VMware Horizon View Reviews

Horizon is used to create virtual desktops. It's helpful for people who want to transition from large desktops and laptops to more virtual desktops. More people are working remotely, and that freaks out IT departments when they can't get access to an employee's desktop. We are seeing a lot of demand for virtual desktops for remote working.

Horizon allows us to sell a solution to customers.

VMware Horizon View is easy to configure and deploy.

The cost of licenses is always a challenge. I would also like the deployment to be simplified and automated to be more streamlined. It would be helpful for managing. For example, if you are deploying 900, it would be nice to automate the management of groups of 30 or 40 or whatever you're doing. Automation and deployment tools would be good.

We've used VMware Horizon View off and on since it was first introduced in 2006. I have been messing around with VMware since early in my career. It's probably been about 18 months since I last did a direct Horizon solution. 

Horizon View is pretty stable.

Horizon View has been scalable enough for everything I've done so far. The last deployment was about 900 users. It was a mixture of office workers and managers.

VMware support is okay, but sometimes it's a little bit hit or miss trying to get somebody who knows what they're doing and talking about.

Our customers switched from more of a traditional laptop or desktop environment where they were maintaining 900 different systems and trying to keep them patched and updated. A VDI is helpful for tracking ransomware or viruses because you can lock down systems more easily when they're centrally controlled.

Setting up Horizon is probably not easy for an inexperienced person. You can't just read the manual and do it. You need some experience to set it up. It's not overly complex, but it also isn't so simple that you could deploy it yourself if you've never done it before.

It took about two or three months because you can't just roll it out. You have to migrate the users in batches. If you're rolling out a thousand users, you can't just turn it on and have at it with a thousand. You deploy 30 and migrate a department and then do another. That's the case with any virtual desktop solution. Rolling it out is always going to be a more gradual process than a big bang all at once overnight.

VMware has tools to calculate projected ROI. The customers don't hit that projection, but they get relatively close. Typically the projected return is higher than what customers actually see.

The pricing can be relatively competitive, but sometimes you have to go back to VMware and ask for additional discounts. You can make it competitive If you're prepared to put in the work. The list prices and standard discounts may not be competitive, but if you push hard enough, you can get the price to where you need it to be.

When you deploy the solution, the goal is to reduce normal operating costs by making it easier to keep your devices updated and patched. Obviously, there are hardware costs for running virtual machines, so there are additional costs depending on where you're running it, especially if you're using the standard hybrid cloud. If you use the Horizon Cloud, it's a different pricing model.

I'd rate VMware Horizon View seven out of 10. If you want to simplify management and retain control, give it some serious thought. If you're allowing users to work on their own devices, it's necessary. If everybody has their own laptops, you want to use something like Horizon or VDI to manage your corporate applications. It's absolutely essential for that type of environment.

In my previous project, we used Horizon to connect three remote offices with the main headquarters for centralized business applications.

It's centralized and secure, making it great for business.

There is room for improvement in support. The response time could be faster.

Configuration and driver support could be simplified. Integrating profiles with Active Directory [AD] is still complex.

I have experience with this product for five to six years. I have worked with v5, v6, v7 and v8.

It is a very stable product.

We can upgrade it and even add new features. So, it is a scalable product.

There are delays. When you're stuck, they answer the call and find someone, but resolving the issue might take one or two days.

Neutral

We used Citrix in non-production environments. But for production, we prefer VMware.

As a technical expert, it was easy to implement. I have a technical background spanning over 17 years. 

But for someone less experienced, it could be trickier, especially setting up client-side agents and drivers and integrating with AD services. But those issues can be fixed. So, deployment is easy.

The pricing depends on the use cases. It depends on the company's needs and budget. For us, it was okay, not too expensive.

Our company is a vendor for over 200 clients. We specialize in migrating infrastructure, on-prem data centers, Hyper-V, VMware, Boxmark, Citrix, any platform, any server, any application database, Oracle, Postgres, SQL Server, EDS, and anything. We move it all to Azure for replication, backup, and high availability.

Just find the right vendor. Check for local experts and certified vendors. You might need their technical help later.

Local vendors usually have technical guys and certified experts who can help with any scenario. I've dealt with upgrades and daily issues for over six years now.

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

The solution is useful for anyone working from home. It enables connection to office workstations and open corporate portals. We can access all files and folders, and collaborate with other team members. I'm a company manager. 

This product works quickly and is reliable. You feel like you're working on your own desktop and not on a remote desktop.

The one thing that could be improved would be to implement more robust audio redirections. When we are talking on headphones, using Teams, or any other communicator, there shouldn't be any lag time, voices cutting out, or interrupted connections. It has improved from what it was initially, but there's still a way to go. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The solution is definitely scalable. If you want to change computer size, or need more horsepower, it can be done. You can also work with multiple flavors of operating systems and if you need to test and work with Linux servers, or open two or more windows, you can do that too.

The solution requires very little technical support because the environment is very stable. The vendors provide great training and have a good knowledge base if any assistance is required. 

I previously used Dell vWorkspace but they halted development when it was sold. We had concerns regarding ongoing support and the lack of development so we switched to Horizon. 

The initial setup is really straightforward. It doesn't take more than five minutes and doesn't require external help. 

I recommend this product and rate it nine out of 10. 

Horizon basically protects you're VMware and your Bring Your Own Device (BYOD). BYOD connecting to your network and these can be secured using VMware Horizon.

With COVID there is a very big impact. There is a hybrid kind of workforce model now. People will be able to connect using their own devices. If it is BYOD case, the number of assets is going to increase. It will almost double the number of the secured assets out there. This means that as the asset size grows, there's a lot of traffic. If you talk about the Horizon it is Zero Trust Architecture plus Micro-segmentation. It has to level both into one platform.

You then need to physically test that your endpoints are all secured so that there is no way for somebody connecting from their own device or laptop to accessing the network with any kind of malicious code. You're protected.

The solution is quite stable. The performance is good.

The scalability has been very good. It's easy to expand it to more endpoints.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The solution could be more secure. Horizon is a recent addition in the sense that, due to COVID, we're working from home and those off-network devices also have to get secured. It's not only on-premises and the cloud infrastructure anymore. Your connectivity from the endpoints from the employees who are logged in from home also has to get brought in.

The solution isn't quite mature yet. It needs more time to mature and to get more market recognition.

The solution needs to work on its pricing. Compared to VMware Workspace ONE it should not be more in terms of cost.

I've been using the solution for more than four years.

The solution is stable. It offers good performance. There aren't crashes and it doesn't freeze. there aren't bugs or glitches. It's been good overall.

The scalability is excellent. If you need to extend it to more endpoints, it's possible to do so, and it's not difficult in terms of a process. If a company needs to expand the offering, it can do so with ease.

We have a hybrid workforce, with 8,000 or so users who likely have both their work and home devices on the system.

We do plan to continue to use the product going forward. We have no plans to move away from it.

Our end-user support is our level end-user computing, EUC. EUC is a separate kind of support model, and there is dedicated support if we run into issues. So far, we have been satisfied with the level of support.

VMware worked with Workspace One, which has been upgraded into Horizon.

The initial setup is not overly complex. It's easy. It's a part of the VMware Workspace segment which makes it quite simple. A company should have no issues with the implementation.

Normally, the process from beginning to end only takes a couple of hours. It's a pretty quick process.

For maintenance, we have a team called EUC - End User Computing - that inspects all the upgrades and handles all the maintenance.

I handled the process of implementation myself. If did not need an outside consultant or integrator. We were able to manage everything in-house.

There is a good ROI.

We do have a licensing fee that we need to pay. Horizon is expensive if you were to consider EDR. I cannot speak to the exact cost of the product, however.

EDR itself is a big investment. If you're investing in EDR be prepared to pay a bit. There are two platforms that we are using - Windows and Linux. In the Windows platform, basically, we can secure it using the Windows Defender. In the case of Windows Defender, we don't need any separate EDR. For Linux, however, we need it. That said, mostly the users are all Windows users. More than 60% to 70% of the users are Windows users and so we don't need the EDR product across the board. That saves some costs for us.

I did evaluate multiple EDRs before choosing this solution.

We use the latest version of the solution at this time. It's the most up-to-date option.

From the COVID impact, the number of vulnerabilities has gone up. That means there are other challenges of coping with the security in recent times due to the deluge of more assets, basically, made on one level because people are bringing their own devices into the mix. So far, we've been able to secure everything, and we've been able to stand back and say that we're fine and, even with this new hybrid work model, we are secure and back to normal, so to speak.

The solution is a recent edition that is not been fully adopted and it is still slightly immature. It's not reached a stage where it is saturated. For that reason, I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.  

I would recommend the solution.

We put our client-server applications on Horizon.

The product helped us deploy complex applications.

The product’s scalability makes the deployment easy. It is important to us. The product handles security and compliance in the virtual infrastructure well.

The tool is not future-proof anymore.

I have been working with the product for about ten years.

I have a good impression of the tool’s stability.

I have a good impression of the tool’s scalability. We have five users.

The initial setup is complex. It is not easy to deploy. It could be much easier. The vendor must build a SaaS solution. The deployment takes too long.

The license could be cheaper.

Everyone is working with Teams after COVID-19. Relatively, Teams is a bit better than VMware Horizon View. I believe there is no future for VMware Horizon View.

I will not recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We are using VMware Horizon View for R&D. We use it like a machine that we need 24/7 at any cost. It should be accessible from anywhere, whether on an office premise or over the internet. But there are a few locations such as in the case of contractors, where we are not allowed to provide our machine. Here, we provide VDI infrastructure to them. They then connect the VDI and work. We integrate their system with Microsoft's Remote Desktop Service. Further, we tag the RDS with the solution. It acts as a connecting bridge between Microsoft hardware and the remote server.

VMware's most helpful feature is its ability to work like a centralized management system. When I say centralized management, it includes everything from vulnerability to application management, and much more. Regarding an R&D environment, we can quickly roll out VDI on their customized operating system. VMware is beneficial for customized platforms that offer auto-promotion and auto-deprovision. 

Initially, they had a VMware security server, which they replaced with a UAE server. The reason was to include more security features. They also included a load balancer feature on customers' demand. But, the paging server should have security enhancement features, which we can rely on and configure for small-scale businesses. They should provide high-end security at the initial stage. They are coming up with a hybrid cloud as well. There should be a function where one can connect and work; whenever not required, one can deprovision it. They should add things like voice interfaces. Whenever you need VDI, it should be a seamless experience. So those are the features I would like them to improve.

If I want to do any upgrade, in case of a zero-day vulnerability, I have to log out of every system. Then, it could be CCM, or it could be patching, or some other solution. We need to wait for the user to come online. To tackle this issue, they should include a feature like Golden Image management. So that we can build multiple VMs.

We used to work with VMware 3.2 and were the first to implement it back then. We used it for over two to three years. Recently, during the COVID time, we again implemented VMware for the remote management of VDIs. So, we have been using the solution for nearly twelve months now. We were testing and using it.

We need to understand every component, from the first tool to the last, and make a call accordingly. We must implement all the best practices and have a backend storage connection transfer. We need to specify how many VDIs and storage are required. If you calculate everything perfectly, it is a stable product. I don't see any issues in our environment other than a slight issue regarding an agent. Because when the VM agent starts to run from and talk to the different VMware servers, there could be a network interruption. We need to make the changes according to the review of the five users. It's a stable product.

It is a scalable product. We have around 50-80 people in our company using the solution.

I contacted them for a query about one of the zero-day vulnerabilities. They provided some assistance but it didn't help with the security scanner. Again, we interacted with the level two team; they immediately released a fix for that. They are doing it well. They have a proper installation matrix in place. They will do it easily if you ask them to escalate to the next level. You just need to instruct about the engineering level for assistance.

Positive

I had experience working with Citrix. But, I needed more confidence in the product because it depends on the active directory. Its value of profile and image management depends on Microsoft group policy. You cannot use the Citrix hypervisor because it is not stable. Comparatively, VMware is a good product. You get a bundle of features with VMware. With it, you don't have to depend on any other vendor for authentication.

The setup depends on the requirement. Implementing VMware 3.2 was a critical setup, as we were the first to deploy it. With the current setup, the site for deployment, even if it's a dedicated VDI, an automated VDI, or some golden image-based VDI, has no redundancies. The only thing is we need to have some networking knowledge. We need to know which port must be open from where to where and see the proxy and direct model. Also, we need to have a basic understanding of firewalls and networking. It helps us do an implementation faster.

Then it comes to redundant CR architecture, which includes the UA layer, the other view, and different standpoints. If we don't understand the account, we can implement it from an infrastructure standpoint. When it comes to a VDI, we get multiple ways out. Sometimes, auto-provisioning becomes complicated. When you need more automation to meet the requirements, it becomes redundant. We need an end-to-end understanding of the security networks, AD architecture, profiling, group policy, etc. We need to know how the authentication standpoint works. The port must be kept open from one authentication server to capture all the details and complete implementation.

I have been working with Microsoft products for twenty years. I advise others to be clear about their requirements, the use cases, and the kind of VDIs they need. They should know whether they want a centralized management system, out of provisioning, or if they want to build a VIN. They should also decide which purchasing programs to opt for. VMware is the best fix for the organization because they are prevalent in the hypervisor.

I would rate it as a nine. The reason is the number of tickets we have raised to VMware compared to the Microsoft product.

The use case is remote access to VMs. It allows us to remote access the VMs and our servers.

It's centralized management, and you have access gateway to enter the VMs from outside.

The issue now with VMware is that we don't know the future of the solution. Because if you follow the news, it was acquired by another company, and they are changing the old product line. 

I have been using VMware Horizon View for 34 years. 

The solution is highly stable. I rate the stability eight out of ten. 

The initial setup is easy. The deployment took a few weeks time. I would rate the setup an eight out of ten. 

The deployment was done in house with two people. One person is required for maintenance.

The solution is expensive. 

Overall I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

VMware Horizon View is easily scalable. Its onboarding is easy and comes with flash provisioning features. 

We would like to see better performance with the product. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate VMware Horizon View's salability a nine out of ten. My company has more than 3000 users. We continue to onboard around 20-30 percent of new users. 

I rate the tool's initial deployment an eight out of ten. Deployment takes two to three hours to complete. It is a simple OEM SOP. You need around two resources to complete the deployment. 

We did VMware Horizon View's deployment in-house. 

VMware Horizon View pricing is high compared to other solutions. I rate it two out of ten. Its licensing costs are monthly. 

It is better to go for AVD on a private cloud than a public one since private clouds are expensive. I rate the solution a five out of ten.