VMware vSphere Reviews

Its compatibility with LUNs and its vMotion, HA, FT and VDS. It works very smooth with LUNs. When we talk about its Cluster feature, then the HA, FT, and DRS features are just great in how they support large scale servers and VMs without any trouble in the production environment.

VMware offers VDS switches which are very efficient and useful regarding network configuration in your virtual environment. The configuration should be the same on your cluster-joined ESXis to improve performance and when running a production environment or VMs on any ESXi.

These features are very good for us.

While using its HA feature, we don’t need to worry about usage of servers. Our VM automatically shifts to another server which has resources using vMotion. VDS provides its NIC which is available on all ESXis. You have to configure it one time at Center level and after that you don't need to worry about any ESXi configuration or its failure. When DRS or HT transfers your VM to another host, then that VM will get the same NIC via VDS.

When we talked about its Vmotion feature so we see we are able to move our Vms in running state from one host to another host within cluster and shared storage but we are unable to move VMs accros cluster and storage in running state so here is vsphere 5.5 suffer little bit.

I guess in vMotion it should have the ability to move VMs across clusters of vCenters and different type of CUPS.

We have been using this solution for many years.

We did not have any issue so far in stability.

We have had scalability issues; we have backup plans if ESXi crashes.

I would rate technical support 5/10.

We didn’t use anything previously. We chose VMware ESXi 5.5 over Hyper V due to its features.

It was complex because you have to prepare for every situation.

Its pricing is affordable for a small company as well.

We evaluated vMotion, HA, FT, and VDS.

I advise you to review your needs and then look into the features. I am sure you will get solution of your needs.

Truthfully, I'm not using many of the available features. My needs have been small in that we just needed to virtualize our environment and manage it effectively. VMware vSphere has served that purpose greatly. I’m sure what I get out of vSphere, though, could potentially be gained just as easily via other virtualization platforms available today, but at the time I felt those were too immature to risk. VMware just worked with little to no issue, so I trust them going forward.

The largest benefit for my companies that have used this is the consolidation of our physical server footprint. Never would I thought I could run as many VMs on a single host as we do today.

Overall I’m very happy with what the product brings so I can’t suggest any major improvements. However, I’m very disappointed in VMware’s decision to push management to a web-based vCenter client and away from the standalone thick client. The web client is just terrible in so many ways, mainly on a performance basis. It is very slow. I also find the thick client much easier to navigate and work with my VMs. A large user population shares my sentiment as there are a number of posts in VMware’s forums regarding the issues with the web client. I hope VMware realizes this and either greatly enhances the web client or moves back to the thick client for management.

I have been using it since vSphere 4, so approximately five to six years.

I’m sure there were issues to contend with originally, but as the product matures it gets easier and easier.

I’m sure there were issues to contend with originally, but as the product matures it gets easier and easier.

I’m sure there were issues to contend with originally, but as the product matures it gets easier and easier.

It was pretty straightforward, from what I recall, but I did not do most of the initial setup. I assisted a colleague who took the reigns.

I've rarely had to enlist support, but when I have it’s been what I would expect.

It was pretty straightforward, from what I recall but I did not do most of the initial set-up. I assisted a colleague who took the reigns.

My first environment was set up by a single colleague with my assistance. The only advice I can really give is to really know your requirements for the systems and software you intend to virtualize and build a proper sized VM environment to host them. Oversubscribing resources is, in my opinion, the biggest concern and something that happens easily. Also factor in proper storage built to handle the I/O load of a virtual environment. Lastly, build your VM environment to factor in an N+1 design to ensure if a host fails, the remaining host(s) can handle the load of all VMs that were running on the failed host and always allow for a 15% overhead of free resources under full load.

I really did not handle the financial aspects of my VM environments, but I do know VMware is pricey. These days, from a price point, I would take a hard look at MS Hyper-V as they are catching up with VMware fairly quickly.

When I first looked into virtualization it was back when VMware released vSphere 4. At that time I was interested in Citrix Xen and MS Hyper-V. I felt at the time VMware was the industry leader and was more mature so I trusted them above all others. I’ve been happy with the choice since, though for cost purposes I am really interested in Microsoft’s Hyper-V solution.

Cost considerations aside, be sure to properly scale your VM environment above all else. This is true regardless of product.

• Virtualization
• Ability to vMotion and create servers on LAN
• HA
• DRS

The ability to build machines on the LAN as the business needs them, and the ability to have good DR and HA, with no hardware that can cause issues. If we go down, we have another host with very little downtime.

I would like them to keep the client-based system, even though they are going towards web client.

It's extremely stable rarely any issues.

It's very scalable. We currently have 10,000+ servers, and 80% virtualized, so scalability has to be there.

VMware tech support is excellent. It’s one of the best vendor tech support I’ve found.

It's extremely easy, very straightforward, and good documentation.

VMware vSphere allows you to run multiple virtual machines. For example, I can run up to 10 computers, virtual servers on one physical server. 

We have at least 10 people using this solution in our organization.

The most valuable feature of VMware vSphere is the ability to work in big system infrastructure. For example, you can move one bridge, one machine to another, or one virtual machine from one server to another. This is beneficial when you want to put a server under maintenance.

Also, the security features and implementation are very easy.

There is nothing from my perspective that the product needs to improve. It works for all my needs.

I recommend that VMware vSphere continue to release more features.

I have been using VMware vSphere for 7 years.

This solution is stable.

VMware vSphere is scalable.

Previously, I had used Hyper-v. VMware is a much better solution.

The initial setup of the solution is straightforward.

We use third party support for this product.

I would rate VMware vSphere a 10 out of 10.

We primarily use the solution for the analytics we can get.

It works well with other VMware solutions.

The user interface is great.

There are no issues with the level of scalability you can achieve.

The stability is good. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

There should be a bit more flexibility in terms of the hardware we can use with the product. There needs to be better compatibility. 

We've used the solution for a long time. We've used the solution for more than a decade. 

The solution offers good reliability and performance. The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

You can easily scale the solution as needed. It's great in the sense. There are no issues around scaling. 

We have about 35 users at this time. 

The solution doesn't use up a lot of space, however, I can't say if we plan to increase usage or not just yet. 

We've never contacted technical support in the past. I can't speak to how they are in terms of the level of service they provide. 

The solution is easy to set up. It's not a complex or difficult process at all. 

The deployment doesn't take too long. It took us about ten days or so. 

We have four engineers that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. 

We handled the implementation ourselves. We did not use an integrator or consultant for the deployment.

We have an on-premises setup. There aren't any extra costs involved. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been satisfied with its general capabilities so far. 

The solution is server virtualization software. VMware is totally for virtualization.

We only use it for a few of its features, such as DRS, vMotion, and fault tolerance. We aren't using the NSX, cloud-based, or any other features. 

The solution is 100% stable.

The scalability is very good.

We find the user interface to be very nice.

The initial implementation process is simple.

It's easy to use and very user-friendly.

Technical support has been very good. They are helpful and responsive. 

The solution could be cheaper and less expensive.

I've been using the solution for five to seven years. 

We have found the solution to be extremely stable. The performance and reliability are great. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is thoroughly a scalable solution. It's easy to expand it if you need to.

There isn't a specific number of users. We are using it for hosting services.

Technical support is excellent. We have no complaints at all.

The installation process is quite simple, quite straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. I'm certified and find the process very easy.

We did not need the assistance of outside help. I can easily handle the implementation myself. 

You do have to purchase a license in order to use the solution.

The solution should base its prices on what the market can handle. Right now, it's a bit expensive.

The price is a little bit higher when you go for the enterprise edition. The Standard edition is quite low and the enterprise edition is quite high.

I have two clusters, version 7 and version 6.7. Both are there.

I'm not using the cloud-based version and other stuff, so I couldn't comment on it. On the on-premises version, however, it's a very good solution. It has a nice interface and nice everything and is a very stable product. We have never faced any issues yet.

I'd recommend the solution to others 100%.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

This solution is used as a virtual and a clustered environment. We provide a minimum of two central storage server clusters and the maximum we have is for approximately four server clusters. 

The solution is user-friendly and easy to manage.

The solution could improve by providing better information on what other products it is compatible with. For example, we have customers that do not like AMD Chipsets used with VMware but it is not a technical issue, they need to bring more awareness. 

I have been using VMware vSphere for approximately 10 years.

I have found the stability to be good.

The solution is scalable.

we have approximately 50 customers using the solution.

The customer service is good.

The installation is straightforward because it comes with the appliance, you only have to deploy the appliance. The installation can take a long time, they need to improve on the simplicity and length of the installation.

All the customers who have the VMware have the vSphere because there is no single installation.

We have five technicians for the installation and maintenance of the solutuion.

There is a perpetual license for this solution and the support is a yearly subscription.

I would recommend this solution to others. If you use VMware, then you need to use vSphere to manage the clusters.

I rate VMware vSphere a nine out of ten.

The solution is a hypervisor. 

If you're looking at virtualization, it's probably the most stable virtualization platform that I have worked on. 

VMware offers one of the most stable if not the most stable virtualization hypervisor.

The solution makes navigation very easy. 

It makes migration very simple. 

There is a lot of very impressive innovation happening within the product right now.

The integration capabilities are excellent. 

We've found the product to be quite scalable.

The installation is quite straightforward.

You can do so much out of the box with their product, with their built-in technology. In vSphere, you can manage the hardware itself using the same platform.

The licensing costs for the solution are quite high.

I've been using the solution for about seven years now. It's been a good amount of time.

The stability of the solution is excellent. There aren't any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability is very good. You can scale down or scale up provided you have the right licensing. 

There aren't users on the solution per se. Our IT team is mainly involved with it. That's it. We have three engineers that manage it.

I'm not sure if we will expand this product. It depends on what might happen next as one of the things that we will be embarking on is HCI technology. VMware came into HCI, however, there are multiple vendors such as Dell or HPE. It depends on how everything turns out in terms of the IT strategy. They're not that cheap.

I personally have never had to ask for support from VMware's technical team. In the last six to seven years, I have never had to directly ask VMware for anything. Therefore, I can't speak to how knowledgeable or responsive they are.

Previously, we were using mainly the normal Windows hypervisor, Hyper-V. At my previous employer, we used to also have Xen hypervisor.

The installation of the product is straightforward. It's really not too complex. All you do is install and click through. You put in your networking and you're done. Out of the box, it's great. However, if you do need to do some configurations, it can get a bit complex. 

I did not handle the installation process myself, and therefore can't speak to the actual amount of time it took to deploy.

One of the problems with the solution is the pricing. The licenses are not cheap.

We do pay a yearly licensing fee. Originally, it was a five-year package. Now we pay either every 12 or every 24 months.

If I have three hosts, just three hosts, a minimum of three hosts plus the vSphere and Center, I'm almost spending close to $250,000 a year. That's half a million in every two years inside just three hosts. In a serious medium enterprise where we would need at least 20 hosts, it means our annual fee or annual license cost could jump into the million-dollar range which means in three years you're spending three million alone on software.

We're just customers and end-users. 

I would recommend the solution to other organizations, so long as they've got the money. If you don't have the money you probably want to look at things that are open source. It's not a one size fits all kind of product. I say this because of the licenses. The amount of money you spend on licenses annually might be less somewhere else. For a medium enterprise, if you want a cross-platform sort of initial hypervisor I would say yes, VMware is a good option. Of course, there's always something better than VMware as well. For example, Nutanix is way ahead if you are a big enterprise.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. If it was less expensive, it would basically be perfect.