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.
There are a lot of neat improvements in vSphere 5.1, but it’s worth mentioning some of the neat features that may not be getting as much publicity. Below are some of the features in the release documentation that aren’t in the “What’s New in vSphere 5.1” one-pager, and so-far I haven’t seen nearly enough excitement about thus far. These are features that an engineer will enjoy, but the engineer’s boss might not care so much about.
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 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.
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.
We primarily use the solution for real-time backups. It can create new VMs.
The solution is stable.
I don't have a problem with scalability.
The product is very easy to install.
The reporting could be improved.
We'd like to see better monitoring. There should be better alert systems in place.
We['ve been using the solution for two to three years at this point. It hasn't been too long.
The product has been stable so far. The performance and reliability are good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.
The product can scale. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.
We have two people using the solution at this time.
We have basically updated the hard disk size of VMware servers so that to accommodate the data of the existing clients. I can't say if we will scale beyond this.
We have called VMware regarding Microsoft Cloud integration.
We were using a third-party utility product. Now, events are being pushed through VMware.
The installation process is quite straightforward. It's not overly complex. I wouldn't say it's difficult. A company shouldn't have any issues with the setup process.
While we have an integrator handle our deployment we manage the solution by ourselves, in-house.
You only need two people for deployment or maintenance tasks.
We had an integrator with us through the process and they assisted with the setup initially.
We have a yearly subscription that we pay for this product.
While we are currently using the on-premises deployment, our plan is to move completely to the cloud.
We are using the latest version of the solution at this point. I can't speak to the exact version number.
I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten overall. It's a very useful product.
I would recommend the solution to other users or other companies.
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.
We have a variety of customers with different use cases. Many can't go to a public cloud, and so we give the option of a private cloud. If they can go to a public cloud, may use a hyperscaler such as AWS or Azure on their applications.
vSphere is easy to integrate with multiple third-party tools. We're using Carbonite, for example, for migration. We are also using vSphere and vCenter for integrating with a CA product.
The solution allows for very good virtualization.
It makes migration processes easy.
The product offers a lot of functionality. It helps use manage everything for the client.
The solution can be integrated with multiple other technologies. If you have Cisco CSA solution, for example, it integrates well.
If you want to use third-party tools, you are able to do so.
With respect to the Windows environment, it's very, very easy to use.
Commercially, you see other products, like Nutanix, which offers a free hypervisor. It would be ideal if this solution was the same in that regard.
There are certain tools the can't run in parallel and occasionally, in those instances, we have trouble migrating customers from one source to our data center.
If I'm replicating workload from the data center and, I have to migrate some of the workload to my location, I have to stop that application. Only then I can run vSphere. That is the biggest challenge. If both the tools cannot run in parallel, it becomes a problem. There should be some sort of way to run these two products in parallel.
We've been using the solution for a number of years. It may be about eight at this point.
The stability has been very good. We haven't had any issues thus far with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.
The scalability is quite good. You can scale it horizontally and vertically if you need to. It's quite flexible in that sense. A company that needs to expand it shouldn't run into any issues.
The solution can have ten to 15 nodes.
Currently, we use the solution quite extensively in our organization. We do plan to continue to increase the usage of the product in the future.
Technical support is okay. We're pretty satisfied with the level of service we are provided. They seem to be pretty knowledgeable and responsive.
We also use Nutanix, however, we don't use that solution quite as extensively.
VMware has much better functionalities. They have integrated IDs and some functionalities. as well as load-balancing which Nutanix doesn't have right now.
The initial setup is not complex. It's rather straightforward.
We can deploy the solution in three to four days, typically. We deploy multiple clusters and we take three to four days in terms of grid installing.
In terms of pricing, a little bit of improvement is required. There is a lot of competition in the market. If you talk about Nutanix, Nutanix is much cheaper than this product. Very recently, we lost out on a contract due to the pricing.
We're a partner with VMware.
We are a data center service provider. We sell these services to customers. We are not using it for ourselves only. We are also selling the solution to our customers. In that sense, there's always a plan to increase vSphere.
Overall, we're pretty satisfied with the solution. I'd rate it a seven out of ten.
I'm always sort of working with the servers, therefore, whenever there is a requirement for a different kind of server, I deal with it. For example, one of my departments asked me to provide one server where they can store some files. Instead of getting a full physical server, we created some virtual machines on vSphere and gave it to the department so they could store their data there. That is one where we are using the server. Sometimes we buy software from outside, and there are specific requirements on hardware - for example, X amount much of RAM is required, Y amount of CPU is required, etc., so we try to use the vSphere to create the virtual machines for that.
It's not a particular feature, really, however, I can say that the solution is just easy to maintain, and makes it easy to backup all those VMs. We can easily save our data and we can deploy VM machines very fast and create the delivery of the server in a pretty simple, dynamic way.
Our company has very limited requirements. We just create VMs and deploy VMs on the machine and give the users access. It's solving our problems perfectly. I'm not using any advanced features right now, however, it is sufficient.
It's very simple and I really like it overall.
I can't think of any features that are missing. I'm not really using any advanced options and don't have complex requirements.
The solution could be a bit more user-friendly.
I've been using the solution for eight years now. It's been quite a while.
The solution is very stable. We've never had any issues. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.
The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand it out, they can do so with relative ease.
There are four or five users that work directly with the solution, however, we have it deployed to many departments, so it's used quite a bit in the company. We have about 10-20 servers that are running on the machines.
Right now, we're happy with it, however, we may move to a different product that is even more scalable in the future, That's yet to be decided.
I've dealt with technical support in the past. Whenever we've logged a ticket, it's resolved very well. Everyone is quite knowledgeable, and whenever there is a requirement to follow a query, their tech team resolves those queries very efficiently and our problems were always resolved. We're pretty satisfied with their level of service.
We didn't previously use a different product.
We're considering moving to a different product in the future that could potentially scale even better than this. The reason we haven't moved yet is the fact that it's not easy for us to deploy and migrate all the machines from VMware to any other product.
We didn't actually handle the installation, and therefore I can't really talk about the process, as I wasn't involved directly.
The company that we bought had installed the vSphere for us and that server is still running from last year. We haven't touched it.
The solution was actually installed by the company that we ended up buying, and therefore we didn't directly handle any aspect of the implementation.
We have the licensing for the solution and the perpetual license which we have allows us to choose whether we want a support license separate or not. It's not an overly expensive solution. The pricing is average.
We're currently in the process of evaluating other options on the market to see if there are open-source options that could work for us or products that scale even better than vSphere.
We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with vSphere.
We aren't using the latest version of the solution. The near version is sufficient for us and it's solving our requirements.
Overall, I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.
While I would recommend it due to the fact that it's solving my problems, I am evaluating other products that may be better. There may be an open-source option that could also work for us. That said, this product is great in that we are using it hassle-free.
Has anyone had any angst when moving from the vSphere client in 5.1 to the web client in 5.5?