We used Microsoft Hyper-V before switching to VMware for the Software-Defined Data Center. The decision to switch was mainly driven by the simplicity of licensing with VMware compared to Microsoft Hyper-V. In my experience, users typically find Microsoft Hyper-V easier to work with, and it is more user-friendly for non-technical individuals. On the other hand, VMware stands out with its highly flexible network deployment capabilities. The choice often boils down to user preference and the specific needs of the deployment, with Microsoft Hyper-V offering simplicity and VMware providing robust network flexibility.

Currently, VMware is better than Azure Stack in terms of software, stability, capability, and known functions. I would like to see Microsoft match or even go further than VMware in 12 months to provide some alternative and competitive environment.

I use Nutanix and Azure.

Previously, we used the Windows Hyper-V solution. We switched because of all the server automation capabilities like vMotion, HA, DRS, and fault tolerance. VMware Software Defined Data Center provides resilient IT infrastructure and software-defined.

There is a lot of need for saving real estate cost and cooling, and those kinds of things. This software really helps with that.

I generally look for a company with good technical backing, as company which is constantly refining the product to make it better for the customers.

We chose VMware for the value, and for what we were doing, it was the simplest, most efficient way of deploying the services.

Regarding having used a different solution, that's a tough question to answer. Software defined data center means that there were things that were in the datacenter that weren't software defined and now they are. So I guess we were using other stuff before. But, it wasn't software defined.

The switch is a business conversation, usually around cost avoidance or, potentially, return on investment. It's typically cheaper to do things in software than in hardware and that's the direction we're going.

The main reason we chose VMware is it's very attractive for us, particularly for a VxRail solution from EMC, that every single piece of hardware and software is made by the same company. So there are no inner operability issues. There's no cat and mouse, there's no one trying to play catch-up. As soon as VMware comes out with a new whatever, EMC has it and it works and it's tested.

We started with version 3.x , then moved on from that older version to newer versions as per VMware recommendations and the hardware performance guide. Now, we are mostly running the latest version (6.5).

I have used other solutions in my time as a Sun engineer and as a Solaris engineer. For example, I have used Microsoft Azure, but I am more of a VMware kind of person.

Prior to this solution, we worked manually. We would supply a hyper-converged infrastructure to our customers and then install a software-defined network. It is an SDDC, but there is no single management portal. This means that it is not fully integrated.

I have also used Nutanix. There are some differences between VMware and Nutanix, where each has benefits and downsides. The advantage of this solution is stability.

We used another virtual environment prior to this solution, but it was not as stable. Stability is important because if you need to restart the server then it will restart all of the virtual machines inside it.

The DoD requirements, more than everything else, is what drives us to come up with a solution for them so they give us what they want in terms of the requirement; we just reach out to VM and come up with a solution for them.
We were not using another solution before. VM is pretty much the-go-to for anything in the department of defense.

We've been using VMware for years. I don't think that it was an actual decision. It was more along the lines of, "Wow this is a cool new product." We go back probably to 3.5, so many years ago. We really did it as most people start out, some management machines, some noncritical workloads, and started to implement it that way, and then realized the value and started to expand to the more critical workload.

So I don't know that it was this awakening that said, "We have to go in this direction." It just kind of morphed, saying, "Hey this is cool, let's try it out on some management. Wow this really works nice," and then started to expand on that, and now we're almost probably 95% virtualized.

Since I'm a partner, my customers are always looking for newer technologies; so for us, it's about trying to stay ahead of what our customers are going to be asking us for. Learning this environment, building and growing it to show-off to the customers, and then also, to be that trusted advisor to the customer when it comes time to get a new one are crucial.

Given our previous experience with KVM and, say, Citrix hypervisors, honestly the reason that our company moved away from them back when I was an administrator was, again, stability. VMware was far more easy for us to use, implement. We got a whole lot more return on investment from virtualizing our workloads, and we're talking about a time when we were probably 40% virtual and 60% physical. Running and implementing VMware got us to 80% virtualization versus 20% physical.

We were looking for ways to improve our environment and how we could reduce in the hardware environment and then, still have the same support that we needed for our users. That is how we decided to go for this solution.
Support factor is big for me while choosing a vendor. However, for the CEO or the director, it would be the cost.

No. You're always creating, to try to simplify and automate things to make it less user intensive, to make changes to the network.

We've used VMware for a long time now and had quite a bit of confidence in their products so that contributed towards the reason we chose VMware.

The company told me to. We have been using it ever since I've been here.

We looked at other solutions, but we found this to be the strongest solution. The other products in the same category include Amazon, Azure, and Google, but they do not have the same features and the same "open solution" policy.