Workspace ONE UEM Reviews

One of our customers used it for centralizing and managing the identity and access of a SaaS-based solution. They used Workspace ONE to provide identity-based services and authentication, such as MFA. It integrates with Microsoft Office, Google Cloud, and things of that nature.

It is deployed in the cloud with a tie-in. It synchronizes to on-prem.

It has really easy and quick onboarding. Its transition and migration capabilities have been very helpful as we transition applications to the cloud. It was a central piece for enabling that to happen very quickly.

Clear and concise documentation is most valuable. That's a feature for me. 

Its UI is extremely easy to use whether you're an advanced user or a novice user. When I first opened it up and had to learn the product, I was easily a novice. By the end of the third month, I was digging into the backend of the system and using it as a highly advanced user to accomplish what I needed to accomplish, and I was able to do it through the UI mostly.

Support is probably the main challenge that we have. Their support was not very good. We had to tell them what we told them four or five times.

This product makes use of SAML across the board, which has seven known security flaws. It would be good if the company created a way to protect against SAML flaws. One way would be to integrate a firewall server or an endpoint out in the cloud with which you could establish trust. If you knew nothing about SAML and you did some Google searches about what SAML is, what are the flaws, and what are the known vulnerabilities, eventually, you'll find that there are seven flaws. There are two methods that you can use to solve those seven problems. They essentially involve putting a firewall or putting rules, such as access controls, so that anybody in the world can't just come in, authenticate, and either be a good guy or be someone trying to knock on my door and get into my house. If I could eliminate that, it would be awesome.

I used it about 30 days ago. It was a three-month project.

We didn't run into any bugs. In terms of performance, we didn't really test it for performance. We were not at all looking at performance metrics.

It seems like it would scale, but I can't really be sure because we did not test the scalability.

Our client has probably 2,000 people with all types of job roles. They are admins, engineers, and then there are regular users with no special privileges.

Their support needs to be improved. I don't know if this is a new area that the support people are learning, but the people supporting the product, or at least the people giving us the response back from support, were not very good. We had to tell them what we told them four or five times.

I didn't use any other solution previously.

There were five people involved. We had everyone from network architects to myself, an enterprise architect, and then we had representatives from each application. Everyone had their own little part to do, but the deployment was pretty straightforward and simple. It was so simple that we didn't believe some of the documentation. All you need to do is B and then C. It took having a little bit of faith and just walking through the instructions, and then, of course, we had to blow everything away and start again to try to repeat the deployment process so that we knew that all the steps were valid and accurate in multiple use cases, and they were.

It took us two and a half to three days to stand up the product. From there, onboarding applications went from two weeks to two days.

It requires ongoing maintenance. It's like running a cruise ship. You need to constantly monitor and maintain the product. We do that on behalf of our client.

It's definitely a bit on the expensive side. It is more for smaller organizations and not large, massive enterprises.

I am not sure about any additional costs. As far as we could tell, the billing was what the billing was.

Workspace ONE is one component of the solution. It is not the solution in itself. Workspace ONE is the front door and the locking mechanisms of all the doors, but you only need that if you're going to build a house.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

It's a SIEM solution. It's a solution used to manage the identity of the users. It also makes a federation for the data applications and gives access to the users, and provisions the users in other applications, including SaaS applications (for example, Microsoft 365, SoundDesk, or Salesforce). 

We use it to provide the users a smooth authentication to the applications with, for example, mobile, or a log in with a certificate from the Windows machines.

Our users have a lot of cloud applications. To manage those, you have to manage all these passwords and users' names and provide access to a lot of services. Potentially, the users could forget their user names and passwords and everything like that. We provide smooth access with mobile SSO to these solutions with one click. The user just opens the catalog applications in the device, and those devices could be, for example, iOS or Android or Windows or macOS or Chrome OS, et cetera. They open the catalog and with just one click on they have access. They don't need separate passwords, user names, et cetera.

Its value is when you use it with a Workspace ONE UEM solution as it is part of the ecosystem for VMware Workspace ONE.

Technically speaking, it's a very good product.

The setup of the product is not complex.

The license could be better. You can't simply license access to services for devices - you have to license the product to users. The problem with that is some companies don't have licenses for the whole user catalog and just offer licenses for the devices themselves, meaning they aren't directly attached to a user. That's the main problem of Identity Manager.

In terms of stability, the performance in the SaaS environment is pretty good. The problem is, with the on-premises version, there can be hardware problems. That said, it depends on the machines that the customer use. Usually, the service is fast and you don't have any problem with the performance. It uses sometimes a lot of resources though.

It's not easy to scale it if you have a setup on-premises as it's necessary to build a cluster, and clusters are not easy to build. However, in the SaaS environment, there is no problem, it's very scalable.

Our company is a small company. We are 200 people. However, I have a lot of customers and a lot of Identity Managers deployed; there are maybe millions of people. 

Technical support is not bad, however, they are not as good as it could be. 

We are currently migrating to Okta, a different product. 

Most clients did not previously use a different solution. Identity Manager was their first. 

The initial setup of the product is very simple and quite straightforward. 

The deployment process does not require a big team. For a big company with, for example, 10,000 users or more, you can manage it with three or four people. It's enough. The amount of time it takes can range from a few days to a few weeks depending on the size of the project. It's usually less than a month. 

If it's an on-premises deployment, you do have a bit of maintenance, however, if you have a SaaS deployment, there is no maintenance required. With on-premises, you just make some changes or add new applications or new users, and that is quite simple. The problems come when you need to upgrade versions if you have the solution on-premise.

In terms of pricing, it's reasonable if you have the Workspace ONE solution. If you don't have the full solution, it's quite expensive.

There are no extra costs beyond the standard licensing fee. 

We have a partnership with this product.

We use both Software as a Service and also on-premises deployment models. That said, the on-premises version is not exactly the same as the SaaS one. 

I would recommend people to use it only if they have Workspace ONE, Workspace ONE UEM, the Unified Endpoint Management.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. 

At the time, our primary use case was for the purpose of having single authentication around endpoints. Every single endpoint was managed by Workspace ONE: iOS, Android devices, and Windows standard devices. We were provisioning payloads. We had a trust relationship between Workspace ONE and the vIDM console, and we were handling certificates around those, to provide seamless certification. In the end, a user with specific applications wouldn't be required to type in any username, password, etc. 

vIDM was a SaaS-based solution, at the time, where you had the vIDM connectors in case you were required to have LDAP Synchronization. It was completely on a dedicated cloud from VMware. 

One of the main benefits was end user experience. Imagine that your business apps on your mobile device, for instance, no longer require you to type in your username, password, or second factor of authentication—as long as you're handling a managed and trustworthy device, you can seamlessly log in to applications. In the past, I personally integrated it with applications like SAT and Salesforce. As long as the application offered integration, we could easily do this. 

One of the features that I enjoyed most was the integration with Azure AD because I could use VMware Identity Manager to standardize the User Principal Name coming from Active Directory. You have Azure AD Connect to do that. In between, if you have vIDM handling it, you can easily get the synchronization of users into your VM and standardize the User Principal Name. If you require quality assurance for handling it, you can actually count on the vIDM to do so. That was one of the main things I enjoyed about the product. 

vIDM could be improved with the multi-tenant capabilities that VMware tends to offer—features like customization branding and the integration of the app catalog based on the branding. Since the integration has been at top-level OGs, you were not able to then do rebranding if you were required to use specific user groups to highlight specific applications. At the time, I was personally opening feature requests for these things. I haven't worked with the latest release, so I don't know if these features were already deployed or not. 

I used vIDM for about four years, though the last time I worked with it was about a year ago. 

I can't recall having any problems with stability or performance. 

The maintenance, regarding the core system, was provided by VMware directly. For the connectors hosted on our on-prem infrastructure, maintenance was handled by the team responsible for the product. 

It's easy to scale, since it's in the cloud. We never had to worry about scalability. 

At the time, there were about 120,000 people in the company using this solution. 

VMware has the standard support, and then they have enterprise support or special contracts for enterprise support with dedicated teams. We never had to deal with the default, but nonetheless, there will always be glitches around tech support. We were quite knowledgeable about the products, so if we actually raised a ticket, it was because something was definitely not working and there was a bug on the product itself. It was mostly the case that it would be dropped at the product management team directly. 

The deployment was complex, considering the infrastructure. Our organization has more than 400,000 users, so the complexity of the in-house infrastructure is quite high, which implies some complexity during the deployment process as well. You need to interact with several teams regarding identity management or identity access management. On a small-sized company, it may be quite straightforward. 

We first collected the requirements, which was straightforward. Then—this will depend on the size of the organization—we had five or six people around the required services. They came from Active Directory, the main identity provider, the application owners for service provider integration, and it took them a few days. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. 

I rate vIDM a nine out of ten. During the time I worked with it, it was a really nice product, and it was straightforward and reliable. 

All the use cases are related to Salesforce and people who are working outside the office. Sometimes, they register their PCs inside the office in Workspace ONE to manage them and push some software or install it remotely and some kind of things.

It's easier to install new software remotely using Workspace ONE because you don't need to stay in the office or maybe connected to a certain server in order to install that software. So it's easier to manage PCs, laptops, phones, and desktops.

Workspace ONE has something like an orchestrator model that allows me to configure a set of steps to onboard new PCs, laptops, or tablets. So, it makes my work easy.

One thing VMware needs to improve is compatibility with different operating systems. Sometimes, customers have old operating systems that are outside the compatibility metrics of Workspace ONE UEM. So sometimes it's difficult to request customers to upgrade those old PCs, and that's a problem for me.

I have been using this solution for three years. We have different versions, but currently it's 20.1. It is the latest version because we use the cloud version.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

I have deployed different kinds of architectures. Some are easier, and some are complex, but I have deployed Workspace ONE many times.

I have deployed Workspace ONE, UEM, and Workspace ONE Access.

The return on investment is big because the administrators of those PCs do much less work to manage those pieces. So, it works.

I would advise just being clear about your use case and what issue you want to solve in your business. Try the drive test of Workspace ONE in VMware. It can give you some insights about this solution.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We deploy this solution for enterprise-size organizations. We are VMware partners and resellers. I am the CEO of a system integration company.

Valuable features of this solution are the device management and the good integration with third parties. The product has improved steadily over the years. 

I'd like to see a more Microsoft-oriented product with a modern enterprise mobility management platform fully integrated with a Windows ecosystem and the capability to natively integrate with SCCM for a common management for a hybrid workspace. The solution lacks a specific environment such as Windows. I would also like to see a more specific customization for each single platform, such as macOS, Apple devices, and the like. It would make the product more competitive. 

I've been using this solution for over five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

The technical support is usually quite good once you escalate past the first level. 

The initial setup is an easy process. It's more complex than if it were a cloud solution but comparing the platform with some other on-premise solutions it's quite easy. 

Licensing costs are similar to other products and I believe the cost is reasonable. 

The solution is good, particularly the latest version. I would recommend moving to the Cloud version, because I believe there is a VMware offset version of the product. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We mainly use the solution for deployed iPhones and tablets. I'm a telecom and mobile device support analyst. 

Once you get to know the solution it's quite simple to use. It's really a matter of pushing profiles. Ease of use is a good aspect. 

The main negative issue is the cost of licensing. In terms of additional features, it's hard to say because I know there are other options out there, add-ons and other things that are within workspace and available,but I haven't had time to investigate. We're not going to be supported after next year.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

That area is all connected with the upgrades. We've had some issues and we've had to have a contractor come in to help us scale up. 

We're in contact with customer support all the time and they are pretty good on the phone, Because they have a 24-hour support desk, we always get somebody in India and sometimes there's a bit of a language barrier but on the whole, they're good. 

I don't deal with the licensing myself but we've got 1,500 devices so you can get an idea of what the cost is going to be. We have 500 users in the company. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

Our customers use it as a single catalog for all of the resources. 

The most valuable feature is single sign-on. It is a true SSO. For example, you can use fingerprint authorization from your Apple iPhone to unlock all of your desktops, corporate applications, and so on.

Our customers primarily use cataloging features.

VMware provides a good user experience in terms of the interface.

There is an application authorization process, where a user will request an application and it will go through a process. It follows a workflow and will request authorization from the user's superior, or perhaps the IT department. It makes it really easy when it comes to application management.

We have a lot of problems when it comes to integrating with Active Directory. Simply, it is not consistent when you configure it.

When I compare this with other solutions, the customization is really limited when it comes to cataloging.

Scaling this solution is difficult and it should be easier to do.

It would be really great if, in the future, endpoint management was integrated into the Identity Manager dashboard. It would mean that a single dashboard could be used to control all of the features in this space.

I have been working with VMware Identity Manager for three years.

VMware Identity Manager is really stable. It is smooth and works really nicely.

When it comes to scalability, VMware Identity Manager is more complicated than other solutions. You need to have a second connector to get high availability, for example. When you want to scale vertically or horizontally, it is going to take some effort.

All of my clients are enterprise-level organizations.

Our very first contact with technical support was really bad. After the engineering stuff had been completed, I had to implement it again from scratch.

Since that time, technical support has been fine and all of our subsequent cases went smoothly.

The initial setup is straight forward is the most recent version. In the past, in version 17 for example, we had a lot of problems during installation. Nowadays, there are just a few things to do. It is a virtual appliance and it is really easy to deploy.

If the prerequisites are done correctly, to deploy the product and complete the integration will take at most three hours.

It is usually two people who deploy this solution. Most of the time, I handle the implementation. I normally have one person involved from the client site, who will take care of the prerequisites.

There are two ways that you can license the Identity Manager and you can choose the one that works best for you. You can pay on a monthly basis, which is called VCPP (VMware Cloud Provider Program), or you can buy a perpetual license that you pay for only once.

When it comes to usage licensing, you can pay for concurrent usage, pay on a per-user basis, or pay on a per-device basis.

We pay approximately $6.50 per user for the standard version. If you are paying for an enterprise license that includes VDI then it will cost approximately $25 per user on a monthly basis.

In addition to the standard licensing fees, you need some kind of database that you need a separate license for. Also, if you are using the cloud-based deployment then you will have to license a connector.

The biggest lesson that I have learned when working with this product is that you can publish to a repository, rather than using a simple network share. Our customer was very happy with this.

Overall, this is a pretty good product that can do many things.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We are a large school managing Mac devices on all levels. We manage the iPads, push education through the iPads, and AirWatch works great. We use it to do a lot of tasks for the school work - manage teachers devices, student devices, and lab computer devices.

We used to have a system before, Mac OS Open Directory server and this open directory became obsolete because Apple decided to stop the enterprise market, so there was no other alternative for us to use. We chose this to replace the open directory and we found that it has many more features than the previous solution. We totally rely on it right now to manage all the devices on campus.

Managing Mac Devices with profiles. Pushing Apps to iOS devices.

The accuracy of the management function has room for improvement. It's important to us because sometimes we send a profile to the machine and it's pending but doesn't reach. And we have to go manually and push it. Also, Chromebook management needs a lot to be improved. 

It's very stable despite the accuracy component that I want them to focus on improving.

Scalability is great for us. When we evaluated other solutions, they didn't meet our scalability needs. 

We have it deployed have on our entire server. All of our accounts propagate to 1500 users. It's great to have all of our users being managed by one central service.

It's a newer solution and I use it at school so I always rely on their technical support. Sometimes they are great, but sometimes they are not.

I switched to AirWatch because it is compatible with different platforms like Windows, Mac, iOS devices, Chromebooks devices. The previous solution we were using did support Mac ONLY.

The initial setup was straightforward with the consultant's help, but without, I couldn't do it by myself. The documentation is not enough to do the implementation of the product. You still need a consultant to guide you. 

The deployment changes every year and the policies change every year. The time it takes to deploy depends on how many devices you have. If you're like ourselves and have a ton of devices, it takes a month to finish the deployment.

For our implementation strategy, we moved on the groups of the policies that were assigned for each. Our strategy was to bend different policies on each so we can get the most of the features we needed to apply to each group.

We used a consultant from France. He was excellent and guided us through the setup of the contact and the implementation. 

If you purchase it for one year, it is very expensive. If you get it for three years or up to five years, then you can bargain a better price.

Jamf Casper.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. They need to make it so that you can add more tools to work so that it can cover all of the management tools that you need to manage all of the devices. 

I highly recommend AirWatch because it covers the compatibility issue. For an organization like us, we have the same platform and want to manage multiple devices, and it is the best solution for us right now.