concern. Microsoft Fabric and the shared costing structure have already mitigated the price-related shortcomings of Microsoft Virtual Server.

I feel Microsoft Virtual Server will be stopped in a couple of months or a couple of years, and it will be completely replaced with SQL Server data warehouse and Microsoft Fabric. Microsoft Fabric has unified all the technologies, like real-time analytics, with data warehouses and then with the use of Power BI on top of data warehouses. Microsoft plans to get rid of all the separate components and start pitching Microsoft Fabric as an alternate solution to all its different or related services offered, but it could take some time, and it will not be an overnight switch. The long-term plan for Microsoft is to unify all its services under Microsoft Fabric.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for more than a year. My company has a partnership with Microsoft.

It is a stable solution.

The performance and scalability offered by the tool meet our company's expectations.

My company deals with small, medium, and enterprise-sized companies that use the tool.

The support provided for the product is satisfactory. If the product team gets involved, I rate the support a ten out of ten, but otherwise, I rate it seven or eight.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was easy because of the documentation.

The time required to deploy the product depends on the requirements of the tool's customers. From site to site, requirements may vary, but I can say that the product can be deployed in a couple of minutes to a couple of hours.

The cost of the tool was an area of concern since users were forced to buy licenses for Microsoft Virtual Server and ADF separately. The tool's cost has been taken care of with the help of Microsoft Fabric and with a consolidated or unified interface, where the entire product serves as a SaaS offering for the user.

Amazon Redshift was a product that my company had tried, but it can't be compared with Microsoft Virtual Server.

The product is used for testing and development. The effectiveness of the product in the area of testing and development is something that depends on the problem faced by our company's client. Nowadays, our company prefers to do everything on Microsoft Fabric because it also includes Synapse Data Warehouse, which is Azure SQL Data Warehouse's alternative.

The most beneficial area of the product for virtualization needs stems from the fact that one of our company's customers could deploy it on an on-premises system. The tool had always caused issues in areas like security and maintenance, but the product's virtualization has helped as it offers a layer of protection on top of the virtual machines, making it easy to maintain, and in the future if a user wants to move away to a different offering, it is easier to do that on Microsoft Virtual Server.

When it comes to the integration capabilities, similar to the data warehousing capabilities offered by any other solution, the tool offers connection strings, and you have the ability to connect and pull the data, which is usually something that depends on the ETL tool, but Microsoft Virtual Server is quite compatible with the ETL tools, like ADF.

One person can maintain the entire solution.

If people plan to use Microsoft Virtual Server or any other services by Azure, they need to look into Microsoft Fabric since it is a tool with some nice offerings.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Virtual Server for its Hyper-V technology.

Virtual Server can assign RAM, CPU, and storage resources to virtual machines. This allows virtual machines to scale according to their needs.

There could be more security features included in the product.

We have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for eight years. We use version 2019 at present.

We have 1000 Microsoft Virtual Server users in our organization. We use it once a week. I rate its scalability a seven out of ten.

In our operations, Microsoft Virtual Server is crucial for managing virtual machines in testing and development. We utilize cloud databases in the Amazon Partner Network for efficient data handling, integrating web servers, and web services. Third-party Internet services and the APN connector system enhance our connectivity, providing a robust network infrastructure.

Microsoft Virtual Server's standout features are its seamless network integration, robust data restoration capabilities, and versatile computing functions. These qualities are invaluable for cloud computing and networking, enhancing the overall flexibility and scalability of our operations.

While I am generally satisfied with the solution, it could slightly improve its stability.

I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for two years.

I would rate the stability as a seven out of ten. It could improve by adapting to new features and changes occurring every three months.

I would rate the scalability at a seven out of ten. We have over 100 users of the solution.

I would rate the technical support as a seven out of ten.

Neutral

Setting up and deploying can be a bit complex, and the time it takes depends on different factors. We have various environments, like development and production. If everything goes smoothly, it is quick, but if there are issues, it takes time to fix them. The deployment process involves moving through different stages, checking for problems like missing incidents or security issues.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Virtual Server as an eight out of ten.