VMware vSphere Reviews

We use vSphere to create virtual machines, connect them with centralized storage, and manage the vSphere servers. Many of our customers use vSphere. It's famous in Egypt.

VMware vSphere has very good applications and services.

We've been working with vSphere for about three years.

VMware vSphere is scalable.

VMware support is very helpful. Their team is very knowledgeable and useful.

Setting up vSphere is very easy. It takes about three or four technicians to implement, including one manager and three admins.

We pay for an annual subscription. We recommend users pay for VMware support because you might need it. We cannot use it without the support license. Here in Egypt, we would like everything free. So if you give us the license for free, we would be thrilled.

I rate vSphere 10 out of 10. I would recommend it to others. 

VMware vSphere is user friendly. It is scalable and stable, which are very important attributes for us.

The installation is a little bit complex.

VMware vSphere needs to increase the datastore volume.

I've been using it for 10 years.

It is stable.

It is a scalable solution.

The installation is not overly complex. The integration project took two months, and the upgrade to version 6.7 took a lot of time.

For deployment and maintenance, you need a team of three or four admins and engineers.

We worked with an integrator.

We evaluated Hyper-V.

I would recommend this solution and rate it at ten on a scale from one to ten.

The product is primarily used as a way to consolidate systems and leverage hardware resources more efficiently.

The solution has offered very good stability so far. It doesn't give us any issues.

You don't need too many people to manage the solution once it's up and running.

The HTML 5 client has always lagged behind. It would be nice if this wasn't the case. It's one of the key areas that they need to improve on.

In a previous company, I did not have a very good experience with technical support.

The main problem with the product is how it manages its snapshotting technology, which would need a complete ground-up rebuild. Likely, they won't put that in, however, basically, if you have an old snapshot, you want to get rid of it. It crushes the environment. This is due to the fact that all of your changes have to be written back to disk when you're deleting something versus just deleting it.

I've only been working with the solution for as long as I have been working for the company, which has been less than a year at this point.

The solution is very stable. It's quite reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's been good.

We've never tried to scale the solution. I can't speak to how easy or difficult it is to expand it out if a company needs to.

While I've never had to reach out to technical support while at this company, I have had to use technical support in the past when I was at a different organization. It was no a very good experience. I wasn't satisfied with the level of support provided at all. They were pretty bad. 

The solution was deployed by the company before I arrived. I wasn't a part of the process. Therefore, I can't speak to how easy or difficult it was or how long the deployment process actually was. I don't have any visibility or insights into that.

There are two main people that can go into the management console and perform maintenance duties as necessary.

I don't handle the licensing or payments process and therefore don't have visibility into how much the solution costs or what the payment structure is.

We are just customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

It's my understanding that we are using the latest version of the solution, although I don't know the exact version number.

I would definitely recommend this solution to other organizations. For the most part, I've been very satisfied with its capabilities.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

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.

• Cloud computing service (IaaS)
• Private/hybrid cloud
• Virtualization infrastructure
• Virtualization desktop infrastructure.

• High availability causes downtime service because it is needed to reboot VMs.
• Fault tolerance is limited by the four vCPUs.
• The service provider is not easy to integrate via API like OpenStack.

• vCloud Director, because we may use it as the dashboard for providing cloud services.
• vCenter 
• vSphere, because it helps us in the management of thousands of VMs in the coverage UI.

The SDK/API to help SPs (service providers) provide the pay-as-you-go business model in cloud service.

It is a powerful solution which enables us to take a snapshot and clone any virtual machine. It is also a centralized platform for hypervisoring that speeds up the migration between the nodes. 

It has a very high speed, which is a nice feature. 

This solution should have a better backup policy. Furthermore, there should be an ability to expose the universal machine. In the current version, you need to shutdown and use an offline virtual machine to backup.

It is a very stable product.

We previously used Hyper-V, and we found a lot of problems with taking snapshots of our virtual machines. It also was not very stable. 

The setup was very easy. There were guidelines, and we simply followed the steps. The deployment took around three days. 

It is expensive. Other solutions on the market are free. We had to plan with VMware how many hosts that we needed in order to determine the price. 

• Enterprise Infrastructure.
• We are distributed across the nation and are primarily all remote employees. I was able to build our private cloud with the tool.
  
  

We are distributed across the nation and are primarily all remote employees. I was able to build our private cloud with the tool.

Virtualization of our environment has made our carbon footprint, the real estate necessary and the ease of deployment in time savings significant.

The thick client had features that were removed from the HTML5 web console and it has caused a learning curve deficiency. Training could be more customer-centric.

I'm building a VDI center and a second-tier user. In terms of mission-critical apps, we use it for our executive pool of users to secure their everyday work. Sometimes we use it for distance education programs as well.

It has been performing pretty well.

We have seen a boost in performance in terms of delivery, but in everyday work, it's just like any other. Our delivery lift is probably more than 50 percent.

In terms of delivery, very often we would have requests for adding some new applications which were not previously there. And in previous deliveries, we would have to lose a day or so to prepare the application. Today it takes me about two hours at the most.

Its most valuable features are reliability, for sure, and quickness in getting the job done. I can spin off 100 or 200 machines in the matter of half an hour.

If I could talk to the engineers I would probably suggest a little bit different approach. There's a process that includes base-lining, then installing the program, and then doing the differentiation. That kind of approach for delivering applications, in my opinion, is way quicker. That approach would take me not more than half an hour to prepare any application. That's a feature I would like to see.

We haven't had any stability problems.

From my point of view, it scales really well; in terms of storage, I don't know.

Test it, give it a try, and see how it goes. Definitely try it.

For me, the most important criteria when looking for a vendor are

• reliability
• ease of use
• customer support.

I would rate it at eight out of 10 because there is still room for improvement. However, we are not using the full extent of the product so I might be wrong. There is some room for improvement in the ease of use.