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.

We use this solution for mobile device management. At the moment, we are focused on managing iPhones.

The most valuable feature is the security policies.

Part of the SaaS environment is the VMware identity provider, which we use to provide single sign-on for mobile phones and apps.

The SaaS environment is not very responsive at times, so the performance can be improved in that regard.

The initial setup could be easier to do.

This is a very stable product. We haven't had any problems with it, including after any updates that were made.

The scalability is very nice. As a cloud-based solution, there is no problem with this. We have approximately 2,600 users and we plan to increase our usage in the future.

The technical support from VMware is normally perfect, although sometimes, it is not fast enough. Typically, we receive answers in adequate time so overall, it is okay.

We started with VMware Workspace ONE and did not use another product beforehand.

The initial setup is not very easy.

For the deployment, two people were required. Only one person is needed to maintain it.

We needed a partner to assist us with deployment.

Our intention was to improve the security of our mobile devices. ROI is not really quantifiable.

There is a licensing fee for the users, and we pay a low amount for our support costs. We hire a consultancy for support but it is not very expensive.

We evaluated Microsoft Intune and a third product. Ultimately, we decided to implement VMware Workspace ONE.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to look deeply at the technical details, right at the beginning. Doing so is necessary and makes it easier to start the project, as well as for integration.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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. 

We use VMware Workspace ONE for our Android devices. I also use it for handheld scanners.

From a remote management perspective, I like the management and the inventory.

In terms of Workspace ONE, we are migrating it from on-premises to the cloud.

I would like to see more service notifications.

We have been using VMware Workspace ONE for five years.

VMware Workspace ONE is stable. We do have a few outages, but they are few and far between. We were able to recover quickly.

Scalability is a problem because we have a service provider who is supposed to maintain the backend with patching. As a result, when we want to use a remote capability the environment must be updated.

The technical support is good.

We use Jamf, for our MacBook Space and our Apple Mac Space.

I prefer working with Jamf. When we did a side-by-side pilot, and I found it to be easier.

When I focus on one product, I gain a better understanding. It is the Apple brand, in my opinion. I now have a better grasp of the policies and groups.

It's pretty simple in my opinion, but I'm not the technical owner. I was just collaborating with a colleague to assist him with it, but it was fairly simple.

I don't have a view on pricing.

I would rate VMware Workspace ONE a six out of ten.

We use it for device management. We have an on-premise environment, we are looking to go to cloud, and we want to manage the device, manage the applications of the device, manage the contents, and of course, manage e-mail on the device.

There are various MDM vendors, and I've used at least five of them. The reason I prefer AirWatch is simply because it helps me to think more in terms of a future perspective. It has given me the right tools for my enterprise. That's the key thing. It aligns with our IT strategy in a very good way.

For me, the integration of AirWatch with various enterprise components is something I like. The way they are partnering with various services, like security services, or some of the big guys like Google, Android, Apple, and including Microsoft; that's really awesome. And the way they look at providing functionality to create self-service and automation, that's really usefully and beneficial. That's where I see they differentiate themselves.

AirWatch has all the features. One of the things that I want them to improve on, if possible, is the management of Mac devices, MacBook Pro, for example. They do it, but they have scope for improvement, in my opinion. It's not that it's that bad, it's just a small need. They have set the bar very high already so that's the expectation.

It's absolutely stable, no issues.

We have a large instance. We have tens of thousands of devices already, and I don't think there are any issues at that scale. We are probably one of the top-10 customers in terms of scale.

Technical support is really awesome. They follow up, they have it 24/7, they handle things in multiple regions. It's not like just one person will be there and they're not responsive. They are responsive, they ensure that they give the right priority to their customers. If it's a critical item, which means it's a showstopper, they do help us immediately and ensure that there is proper follow-up among the team members. It's not like they leave you hanging there. There are very good documented records in terms of what actions have been taken, and what the next engineer is going to come in and do.

I was the one who set it up. It was not complex, it was an appliance-based setup and it was pretty easy. AirWatch was there, but I was the one who was there from day one.

It's important to understand your requirements: What is important, what is your environment, and what are you looking for? If you are a government company, that means you are looking at a lot of data protection, security is the highest priority. If your back office is Microsoft and you are looking at an integration with your Microsoft products, that would be a different thing. If you are a salesperson, with Salesforce and you're application oriented... it all depends. Each organization has different needs. It depends on your priorities, what you need in terms of making sure your productivity, your top line and the bottom line, grow. It's nothing like one size fits all.

When selecting a vendor, there are multiple things to consider, there is not just one. But one of the things I would really look at this moment, because so many vendors already give that, is the ability to do discovery/self-services analytics: How the solution is going to help. It should give some kind of a blueprint in terms of what's happening in an enterprise, so that you can take an informed decision. I would make analytics a key decision point.

I rate AirWatch at about nine out of 10. I would not give them 10 because there is always room for improvement. I have had no issues and it has been really awesome for me. I have been using it for five years, and I have seen how they have moved up on the ladder, how they've integrated, how they have gone forward moving into the enterprise, and the rate of change, of transformations. It's really excellent.

Our use case of this solution is for the Zero Trust feature; when anyone from the company logs in, the authentication goes through VMware Access and checks that only devices owned by our company can access all their source and on-premise applications. I'm CEO of the company. 

We use the solution in conjunction with Okta and that is perfect because it enables us to set it up and get the best out of the Zero Trust implementation. Both the identity MSA as well as the device are checked at the same time.

Using the solution on Android requires a special setup, the mobile SSO doesn't work as well. It would be easier if it was integrated and we could do it similarly to the iOS SSO setup. 

Our users access the solution every day and we haven't had a single stability issue in the past 12 months. It just works. We have one person working part-time on maintenance which is usually when we have changes to our applications, otherwise, it just runs in the background. Because it's a SaaS service all the upgrades are done automatically in the cloud. 

We've done 10,000 implementations globally and we have 250 users in the company. The advantage of it being a SaaS application means that even small companies, say 10 or 20 people, can use it. There's no financial hindrance to doing that.

They have a very knowledgeable guy, who's worked on the development side and provides us with good service. With some of the bigger US software companies, getting through the first level of support can be tedious.

The initial setup is pretty simple. We deployed internally, we have really good senior consultants who carry out the installations for us and for our customers. Deployment takes a maximum of two days. 

The solution is licensed per user. It's part of their advanced package, and it comes together with the MDM part. Depending on your needs, the license can be $40, $60, or $100 per year. It's an SaaS subscription.

VMware bought AirWatch mobile management and married Identity Manager with MDM. When VMware and Okta started working together for Adobe, they needed to make it work successfully. When we got the results, it was a no-brainer for us.

It's important to look at the bigger picture to get the full benefit of the product. It can be tailor-made to suit your needs. Some countries might not be able to access it or they might find that there's an extra MFA. MDM or Identity Manager separately are not enough. You need both, as well as Okta to get the full story, so to speak. They work closely with VMware so that the pieces all work together with their product. It's perfect for our customers and our company. The important thing is that it's developing all the time and they are constantly working on it, so if it's good now, it will be good in two years as well.

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

We use AirWatch for mobility management. We leverage all the basic functionalities this solution provides, such as MDM, MAM, MCM, MBM, and MIM.

Our company provides managed services to customers. We are a partner and managed services provider, and we help with the installation, implementation, and configuration of VMware solutions.

We are working with its latest version. In terms of deployment, it is a mix. Some of our customers opt for the on-prem model, and some of our customers want a site-based model.

Remote management is most valuable. It allows you to manage multiple types of devices. It is not just limited to laptops or desktops. You can also manage IoT devices. If a device is lost or stolen, you can easily take control of the device without letting any information get leaked.

Feature-wise, it is fine, but its pricing could be better, given that Microsoft is on a bundling spree. AirWatch would benefit from reducing the license pricing per user per month.

It has been a couple of years.

It is very reliable.

It is easy to scale. We deal with all kinds of companies, but it is mainly used for large companies.

I don't get involved with the installation or administration of VMware. There is a different team that looks into all these things. They might have been in touch with VMware's technical team. I am in touch with their alliance team.

For mobility management, we deal with VMware AirWatch and Microsoft Intune. Both products are more or less the same. Intune is just a basic solution, and feature-wise, AirWatch is better. Security-wise, AirWatch is better, but Intune is catching up. The benefit of Intune over AirWatch is the bundling and the pricing. 

I don't handle the technical bit. I am a product manager, and I'm not the one who installs this product. 

AirWatch would benefit from reducing the license pricing per user per month. Microsoft bundles everything, and then that bundling makes the product free for the customers.

It completely depends on the use case and what a company is looking for. For example, if they are an SMB and already have Microsoft products, then I would suggest they upgrade the licenses so that they get Intune or device management complimentary. For a big organization, we need to do some feasibility study to understand the customer requirements, and based on that, we can suggest a product. 

AirWatch has been a leader, and it has always been in the top category. I would rate it a solid nine out of 10.

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.