VMware vSphere Reviews

I have been a VMware Certified Professional (VCP) since 2008 and did several projects for server consolidation on-premise and migration to vSphere-based cloud. Currently, I am working on project to build a private cloud on-premise with Cisco FlexPod (Multipod environment stretched over two datacenters). The Cisco FlexPod includes Cisco UCS (computing), Cisco ACI (networking), VMware vSphere (virtualization), and NetApp (storage).  

vSphere has enabled an enterprise class virtualization environment with a central point of monitoring and management stretched over multiple datacenters (multi-site use), adding all the features of clustering for high-availability and failover, VM migration, and operations. 

vSphere brings the features required for an enterprise class system with a lot of supporting components: An intuitive user experience that simplifies and helps operational management, e.g. provisioning and monitoring the status of the VMs and the underlying resources capacity. 

As we introduce the DevOps culture, we need to make sure that the principles and tools used to support this approach can be easily integrated and interoperated with the vSphere environment with no (or less) redundancy in tools and functionality.

The self-service portal, number one, the ease of deployments, the ability track and monitor how quickly you can provision a virtual machine guest, and the Chargeback model affiliated with that.

The simplicity of deployments, the speed to market with our application portfolios, the ability to give our developers the ability to quickly provision or stand up in an environment without having somebody to hold their hand.

Some of the features I would like to see, future enhancements of the vSphere product which starts with Virtual Center. The ability to manage more than a single host because right now, they're a challenge, because we have so many deployments, we can only manage one Virtual Center per one VMware host box. That's a limitation of the product. We would love to be able to see, we have various locations scattered throughout the US and international. We would love to see Virtual Center being able to manage more than one host at a single location because right now, we're challenging with having to login to Virtual Center at each location, instead of a single pane where the Oracle exist under one Virtual Center, our motto.

We currently use the vSphere EXSi along with their vCAC products. We are currently evaluating their vRealize products and we are also evaluating the vCloud Air.

Some of the advantages of the stability of their product is how robust VMware is, in a sense. The ability to scale on a fly. Without having to touch the system, you can literally increase the compute resources on the fly. I mean, we've been running their products since 2002. I have not had any major issues or outages since, and we've deployed this solution globally.

In my impressions of some of the capabilities and scalability of the vSphere products, it allows you to, without having to invest in a large hardware portfolio, it gives you the opportunity to scale on the fly through consolidation efforts.

We were challenged a couple of years, several years back with figuring out ways to cut cost and save money through ingenuity and automation and innovation, and this is one of the tools that was recently released in the early 2006. That's when VMware, I want to really feel like they really ironed out their niche and made this product usable and feasible for our infrastructure. By doing so, we saved a ton of money.

The efforts required to set up vSphere is extremely simplistic. In our market, we have a large turnover from time to time, so it's easy to train and educate those on setting up the vSphere products from the ground up. It's very simplified. The installations are very easy.

Typically, what we do is the installations are done by our own premise resources with little or no experience, so that goes to show you how easy and simplistic the product is to install and or to manage overtime.

There were other competitors out there that we've evaluated that just fell short of this implementation because of their feature set or some of their security vulnerability.

I have not tested Virtual Volumes. That's why I'm here, to learn more about the Virtual Volumes feature along with the NSX platform. I'm excited about it because we have a huge SAN infrastructure where we would like to be able to move workloads from point A to point B and I think that's a good starting point.

I've seen a lot of hypervisors out there, but 10, hands down, in the market.

If I were to recommend this particular product to some of my peers or co-workers or somebody else in another industry, I would clearly state the reliability, the stability, and the ease of use, is which they would fall in love with and they're always innovative. I mean, that's what we love. Every year, we come back to the conference and you learn something new. There's always some good takeaways.

Typically, I would like to hear from the source. I always find myself as an IT technical resource. I tend to like to talk to the people that's actually doing the work and I like to read some of the guys that have the hands-on experience. I don't go out and read a bunch of documents or books per se. I like to engage with the resources that have actually deployed, implement it, because those are your viable resources that have the hands-on experience.

• Virtualization
• Clustering
• High Availability
• All the core functionalities

Allows for substantial increase in server density, reduced spin up times, allows for more remote site management. Recoverability in a server crash situation is substantially improved as well.

User interface and management. The ability to manage the underlying infrastructure is very poorly thought out and implemented. They moved from a C client to a web interface, but still require critical functions to use the client.

I've been using it for seven years, since it was ESX v3.5.

WAN management of sites has some intermittent stability issues.

I would rate it fairly high, as much as I complain about the changes their back end team make, their front end support, and sales guys are very communicative.

We used Microsoft Virtual Server before ESX3.5 was released. We switched because it was not an enterprise grade option.

The setup for the current datacenter was complex, not because of VMware but because of the hosting limitations provided.

We had it initially set up by a vendor team, and I spent four months afterwards fixing their work. I would advise that you verify in advance the skills and knowledge of the implementors.

No attempt to calculate ROI has been made on the current environment.

I am attempting to build an environment around ROBO licensing, which I would advise anyone who has remote offices to investigate. It should cut our costs bytwo-thirds when I am finished.

No evaluation was done.

• Virtualizing everything
• HA
• DRS

When I came, it was already being used, but it helps with consolidation of our 750 machines. We have 50 ESXi hosts, and they’re all consolidated, being able to share memory, computing.

As a partner we have VSPP (VMware Service Provider Program in which we pay per memory usage).

The web client needs to be moved from flash-based to HTML5. I would like an app as well for remote access.

I've had hardly any issues. The ESXi host can stay up and running, and the hardware compatibility is very good, and we're moving towards a virtual appliance (vCenter).

It's easy to scale.

I rarely contast them as I had a terrible experience. The made me take down all the linked nodes, and I need to escalate if I want resolutions.

It's extremely easy, and you can set it up in less than a day. We do nesting virtualizitions and labs all the time.

Go ahead and buy it. I always go with VMware.

The clustering and High Availability features are very useful and valuable.

After implementing VMware alongside some HP solutions, the total ownership cost was reduced significantly, and operational time was also reduced, which resulted in increased productivity and efficiency.

Management features for multi-vendor products for complex environment need work.

I have six years of core experience in design and configuring VMware solutions.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

9/10.

9/10.

We started virtualization with Microsoft Hyper-V v2, but VMware products are more stable and scalable.

It's straightforward.

The first implementation was done by a vendor team, and after that we completed three upgrade project cycles in house.

The cost of licensing is bit on the high side.

We also looked at Microsoft Hyper-V v2.

The ability to handle an entire virtual data center, keep costs under control, and move the workload without having a business impact.

Before virtualization, my company had 20-25 physical server, with one or more services each. These servers were placed in three to four racks.

Now we handle 500 servers (VM's) in half a rack, meaning only 16 physical servers. This solution improves cost, manageability, and growth.

The product is very mature and stable, but vCenter web interface response could be improved.

I've used it for 10 years.

Yes, but by support, we found the solution, a hardware driver for HBA component.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

I've only used them a few times, but they've always answered my queries very well.

It's very high.

We used Xen and KVM, and we switched for the lack of manageability, stability, scalability.

Setup is light work, but many components must be configured with vSphere documentation by hand.

I implemented it in-house.

For every Euro we sold in infrastructure, we gained five to seven Euros in services, because we have less operation costs, a good time to market, and more infrastructure agility.

The price can be very high, but in the case of a service provider with a VSPP program, you can offer the top class vSphere features for two to three sold VM. If you plan a little deployment I suggest bundle kits (Essential and Essential plus).

Yes, KVM and Xen (both opensource), and although they have no upfront costs, these are countered by very high operative costs.

First try this product, evaluate the infrastructure sustainability, and purchase the correct license that fits your needs.