Perhaps integration with Azure would be beneficial. It would be great to have compatibility with vendors like UCS, considering I use different hardware such as HP or UCS. 

Additionally, a direct connection to monitoring tools would be valuable.

One area where VMware Software Defined Data Center could improve is in the user interface. While the backend scripting and automation are robust, having more features accessible through a CLI mode would be beneficial.

Even though it is very powerful software, it is complex. The way the software is driven should stay the same. My main problem is that they are changing the interfaces frequently, and each interface is incompatible with the last one. So you have to be in constant learning.

But the main problem here in a country like Mexico is that the software cost is exceptionally high compared to other states. One of the ways to adopt this platform is that it would not be as expensive as it is. For example, this version of the storage utilization is costly, and most of the other features, the most valuable ones, are extremely expensive.

There's quite a lot of uncertainty at the moment regarding the solution following the Broadcom acquisition of VMware. After the Broadcom acquisition, they changed the licensing model, reduced their product's queues, removed all the perpetual licenses, and moved to subscription. We are unsure about the future growth and stability of our organization.

There could be more insights for hyper-cloud solutions in terms of enhanced configuration.

When they release the next version, we need some new features in vCenter eight, like DPU, and data packet processing. When it comes to research and development of the product in class, we would like to receive the next version in the best possible way.  I would recommend bundling so the end customer can utilize all the automation and orchestration features with SDC. Currently, they are provided as separate offerings. I think it should be included as one so we can evaluate and optimize our cloud resources.

The solution must provide more features.

Maturity of the features they've released just now. What they've released now has a lot of potential, but it's in the very early stages. Again, that consistent feature set across on-prem and cloud, that's what I would look for.

Its pricing could be better, and there could be more integration.

The biggest operational change I'd like to see them do with vSAN is to change the actual underlying way the storage is done, so that every node and every disc in the cluster equally participates in all reads and writes. It isn't set up that way right now. I know that's an insane thing to ask because it would require completely rewriting the application.

For NSX I don't know if there's anything that needs to come out right away, partially because we have not started using it yet. Also, because we're so far behind the times, by the time we start using it all the features we need will already be available.

This is not yet a mature product. Initially, it is simple to use, but after some time in production, you've got problems. These are particularly related to the main design.

The design phase is not easy. All of the stuff available on the website is not very carefully designed. We suffered for four months before obtaining the bug fix.

I would like to see the process of building and setting up homogeneous classes made easier.

We have some Intel machines and some AMD machines, are we cannot mix these within the same cluster. It is a big mess for us. As we want to scale, we do not always want to use the same kind of machine.

The automation of the solution needs improvement. We should be able to automate some processes.

We would like to see more analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning capabilities in their products. 

Another good feature would be to have predictive analytics and remote monitoring to monitor the virtual infrastructure with integrations to social media apps, like WhatsApp and others.

The virtualization has room for improvement.

The Site Recorder Manager needs to be improved. We would like to have active-active replication. 

This solution is not efficient for small customers.

Technical support could use some improvement.

The main problem that we are facing with this solution is vSAN stability. Sometimes, the storage becomes unstable. It is not an issue with integration; rather, it seems to be within vSAN. It could be the hardware that we are working with. VMware has confirmed the bugs, but have not told us to upgrade the hardware. It is compatible and everything is ok, so I don't know. VMware has done some upgrading and patching.

Not all of the storage systems from other vendors can be integrated into this solution.

The licensing for this solution should be improved. For example, you should be able to expand the SDDC with a compute-only node, rather than a hyper-converged node. Otherwise, you are buying a vSAN license for nothing. Their competitors, like Cisco, do not have this problem.

They have to add the fibre channel storage so that it can be integrated with the SDDC nodes. That was the customer can utilize their storage for file-sharing, which most of the customers have. EMC Unity and HP3PAR connect using FC connectivity, but for this solution, we have to change everything in order to mount this storage to the SDDC node.

Adding endpoint security to this solution would be a good improvement.

The next version of this solution should include more automation.

There should be more visibility in the performance and the configuration.

They are using vRealize Log Insight as the virtualized log platform, but this solution is not well developed and not yet ready to use for advanced optimization and troubleshooting.

The most recent web-based interface has given us some problems. For example, if you delete a virtual machine or you delete storage then it takes a long time to refill it. In prior versions that were a client installed directly on the PC, the interface was more responsive. Things happened on time. I had a problem last week where one of my VMs was deleted, and it took perhaps thirty minutes to repair it.

Upgrading from previous versions is tricky, especially when you have an environment that spans over five operating systems, and we're using various types of hardware. So a streamlined updating process would be better than what we're currently doing, which is piece by piece rolling out the updates fairly slowly over the course of a couple years, going from 5.5 to 6.0.

It would be an improvement to have more functionality with hardware products. For example, performing routine analytics on a hardware network would be useful because not many network switches can do it.

The solution needs performance optimization of the VMware IO technology.

Maybe, by just incorporating encryption and making it cheaper are some of the improvements needed. Right now, encryption is still expensive and then encryption is a requirement for DoD, so maybe if encryption got easier and cheaper it would be helpful. That's what I want to see.
The license is sort of confusing, but hopefully, it can get better.

I can't keep up with what they're releasing now, to be honest. Certainly, some of the new things they announced recently, like being able to get better intellect about the virtual machines. That's always been a challenge. vRealize Operations Manager is a really good product, but it's a bear to manage. So simplifying some of that would be good; it provides too much information at times. Being able to correlate some of that would help get more intelligence out of the virtual machines. I was glad to see they announced that in the keynote at VMworld 2017.

There are still a lot of pieces that they're working through bugs because it's a new technology. There are things that need to be flushed out to allow customers to be able to troubleshoot the environment a little more easily, so certainly that is one area that I would like to see improve.

I would like to see something that stands out. Every year we see new products coming out from VMware and they keep packaging more and more in the software defined data center. But I would like to see something that is very much like how it was with NSX, something that's going to redefine the way that we do datacenter operations from VMware. Don't get me wrong, the product's great, they continue to improve upon it each year, but they're incremental improvements. It's not groundbreaking, it's not something that's completely changing the game.

I would like to see the vSphere Client to have more options as opposed to the web client. I don't like using the web client and HTML. I don't like using that.

I hadn't given that much thought. A lower price. It's a fairly polished solution, but there are some things that are a bit clunky still.

The interface should be improved because when there are many alarms, it is difficult to figure out what the error is.

I have had a lot of trouble implementing automation in cloud-based deployments. The problem lies in the third-party integration.

It would be very valuable if they offered shareable data center designs.

Possibly iBGP. It is just not clear to me yet. I have had some talks with folks who are helping networks internally. But, my understanding is no one supports eBGP.

The storage utilization needs to be improved. It is not a perfect product. It needs to be more secure and it needs more aesthetics.