VMware vSphere Reviews

We are using VMware vSphere to manage the virtual environment. We use it for visibility and for managing the host.

What I want to see, I can get easily from VMware vSphere, because I know how to navigate it, as I've been using it for years. I also don't have issues with its operation, stability, and security. I also find the VMware support team diligent when they assisted me with the issues I raised.

Before the latest versions of this software, we used to work with versions 5.5 and below. We used VMware vSphere as a client, as an application, e.g. it was not web-based. Now that has changed, because they've moved it from the application to the web-based version. It's the only change I've seen which I found very difficult because it was challenging to connect to the web, particularly because it can be very slow. It freezes, unlike the app version which was absolutely perfect.

The performance was better with VMware vSphere as an app, but not with the web-based client. The web-based client could be improved, in terms of its speed. It could be faster, but I also just learned that since everything is moving to cloud, there's a reason why there's a web-based client now.

I have been using VMware vSphere for almost 10 years.

I don't have any problems with the stability and security of VMware vSphere.

I had to engage with the VMware technical support team once or twice last year because we had a disaster, and they were able to assist me diligently.

The installation for VMware vSphere was a one-time installation. You do it once,  and that's it.

I had a consultant do the VMware vSphere installation for me.

We pay for the license of VMware vSphere yearly.

We are using VMware solutions. We are running the VMware standard edition. We also have VMware vSphere and VMware ESXi.

We are running the latest version of VMware vSphere: 7.0. We started with version four of this software.

I wouldn't say that there are features that I like the most about VMware vSphere, because it's just a normal management console. It's a default client management software for the virtual environment. It's just a console that we use.

We have been using the software since we enrolled into the virtual CRR, so we are used to it. I can't say whether it's easy to use or not, because I've been using it forever. I can't do any comparison. To say it's easy to use or it's not easy to use would not suffice, because I've been using it for years, so I know how to navigate the platform. What I want to see, I can get easily from VMware vSphere.

I don't recall the last time we installed the software, and even if it was a difficult process, I wouldn't know, because that would best be answered by the technical team, who keeps installing it for different lines. For me it was something that was done once.

We only have one engineer who takes care of the deployment and maintenance of VMware vSphere. The software is only used by fewer than five people, e.g. just the administrators. We're not increasing the number of users, because there are only just a few people needed to man the environment.

I would recommend VMware vSphere to others, particularly because when I contacted them about some issues, they assisted me diligently.

From one to ten, I'm rating VMware vSphere an eight.

When you talk about performance improvement of VMware vSphere, you have to look at other factors. You look at the whole infrastructure. You can't look at the software alone, because when it comes to performance, you also have to look at your hardware. You have to look at your storage. It isn't just the software, e.g. VMware vSphere, that you are using. For example, the last time we had an issue, it wasn't only because of the VMware side. It was also because of our storage, e.g. Our storage capacity was full, so we had to engage VMware. To improve performance, the VMware infrastructure as a whole should be improved, which means changing the storage, storage accessories, etc. VMware vSphere is only connected, and it's only a software that is running on the hardware, so to improve performance, we also need to talk about and look into the hardware aspects of the solution.

I use VMware solutions every day. We use VMware 6.7. We are unable to update because of hardware compatibility concerns.

Our day-to-day operation is building virtual machine applications. 

We are a small company. We are moving to the private cloud along with the VMware solution, starting with building computers, then storage virtualization, and then network virtualization. VMware vSphere has helped us create our infrastructures and provide services for our customers.

The UI could use some improvements, especially in dark mode. There are some features not enabled or do not function as expected.

I would like to see VMware try a new service like Blockchain.

I have been using VMware vSphere since 2009.

VMware has been stable. The performance is good.

All the features of VMware vSphere fit our organization and are compatible.

We had a problem one month ago. Technical support was really able to help us.

The initial setup of VMware was easy. I did not experience any problems or have any difficulty. It took two days to deploy.

We used a local partner to implement the solution.

The solution has standard licensing fees. Support is the only additional cost.

VMware vSphere are leaders in virtualization. The capital investment is high, but it is efficient.

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use vSphere to host all of our business applications, as well as our in-house developed applications. We also use it for the software components that support our IT team.

The core components are the most valuable aspect of this solution. The fact that we have the ability to easily scale out, and the ability to do maintenance on the underlying hardware without impacting our business applications, are important aspects. In general, we have better control over what kind of systems are impacted when we make changes.

The challenge that we have is keeping the system up to date, as well as having the internal resources to maintain that platform. We're not an IT company, so it's challenging for us to keep the IT resources in-house. It is for this reason that we are now investigating public cloud offerings.

We would like to see VMware move in the direction of having a working model on the application level. The next level of virtualization, most likely container solutions, is what we're interested in. That would avoid us having to support the operating system and tooling. Overall, it would make it easier for us from a customer perspective to use it.

This is a fairly stable product.

Absolutely, vSphere is scalable. We have approximately 4,500 users connecting to this system and we increase our usage by approximately 10% per year.

The technical support is a combination of VMware and our integrator.

If we have major issues or we are making major changes, we typically go through the integrator. They have a partnership with VMware.

We typically deal with the less severe or impacting changes and issues. In general, that goes pretty well. The software is pretty well documented, so usually, we have a quick fix if we run into problems.

We did not work with another similar solution prior to this one.

Our deployment was a project that took a couple of weeks. It was not major. The last upgrade went smoothly, as well. In general, the time that it took to put things in place was acceptable.

Our only complaint about the implementation is about having the resources with the requisite knowledge. That's our biggest challenge.

We use an integrator to do the initial implementation. In case we have major changes to make, we will again hire the integrator to do that work.

With respect to our return on investment, this product is definitely worth it. It is not cheap and there is a cost associated with additional licenses, but there are not very many options.

The cost of the licenses is acceptable and we haven't seen any major increases from the vendor in the time we've been using it. This is not a cheap product but it's an investment.

There is a cost associated whenever we need to add licenses.

We reviewed a couple of options and at that point in time, VMware was one of the strongest players. This was especially true because they had a lot of partners and integrators in the region, which quickly led us to choose them. Selecting another solution would be more challenging for us, especially in getting the required support.

I don't think that we're going to expand further or improve upon our current solution. We are now investigating to what extent the public cloud offerings are a better match or solution for our use cases.

In summary, this is a very stable solution and it has been that way for years. So far, it's been a very good fit. The only question is today, is it still worthwhile investing in on-premise solutions, or are cloud solutions at a level where we can move production nodes to it? That's basically our question and I'm guessing a question that a lot of other companies are asking themselves.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

In the organization where I have worked for the past nine years, there are multiple virtualization platforms. Virtualization software includes Microsoft Hypervisor, Red Hat KVM, Oracle virtual machine, and Oracle virtual cloud.

vSphere is optimized for a specific type of virtualization.

There is the simplicity of management, accessibility, and availability.

The interface is really user-friendly.

The only concern that I have with VMware is the support. It is very limited and can be better.

When you get support from the VMware global team or support locations, customer complaints are not entertained or taken seriously by the VMware global team or support centers. Other OEMs, such as Microsoft and Oracle, would make you a priority.

I have been using VMware vSphere for three years.

We recently upgraded to the latest version.

It's a very stable solution. In fact, when it comes to virtualization, you can tell anyone to use the system.

In our organization, we have 600 users. 

My previous organization had a population of approximately 35,000 people.

The support is the only negative feedback, they need improvements.

I'm familiar with all of the virtualization platforms that are now available on the market.

The initial setup and installation are straightforward. It is something that can be done by anyone.

In one hour, we can complete the installation and configuration.

Admins are only required to look after the VM portion of the new VM creation as well as the configuration or modification. Aside from that, we have a team of two or three admins to deploy and maintain this solution during their shift time, such as in the morning and afternoon shifts.

The organization pays the licensing fees.

We looked at a few alternatives and compared them to vSphere.

The freelance experience for the platform is excellent.

I would recommend this solution to other users.

I would rate VMware vSphere a ten out of ten.

The solution acts as the basis for doing virtualization. 

I definitely like the stability, performance and ease-of-use. 

I have no issues with the solution's scalability or user-friendliness. I consider these to be perfect. We have had a fantastic, problem-free solution for the past 14 years when it comes to fault tolerance and disaster recovery. It has everything one needs. 

VMware vSphere has a limited scope and necessitates the adding of additional products. This involves further complexity and expense. NSX is a product of VMware vSphere and it would be nice to see the solution have full integration capabilities with it. 

I have been using VMware vSphere since 2007. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is certainly scalable. 

The customer support is nice. We are talking about a great organization, which offers much staff, support and white paper. 

The initial setup was straightforward, perfect. 

This process for the initial server lasts ten minutes. There is also the console, which involves two parts, one being the server itself. This is where the CD-ROM goes, something which is now on a USB key and does not involve the undertaking of any activity. 

Deployment lasts half a day, at which point everything is up and running. 

The real question is whether the person wishes to have one server or a hundred. The use of 200 machines will take longer. What I am talking about is small, basic installations. 

If a person is trained, then he will be able handle the deployment and maintenance on his own. This is not complex. 

Our customers incur a yearly licensing fee, one of three or five years, in fact. 

We consider the solution to be obligatory. 

The solution's use can range from ten users to thousands. 

I would definitely recommend the solution to others. I am a big fan of it. 

I rate VMware vSphere as a twenty out of ten. I give it a perfect ten rating. 

The solution is primarily used for management. It offers easier control at multiple branches.

The product is stable.

The flexibility of the solution is very good.

The product is very easy to use. 

The product offers a very nice single dashboard for complete management.

The solution is very straightforward to implement.

We found the scalability to be very good.

The solution doesn't seem to be missing any features currently.

It would be ideal if the integration capabilities were a bit more robust.

Technical support could be faster in terms of response times.

I've been using the solution for about five or six years. It's been a while at this point.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable in terms of performance.

The scalability is very good. We haven't seen any issues with expanding it if we need to.

There are about 15 to 20 users on the solution at this time.

While we don't have current plans to increase usage, if the business grows, we likely will.

The technical support is quite good. They are helpful and knowledgeable. That said, their response times need to be better. We would like them to respond faster to queries. 

Other than that, we are satisfied with their level of service.

The product is not overly complex to set up. It's very simple and straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the implementation.

We have an admin team that can handle any maintenance required.

We are looking for opportunities with Nutanix. We are looking at it now.

That said, we did not evaluate any other products before choosing this solution. However, many years back, we did look into Citrix.

We are using the latest version of the solution at this point. I cannot speak to the exact version number off-hand.

We are not integrating the solution at this time.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. I would recommend the solution to other companies.

We are using vSphere as a multi-tenant platform. We are hosting VMs for a few of our customers.

We are utilizing all of the features and they are good.

I don't see any challenges in using this product. 

We have been using VMware vSphere for between three and four years.

This is a stable product and I haven't heard any negative feedback from my implementation team about it.

We implement this product for medium and large-sized companies. It is easy to scale.

I have not personally been in touch with VMware support.

We have not used another similar solution.

The implementation is an easy process for us, which is why we're using VMware cloud as a product. The length of time required for deployment depends on the customer. We need to know their requirements, and then we proposed timelines and inform them accordingly. It is defined by the number of nodes and the number of workloads.

We deploy vSphere for our customers. We also offer maintenance and support as part of a managed service.

This is quite an expensive product, although everything is included in the standard licensing fee.

Overall, for me, everything with this product looks good and I can recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Firstly, we use it to provide an infrastructure for a development environment. Secondly, we use it to provide services to end-users. A kind of clustered services, where underneath, there are plenty of virtual machines. Thirdly, these solutions were chosen because of the easy way of providing backups and zero downtime between accidents and issues. 

VMware vSphere provides an easy way of providing near-zero downtime services, the operation of the instances between clustered services, and providing the projected SLA for our customers. 

Mostly, we use a gap solution for PaaS and IaaS levels of solutions. We also use Kubernetes on the application layer and downtime to move to a different layer of workloads. 

However, we still use plain virtual machine platform environments because we are leveraging just on-premise servers. We can't, or we don't want to fully move into clouds. That's why it's important for us to use a solution like VMware vSphere. 

I'm not aware of every option that our solution provides, but I see mostly two things. Provide a better solution for hybrid clouds and migration to the cloud. That could be one thing. The second one is providing some integration with different solutions at the application level, such as Kubernetes.

There is always a problem that the application level solutions are not aware of lower levels of infrastructure, of architecture. Some bundled applications with a stack of new VMs with better templates, including the deployment of such things. Monitoring could also be improved.

I have been using VMware vSphere for more than 10 years.

I think it's stable. We have encountered a major issue twice during the last four or five years. But it was not related only to vSphere but solutions like extensions to the software we use. 

However, there was no downtime, there was some issue, but I would say that the solution is quite stable. We have been using it for a few years without any major incidents that I am aware of.

To my knowledge, it's quite scalable and elastic in terms of providing bigger throughputs and managing higher volumes of requests at the end, but our cases currently are not like the biggest. 

I think most of the solutions available right now are set up for the infrastructure. The hardware is enough for the performance level we want to have. It's enough, and if we wanted to improve it, there is space for that. 

However, I can tell you that this solution was stable in my first project. Between 2010 and 2014, at a different company, the solution provided everything that I needed at that moment. There were no problems with scaling this solution.

However, we had problems with the hardware limits. We reached the limit, but it was quite good with vSphere solutions because even if we reached the point of having no hardware, like memory and computers, we managed to provide stable workloads for our customers. We gained the level of performance we wanted to have.

We were dealing with a complex situation dynamically, and the solution provided us with the tools, and the scalability was not an issue. However, we had problems with the hardware limits.

The support could be better when it comes to opening and responding to a ticket. But it was within a reasonable time. However, I'm don't have direct contact with the support, and my team's not giving me information about any issues.

My experience was with the public sector. That was rather complex from the start. In my previous experiences, if we wanted to use vSphere, that was after we tried some different techniques, and we had reached the limit of it or the complexity of the setup. 

That's why we wanted to move to simplify it. The setup was immature, and we needed to provide better service for customers. That's why we choose to use vSphere. The complex one was the other option.

The setup takes about one or two days or something in-between.

VMware vSphere is a top enterprise solution, so we pay the price for a major product.  We use vSphere because when we get the project, the customers were already using it. But currently, for example, if we have a new project and we are setting up our environment, and we have no constraints about the technology, like using vSphere, we rather go for Proxmox.

We are using it because it was already there before. The cost of migration, for example, is too high to move into different solutions, and the cost of keeping it is enough, and so we accept it. 

Overall, I would like to have cheaper licensing costs and maybe a different policy for licensing. However, we don't see that as a big issue because we are paying for a good solution. 

That's why I think it's a fair price. We are using it on the production side, and everything is good from our experience. That's why I would say that the cost isn't too high. However, it would always be nice if it was cheaper.

Proxmox is cost-effective and good. For example, if we have some projects where the hardware is provided by our customers, and we can use any technology we want.

Proxmox, in most cases, is good for creating some development and staging environment. Because it's cost-effective, we can afford to have a solution based on that technology. 

In most cases, I know that it's not limiting us in terms of the operating systems we use, and my team is quite happy when using such solutions. But it's not the production solution that we use at the end. It's mostly temporary for a few months, and we are using it because of the cost and because there will be an easy way to deploy. We can start to use it and move our environment between the projects. It's quite easy and quite quick.

With different technologies like Grafana, we gain information from infrastructure and application-level from different sources, and we integrate it into a different solution.

However, monitoring information could always be improved. Integrating with the application level could be improved, and monitoring could also be extended to that. Providing us with a more complex and just a one-click solution for seeing everything, how the infrastructure and how integrations are behaving, and the levels of infrastructure and application services would be a nice solution to have.

I think the decision needs to be made by the architects of the solution. They need to be aware of the cost of such solutions, their requirements, and the constraints of such technologies. From a technological point, it's always a good solution. However, it might not be the best solution in terms of the total cost of ownership, and maybe there are better solutions like Proxmox.

I would give VMware vSphere a solid eight out of ten.