Workspace ONE UEM Reviews

Two of the most valuable features are the MDM, mobile device management, and the content management, the containerization management of apps so that I can have clients that bring their own devices to an enterprise as well as enterprise apps, and I have two different solutions of deploying applications to those mobile devices. There are a lot of other aspects other than security that are advanced features in AirWatch that I didn't see in some of the competitor's products.

From an AirWatch standpoint, basically a lot of concerns in the enterprise today are security. With these MDM and mobile content management solutions, an organization can manage their applications without any concern for the end user losing important enterprise data.

For instance, say a person leaves an organization, we can basically, even though they own the device, we can using AirWatch, wipe all the content that's enterprise related off of that device immediately. If it's an enterprise device and it gets lost, we can wipe that device immediately. AirWatch gives you the security built into their solution that's very robust.

I'm so overwhelmed and pleased with the solution that they offer. The solution that I had before was so difficult for me to use that I haven't been able to use it enough to find things that it's lacking. There may be things out there that it's lacking, but I'm not just aware of those at this point.

We use the cloud version. They have a on-premise solution of AirWatch. We use the cloud solution of AirWatch. We found that the responsiveness of that solution far exceeds the competitor products. We used competitor products for a while, and we were consistently encountering issues with stability as far as connectivity, time outs, but the AirWatch solution flawless as far as the cloud solution is concerned.

From a scalability standpoint, it looks like it's really, really robust, but we haven't had the opportunity to scale it up to a high number of users. Just from a scalability standpoint, for instance, the ability to take organizational groups and manage at a lower level of an organization with the multi-tenancy just kind of blew my mind.

I'm amazed that somebody thought about this in advance of the solution of the development of the product so that the solution that comes out would be a solution that you can have like three or four companies under one AirWatch instance. I was amazed.

I myself, haven't used them a lot. When I have used them, it's been stellar. They've been very responsive. What I really like is they have the support infrastructure that allows you to go to their forums and ask questions. I've shared a lot of information with other forum participants and finding solutions to the specific problems that others have had as well as the search capabilities inside the forums are really robust.

There were some issues that we encounter with respect to.... For instance, we would have partners that we work with that have their own apps and they want to put those apps on our devices and use our devices, or they want to have their own devices and use our apps.

The solution that AirWatch had where you can manage just content on a device, or you can manage a device itself as far as an enterprise device, was a lot more flexible, so we were able to put our apps in, say, the Apple App Store and allow our partners to download those apps onto their devices in a containerized solution that we can immediately wipe.

For the cloud solution, it was really straightforward. There are some, they weren't issues, I wouldn't call them issues, there was just some technical obstacles to overcome that were more organizational than anything else related to the AirWatch connector to sync active directory, et cetera with the enterprise.

Right now, I'd rate it a 10 but that's because everything that I've looked at from an AirWatch standpoint that it says it does this, this and this, it has been able to do and do well. You have to realize I have some exposure to experiences where, "Hey, our product does this, this and this." Then we go do those specific things and the product doesn't do it. Whereas with AirWatch, everything that it said it would do, it did out the gate. There wasn't like, "That's the next upgrade," or, "We'll ... " That's my satisfaction.

I think they should consider flexibility. One of the things with respect to AirWatch, and its ability to be flexible in any type of enterprise, and as well as working with external entities from your company that your teams or sales people are working with to deploy whatever solutions to any of your clients. You want something that's going to change so you can adapt it to your specific business model or business environment.

We see what other enterprises are doing. We look at that. Then we also look at some of the Gartner materials that are out there. We use some ITIL Standards to do some evaluations. Basically, we definitely look at what's happening externally in the environment. As you know, this industry is changing so fast. Somebody has a solution but that solution is no longer relevant by the time we implement it.

We used it for the backup and restore. If you have some sort of data that you've lost, you can restore from a previous snapshot.

It was an excellent product. It was very good for recovering lost files and folders for customers.

It was easy to use. I don't really remember it very well. I used it for a short time frame, but it was fairly easy to use. It was fairly streamlined and worked well to some extent for backup.

There could be ease of integration within the environment. I didn't have any issues when using it, but the integration part was a bit difficult for the other team. 

I used it in my previous position for about a year and a half. I believe it was the latest version.

I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of stability.

It's scalable. There were probably over a thousand machines.

I have not used their support.

We didn't use any other solution.

I didn't set it up. It was set up by a different team for the customer. I was only responsible for managing the backup and recovering the files. Its implementation took about six months period. 

In terms of maintenance, it was just myself. There wasn't much maintenance to do apart from getting the latest version and ensuring it was applied to all machines. 

It was definitely worth the money. It was an excellent product.

There was a commercial team that dealt with that. My guess is that its licensing was yearly. There was probably no fee in addition to the standard licensing fee.

I'd recommend it. I'd rate it an eight out of ten.

We have used the solution to deploy for corporate organizations and also for complex networks.

I would say that VMware has actually met all of our requirements. I don't feel like we presently need to actually have any improvements. It's actually a good fit, especially for our market.

The security features could always use improvement, although there has already been a huge improvement from years ago.

The solution is scalable.

The solution was easy to deploy.

I have an internal team for the deployment. Interestingly, I actually am the founder of a company, and one of the other founders of the company is a VMware partner.

The price is high. Also, the infrastructure requirements are huge. We're looking at three locations then I'm also looking at connectivity in between locations and then I'm also looking at the application.

I'm currently in the process of testing the solution. In terms of cost, I'd probably go with HP or VMware. We have a number of VMware implementations, so VMware is the only solution that we have actually used.

Generally, I am satisfied with VMware because they have been quite responsive in terms of the kind of challenges that we have in the Central African region. We have solutions that are very scalable. It's also very flexible, especially with regard to multi-cloud infrastructure. In other areas, it's actually not more capable in terms of running the virtual machine. It's also more flexible in terms of the choice of hardware that you'd actually like to use.

We haven't actually used VMware outside of the test environment. Previously, one of our challenges was providing enough security in the virtual environment but VMware achieved that years ago. I don't quite see any urgent need for me, but maybe other organizations may require VMware for a more complex deployment. For us, VMware, pretty good.

It's also scalable, it's more affordable, and it's also easier to deploy. It's not restrictive to particular hardware. VMware meets practically all of our expectations at this point.

I would rate this solution nine out of 10.

We use this solution for the secure email gateway. This solution is deployed on-premises. 

There are about 500 people using this solution in my company.

The solution is used to secure corporate data for end-users.

If an end-user has an issue with a device, the administration has the ability to remote access the device after approval from the end-user.

There could be improvement with processing the environment to be more user friendly for the end user.

The solution is stable.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I would rate technical support a 3.

Setup is easy.

The license is paid annually.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

It's a very complex solution. It's used to manage any operating system devices with internet connections. I would recommend this solution because it's simple for end-users.

We have many use cases in our customer's environment and use this solution to manage applications on devices. We have clients with Android devices, Apple devices with macOS, and Rugged devices with Windows CE.

The location and remote management services are the most valuable.

The location service could improve and more integration with other devices, such as Android enterprise and Apple devices.

We are having some issues with JavaScript or XML, and there is not any information provided for resolving it.

I have been using this solution for approximately four years.

The stability is good. However, there is some downtime.

The solution scalability is very good.

We have clients mostly in medium to large-scale enterprises. In some of our large customers, they have approximately 1,300 devices using the soltuion.

We have not had good experiences with technical support. We have many tickets remaining that are unresolved. The agents could improve by having better knowledge and faster response time.

There could be more troubleshooting information provided because sometimes we do not know how to resolve a problem or issue.

The on-premises version of the solution installation is complex.

We do the implementation of the solution and the time depends on the client's environment. It could take up to two weeks to implement but it depends a lot on the client's infrastructure.

We have a team of two engineers that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

Our clients have evaluated Soti. Mainly to resolve issues and problems with some devices that are using JavaScript environments.

I rate VMware Workspace ONE a nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature is the User Experience Designer, which has been very helpful for our project.

I would like to have better support for multi-cloud sessions.

The cost of this solution should be lower.

I have been using the VMware Identity Manager for five or six years.

This is a stable product.

VMware Identity Manager is scalable and we have approximately ten users.

Technical support from VMware is one of the best in the market.

I have also worked with Amazon AWS Directory Service and Google Cloud Identity. I find that there is no normalization in these solutions.

The initial setup is easy.

Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to be close attention to the rights that are given to end-users. This is a critical aspect.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

AirWatch has one of the best User Interfaces and it's quite easy to figure out where particular items are within the menu system.

They have good functionality across all the major platforms, too.

It has allowed employees to access their apps from their mobile or tablet while on the go, essentially freeing them from their old desktop workstations.

There is a lack of a real developer community. AirWatch doesn't seem to empower IT admins to try new things or get creative with implementations. They are more happy to sell you one of their support subscriptions.

I've used this solution for six years.

Some features like the AirWatch Launcher on Android can be very quirky.

The enrollment process on Android devices has always created challenges with scalability.

Scalability on iOS is seamless if you have developed a try zero touch build via AirWatch's integration with Apple's DEP and VPP deployment programs.

A three out of 10.

I manage Mobile Iron environments as a professional service. Through previous roles, I also have had exposure to InTune, SOTI MobiControl, and IBM MaaS360.

Not particularly, they are all evenly matched here.

Don't make compromises when enticed by enterprise license agreements for other products that may include their own MDM for a substantially low price.

You should take out a dedicated license agreement of your MDM fleet and invest heavily in innovating in this space. I've seen many companies that buy into MDM and don't make a continued investment in evolving their use cases.

Zen Mobile, Good, Silverback, and MobileIron.

Have a long term plan in place and spend more time on designing the solution before rolling out. Never lose sight in what your key motivators are, whether it's enablement, scalability, security, or governance.

I am the CEO of our company and we implemented VMware to help our users when they go to different source applications. We wanted that to be easier for them.

I'm happy with the interface and dashboards but the most valuable feature comes from the name of the product - it's now called VMware Access, so it's the access to the different applications and so on that makes it a good product. It provides a single page where you can log in to all of your applications. It saves time and simplifies the work because it has to have the application for iOS, Android, Windows, and Mac OS web-based too. So basically all of our users can use all the applications from any platform. It helps the end-users to work on the road without needing to set up all kinds of VPN connections, etc. There's access to all the applications you want, whenever you want them.

I think the product could be improved by making it more independent. For now, it's very dependent on an active directory so that you could basically tie into us for A, B or some other IDP that they provide.

Another aspect that could be improved in the next release is to have local language support. It's not a big issue because you have their icon soft applications there, but it would be nice to have the Finnish language there as well.

Additional features they could include would be integration with Microsoft Windows desktop, which is the VDI for Microsoft. I have heard that they plan to do that so I'm looking forward to getting that in there.

The product is very stable. 

The product is very scalable. I think it would scale to tens of thousands if needed, but we don't need that much.

The cloud version is quite simple and straightforward. The initial setup and implementation took one day and of course then each application where you want to do the single sign-on. That requires planning because it needs to be done at a certain time. But then if you want to define integration there, you have to wait for the right time. Then a second application after one week, and then possibly once a week after that and so on. It takes some time, of course. You need to decide when you want to integrate the applications because it has to be done one at a time, not everything at once. 

We checked a couple of other options before going with the product, but because we have VMware, MDM, it meant that Air Watch mobile device management is used so it was a natural step that led to using Identity Manager there as well.

We deploy both on-premises and cloud. The auto-prem is easier but the cloud is much better. It's important when installing that the roadmap of the application integration is carried out correctly. 

I would rate this product an eight out of 10.