vCenter Orchestrator Reviews

We primarily use the solution to try to make use of it on a couple of workflows, as well as deployment, and packages. 

The solution helps us to manage our resources more efficiently.

In regards to the workflows, the fact that we can actually have a full dashboard library of all the existing workflows on this is great. We can see all the workflows and what all the actions do and can work with scripts.

We haven't gotten to that level of usage yet as to be able to see the downsides. The solution has been able to handle our basic requirements at this point. Maybe in a year, when the team has used the solution extensively, we would be able to actually see the drawbacks, especially those of us who are trying to compare it with other solutions as well.

As we work towards more stability on the solution, sometimes we'll try something and it breaks and it's easier to restart the service. That's the only drawback. We've experienced this with other applications as well. 

It would be great if the solution could further integrate with other services. it would be really good to have all of the solutions in one particular dashboard or one particular installed package. Right now, you can do that from other products, but we have to orchestrate it or have it as a subset. It would be great to actually have all the features bond together, especially for SMBs. It would be really cost-effective in the end.

The solution is pretty scalable. With the new cloud platform, it's easy and at a fairly low cost. We do plan to increase usage in the future.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

For our organization, the initial setup was straightforward. We don't have a super complex multi-tenant environment, which may make it more complex for others.

Deployment took about a week but it wasn't a fast deployment. We handled it on and off as we handled other projects, so it happened over the course of two weeks to a month.

We had VMware assist with the implementation.

We're a partner, so we have a PLU licensing model; we have a partnership agreement.

We're using the on-premise deployment model.

It's a great solution and it's great to work with as well. Anything coming from VMware is pretty much top-notch, but, of course, you still have to look at the licensing requirements before you sign on to the solution. It should be a case of functionality versus budget in terms of if it will work for your organization.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

The solution is a cluster of servers which is managed by the vCenter cluster manager or vCenter Orchestrator. It controls workflows for us. 

The powerful management console for each allocation gives the foundation of the organization. The ability for maneuvering in the location of computing resources and storage to reach the required performance for the IT department satisfies the organization's basic needs.

The solution's HA feature is very good. The VRS and multi-source scheduling are very helpful. The port to run feature is good as well.

The user interface is very user-friendly.

The solution could be a little bit less expensive. It used to be cheaper, but now it is very costly and the license model counts by the processor. The currency conversion rate in Egypt is very high, and a couple of thousand dollars means here a lot of money to us here.

Mainly VMware integrates with other products, but there is no easy way to link with other products from a different vendor. We can integrate with other products from the same vendors fairly well, but if they could make it so integration is easier with other vendors, that would really help.

The solution is very scalable.

Communication with technical support is very good. It has a repository of knowledge base articles which we can access which are very helpful.

The initial setup was very easy.

We mostly use the private cloud deployment model.

I would recommend the solution. I'd rate it 8.5 out of ten.

We are a software IT provider. I work with vCenter. We use it for our clients. It's for customers and our customers who use VMware products. We are the implementation engineers. Most of our clients work with the traditional data counter.

Our primary use case of this solution is for virtualization management, so virtualizing the infrastructure, and optimizing IT workload.

The most valuable feature is that it's simple and very ergonomic to use the product compared to other virtualizing product. Out of Microsoft, Red Hat, and IBM, we found VMware to be the best one.

It's a single pane of glass. We can manage all the sectors on vCenter.

It is too expensive. One of the main issues is the price. 

I don't know if vCenter Orchestrator can automize the provisioning of other products and other virtualizing software besides for VMware. If it will develop the ability to be a multi-provider product it will be better for VMware.

I would it to become multi-platforming, like what vRealize does. 

It is stable. I didn't find any technical problems with any VMware products, including vCenter. They are stable products and the only problem is that they cost a lot of money. 

In Tunisia, we don't have very big data country like in the UK, Europe, and other countries. The biggest data center in my country has maybe around 500 virtual machines. We don't have the problem of scalability in Tunisia. We're a small country with a small data center. For big companies in Tunisia, it's compared to a middle-sized company in Europe.

We don't have this problem and I know vCenter it's very scalable with how much you can manage and how many customers you can manage. We don't have this problem with scalability.

We don't have a problem with VMware support. I would rate their support a nine out of ten. 

We compared vCenter to Microsoft SCCM and other tools and I think vCenter is the most dynamic and the easier one to use in any complex environment.

The initial setup is not complicated. The setup took around half a day. If we have all the requirement that we request it takes less than half a day.

We do both. We implement and we do the support and maintenance tasks. We only require one staff member for the deployment. 

The setup depends on how the company has organized it. We have people who are responsible for the implementation and people who are responsible for the maintenance and support desk. But if you have a problem then just one person can fix that problem. 

Our licensing is on a yearly basis. We pay for the license and then we pay the support every year.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. Not a ten because of the price. 

We use this solution for creating workflows, and we have a public-cloud deployment.

We are a cloud service provider. We have the ability to do custom workflows for our customers, but none of our customers are using workflows right now.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the workflow creation.

The user interface is ok.

The custom workflows are very difficult and confusing.

The IDE for developing is not user-friendly and does not have IntelliSense for checking your code. I find this to be very challenging.

It would be nice if the IDE accommodated all of the languages because right now, it only has JavaScript. More options for scripting are needed, such as C# and Acorn.

I would like to see the creation of video tutorials to help learn how to use particular functions of the product.

I don't think that this product is very stable because, at the moment, I am not able to run workflows. It crashes. Workflows that I have run before, I'm not able to run them again. It just crashes for no reason.

This solution may be scalable but right now, I haven't had any cause to explore scalability. In my environment, we do not have customers for this solution. It is used in-house.

We're working on internal workflow, but at the moment, it is not being used extensively. 

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup was not straightforward. I had to do a lot of research, and a lot of reading. There was no material available online.

I performed the implementation myself, but as I said, it was not straightforward. I had to search and experienced a lot of challenges, but at the end of the day, I was able to figure it out.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

This is a product that I'm still exploring.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use it for segmentation and the isolation of tenants.

The DRS feature from VMware is very valuable to us because it balances workloads.

I did not encounter any downtime in my environment. 

VMware continues to improve its product, and we find a lot of new features that have improved over the years. I would like to see a greater ability to do mobile administration. 

The stability is good. It is a stable solution. 

We have had no problems with scaling of this product. We have over 130 users of the product. 

Deployment took us approximately four hours. 

Primary use would be consolidation into a smaller footprint and its performance is pretty good.

It allows us to maintain an offline catalog of a bunch of product configurations that can be powered on remotely, so they don't use any resources while they are off.

The hardware abstraction layer, being able to make the VMs portable when moving to a different platform or over a WAN.

I would like to see, from within the Web Console, being able to define the project and custom templates per user; almost like how CloudSpec has approached the solution.

Stability is an eight out of 10.

Scalability is an eight out of 10.

There was no previous solution. It was all bare metal hardware.

When selecting a vendor the most important criteria are time in the industry and cost.

The initial setup was very simple.

I looked at Zen, VMware, Microsoft Hyper-V, and the free Linux solution. My decision was made by the fact that our product support team only specifically supports virtualization on VMware.

I rate this solution a nine out of 10 because of its simplicity, scalability, and availability. The one ding would be the need for better manageability of VM sprawl, that would be nice.

In terms of advice, I would tell people that this is VMware's only business, or primary business. That's longevity in your investment, as opposed to going with a Microsoft or a Linux that may or may not continue the solution.

vCenter Orchestrator is a user-friendly and straightforward product.

The product’s cost needs improvement. Not all organizations can spend huge amounts of money to orchestrate the operation. In comparison, KVM is less expensive and has similar functionality. It could be integrated with other products and technologies than VMware.

The product is stable.

It is a scalable product.

The technical support services are excellent.

Positive

I use Ansible to automate workload management for third-party products and heterogeneous environments. In comparison, vCenter Orchestrator can be used to manage only VMware infrastructure.

The initial setup process is easy if you follow the proper procedure with the correct steps and prerequisites.

I rate vCenter Orchestrator an eight out of ten. If you have only VMware cloud, then vCenter Orchestrator is the right fit for your business requirements. You should look for other compatible tools if you have a heterogeneous environment, including public clouds like OpenStack or OpenShift.