VMware vSphere Reviews

We are resellers and consultants who provide solutions for our clients.

They manage the virtual machines, such as CPU usage, or memory usage, or disk space.

The most valuable features are the vMotion, the storage vMotion, the DRS, and the high availability function.

The way that vSphere manages the alerts on the data machine is not easy to configure.

I have been working with vSphere for approximately 15 years.

We started with version 4.

It's a stable solution.

VMware vSphere is scalable.

Our clients are medium size companies.

We have not used technical support.

The initial setup was easy.

In my opinion, the essential version is a good price.

This is a good solution and I will recommend it. They are choosing a good product.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We primarily use VMware vSphere just for hosting purposes. We are data center. We create virtual machines and give them to our clients. We deal mostly in gaming.

We only have one virtual machine and we're still exploring it. Overall, it's a super product.

The initial setup is easy.

The product offers good stability.

The solution is too expensive for us and we don't have any funds to direct towards it. We just started the company, which makes it hard to explore the solution the way we want to with the amount of cost involved to do so. They should work to make the licensing more affordable.

I want to be able to use OpenStack, however, I can't do that without vCenter, and it's so cost-prohibitive for us, it's become a problem.

We've only faced one technical issue. That is downloading the virtual machines and uploading the virtual machines. It takes a lot of time and we cannot transfer the VMware from one machine or directly from one server to another. That action requires vCenter. That may only be an issue on the free version and not the pro version. On the pro version, you have much better features. 

It would be ideal if they could integrate billing software so that clients can customize it directly on the virtual machine. Billing should also be done automatically. Perhaps this is already the case, however, I haven't really had a chance to explore it fully.

While I'm currently on the free version, I'd like to have the ability to explore the pro version to see what is on offer there.

I've been working with the solution for the last three years.

The product is very stable. We don't have issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't fail or crash. It's reliable.

The solution may be scalable. However, we haven't personally attempted to scale anything due to our general lack of funds and the expansiveness of the product. Therefore, I can't really speak to scalability so much.

I'm currently also working with another product called KVM. It's much more affordable than vSphere.

The initial setup is not difficult or complex. We found it to be straightforward and easy.

The solution is extremely expensive, especially for startups such as ours, who don't have the capacity to invest so much in such a product.

Overall, I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. Everything it does, it does very well, even among all of the competition that exists in India. However, price-wise, for us, it's not ideal.

I haven't explored much, however, from what I have seen, they really do cover everything.

We have co-located our servers in different data centers, and these co-located servers are in a cluster. For storage, we are using vSAN, and for compute, we are using vSphere 6.7. We will be upgrading to version 7 in due course.

It is very easy to use and very stable.

The cost can be better.

I have been using this solution for almost eight to nine years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. You can use a cluster with 216 nodes. I believe it can be scaled much more.

We use vSphere to create virtual machines and give them to our customers. Most of the applications are on it, so we have around 8,000 to 10,000 users on five different clusters. In terms of our plans to use this product in the future, we are currently thinking about whether to continue using this solution or not.

Their support could definitely be better. They can put more experienced and more intelligent people on support. I would rate them a seven out of ten.

I won't say it is straightforward, but it is also not complex. If the hardware and net securities are there and you have the hardware configuration, then the installation takes 24 to 48 hours.

We have a team of infrastructure users who are experts in VMware. They do the installation. Two persons can do the deployment.

It is expensive. 

I would definitely recommend this solution to others. It is a very good product. It is very stable, so your infrastructure uptime can be better. The manual cost of your infrastructure can be less if you use vSphere.

I would rate VMware vSphere an eight out of ten.

I use VMware vSphere to run all my applications in a private cloud. I had all the applications in the standalone mode. I migrated them to the cloud. 

VMware vSphere is the best private-cloud solution.

It is expensive. They can improve the licensing cost for Cloud Director.

They can also improve the integration with other applications and the metering feature, which is currently not flexible.

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

It is very stable.

It is scalable. We have 100 users, and we plan to increase the usage.

The price is very high for professional services. I don't know why.

It is expensive in terms of cost, licensing, and professional services.

I would recommend it for big enterprises. I would rate VMware vSphere a nine out of ten. It is the best solution. 

• Implemented private cloud.
• Created different OS VMs
• Implemented backup policies.  
• Implemented network solutions.

Due to clustering, if any VM or server goes down, then within a moment it can be back. Even if a node goes down, then automatically all the VMs shift to another node. That is thr beauty of the product. It supports different platforms: Windows, Linux, Unix, Ubuntu, and many more. 

It is very beneficial with low space and easy manageability. Due to this product, we have saved space, energy, and durability. We have a lot of VLANs for different floors and services. This requires different VMs all implemented in one place. 

Users get tremendous speed. As an admin, I found it's usable to manage all services from a single location or point. We have already implemented private cloud, so in an emergency users can work from home. It's suitable for all users. 

SimpliVity backup and restoration is more suitable and its best feature. If any file or folder is missing and needs to be restored, then within a moment you can recover it. Simplivity has its own backup system, so there is no need to purchase separate backup software. 

All data has security. 

Multiple OSs can be created on a single platform. 

Its DR facility is good. Within a moment, data can be retrieve from another physical location over the Internet. The speed to recover data is good.

HPE uses flash drive, so its working speed is also better. Its node has 2U rack space, so it saves space.

OS templates should be readily available, so there is no need to get an OS separately. Only the activation part should be different, which is not presently available due to the need to get the OS from a different location, then create VMs. If it connect with Internet, it should ask this during VM creation with the help of selection. It should auto download the OS so it will be beneficial only at time of activation by entering a valid key. If a key is not valid, then it should start with a trial version. 

More than three years.

It requires proper maintenance and attention to work smoothly.

The product is expandable, as per requirements.

My experience is really good.

No, we only selected this solution at the start.

The concept is new. We found it a little complex at the start but the operational part was normal.

Our vendor supported the implementation. After that, we did it in-house.

As per our requirements and usability, the product is good.

After getting a headache, you will find the cost is reasonably cheaper.

We compared with Nutanix, IBM, and HPE. We got all the technical details, benefits, and functionality.   

Before selection of any product, first determine your own requirements, study them, and then present solutions.

Using this solution, we have virtualized 90% of servers used by a tier-one automotive supplier.

We have reduced maintenance and power consumption, as well as the recovery time that is required for any failures.

The most valuable feature is the VDP Backup solution. It just works.

The Disaster Recovery solution is easy to implement.

I would like to see better fault and performance reporting in the GUI. I should not have to resort to using the command line to see what is going on.

I have been using VMware vSphere for five years.

We use this solution for hardware consolidation and improved infrastructure resiliency.

It has allowed us to be more resilient to infrastructure and hardware failure, reduced hardware costs, and decreased recovery time from failures.

The most valuable features are cloning, snapshots, vMotion, and replication. All of these have increased our ability to recover from failure and balance workloads.

Reducing the cost of vSphere would be an improvement.

We have been using VMware vSphere for five years.

Our primary use case is infrastructure as a service (IaaS).

It provides more efficient use of compute resources through virtualization, making our infrastructure more cost-effective. It makes deployment and management of resources easier so that we can be more agile in our projects.  

The free ESXi hypervisor was a great way to get started, as it allowed us to introduce virtual machines so that users could start to experience the advantages.

It would be great if the free version included a management tool that was a scaled-down vCenter Manager.  

We have been using VMware vSphere since 2005.