Workspace ONE UEM Reviews

In the main, our primary use case is for controlling mobile devices and deployment of mobile device applications inside the company. We are consultants and implementers and I'm the presales project manager. 

The most valuable feature for us is the contained browser of the product.

There could be improvements to Workspace ONE in terms of the pricing and some security aspects such as data loss prevention. It could be more competitive relative to other solutions on the market. For example, Microsoft EMS is very tightly integrated with Office 365 and that's a big advantage. 

The solution is stable. 

We haven't had any issues in terms of scalability. 

The initial setup is straightforward although the configuration guide is a little outdated.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We use VMware Workspace ONE to manage devices, such as Apple, Windows 10, and Android. We can manage all devices with this solution.

VMware Workspace ONE can ease the jobs of the IT department in an organization by allowing clear visibility on devices and compliance issues.

There should be better compatibility with Linux devices.

I have been using VMware Workspace ONE for approximately five years.

The solution is stable.

VMware Workspace ONE is scalable.

We are certified to do the implementation of the solution.

VMware Workspace ONE can fit any organization because if you need more devices there are only additional fees.

I rate VMware Workspace ONE a ten out of ten.

The product is a DM solution - a device management solution. It's for our users, for moving devices and laptops. 

We have been manually provisioning everything for end-users, however, with this tool, now we have more control over the items on the end-user side and we can regularly update them from one place. It makes everything much easier.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ability to remotely manage the devices. That's what it is meant to do. We can push applications to mobile devices from the portal.

Overall, we've been very happy with VMware.

The initial setup is easy and the deployment doesn't take too long.

I don't see any such areas where we are lacking. I was just doing the evaluation of other products to see if they have something else. However, this isn't missing anything, even when you look at the competition.

The pricing could always be better. It would be nicer if they were cheaper and more competitive.

We've been using the solution over the last 12 months at least. I've been using the solution for the last three years.

The stability of the solution has always been very good. there are no bugs or glitches It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution scales quite well. That's not a problem at all. If a company would like to scale the solution it can do so.

Currently, we have about 250 users on the solution.

The initial setup is not complex. It's very straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the initial setup process.

The deployment took a few days to roll out. We did the implementation about two years ago now, and therefore it's hard to recall exactly what our deployment strategy was at that time.

We had a systems integrator assist us with the initial deployment. We did not completely handle everything in-house by ourselves.

The experience was good. They were able to understand what we need and they deployed it very smoothly.

We have a multi-year contract, however, we'd like the costs to be lowered if possible. Next year we plan to revisit everything and do a price evaluation.

We're a customer and end-users. We've worked with resellers in the past.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the solution at a nine. Its capabilities are good and we've been quite happy with it overall.

We find this solution allows us to deploy apps more efficiently. We have a vendor that developed an app for their software for use in our company. We were able to deploy this custom built app easily.

We also find the Secure Email Gateway very useful. Active-Sync email routes through that server to the exchange server. With this configuration, we were able to lock down Exchange to only allow active-sync email from this server. We were able to configure the email settings within AirWatch to choose which extensions can be allowed on the email on the mobile device, as well as what app can be used to view attachments. There are alot of other options such as forwarding and screenshots that can be disabled, or restricted. We have implemented this with AirWatch Inbox to further lock down the email functionality and secure the email. We have also been able to deploy outlook settings to Windows desktop OS by using AirWatch.

I also like the ability to enroll devices in shared mode, which allows devices to be "checked out" by users by entering their username/password in the AirWatch app. Once they do this, their email is configured, and any apps, etc are downloaded. When they are done, they sign out, and the email and apps are removed.

I do like the remote wipe and how it allows you to locate a device if it is missing and delete the enterprise data, however these are limited on apple devices due to apple policies and cannot be changed by AirWatch. This will be the same on any MDM provider and isn't limited to just AirWatch. For example, if a device is stolen, you can't wipe it if they have it turned off. It will need to phone back home in order to be wiped. Now you can set a wipe after up to 10 passcode failed attempts which will help keep your data safe if it's stolen. You also can't force location services to be enabled by AirWatch. When enrolled, location services has to be enabled (or enabled later in the settings). AirWatch cannot force location services to be turned on due to Apple policies (and this will be the same for any other MDM provider). If the device is stolen and is phoning home, you can't locate it if location services was disabled or never enabled.

Jabber and other applications used often are easily able to be deployed and configured, as is e-mail. Email can also be secured more effectively with their product.

More functionality has been added for Windows desktop devices, and the options for Android and IOS has been fairly extensive already. The only recommendation I could make right now is continuing to add more functionality

We have had this deployed and in production for around 4 years now

No. The deployment is fairly simple.

We encountered an issue with the renewing of the APN certificate, which was due to a bug in the version we were running and was resolved in an update. We have had a need to move the database, and that was fairly difficult as documentation was sparse, and the first support technican said AirWatch would need re-installed. However the next support technician pointed me to the configuration file in the install path that I needed to change settings in.

This has functioned as we expected in scalability.

When we have worked with Customer service, they have most often been helpful, knowledgeable and timely. There have been some instances where they weren't great such as when I needed to move the database. The first technician stated we would need to re-install AirWatch, however I opened a case up again and the next technician pointed me to a configuration file that I just needed to update. There have been other moments when one technician states something isn't supported or possible, but the next technician would state it is and provide information on how to do it.

When we have worked with Technical Support, they have most often been helpful, knowledgeable and timely. If we got one that wasn't, we give it a day and open another case in hopes of getting a better technician.

We used the default exchange settings to manage e-mail however the settings for security and deployment are limited there compared to AirWatch. We also tried to Use Vipre MDM but it was very limited as well when compared to AirWatch.

The setup of AirWatch itself was performed by AirWatch, however the setup of groups, policies, apps, etc. was straightforward.

We implemented this product on our own. It was straightforward and fairly easy to implement.

This product is effective and simple to manage. It has more options that stand-alone products such as Anti-Virus or Exchange.

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 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 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.