The stability is good. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

vRA has been pretty stable, unlike vSphere infrastructure. With vSphere, while nothing has happened, there are a number of integrations that could break. However, on the vRA front, it has been good and stable. There hasn't been a single situation where we have run into a big issue and had an outage, which is great. 

It is too early to come to a conclusion on vRA 8 because it is still getting migrated, but the initial impression is good. It is better than vRA 7.

I would rate the stability 8 out of 10. 

We haven't got any instability in the VMware Automation.

I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.

The product is stable.

It is a stable product.

I rate the platform's stability a six out of ten. It could be better.

I would rate the stability seven out of ten. Ensuring hardware compatibility is crucial in our platform. However, it posed challenges as some of our servers were not compatible, necessitating extensive adjustments to make them function correctly. Regrettably, this incurred a substantial overall cost, which was quite troublesome.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

vRA 8 onwards is very stable. vRA 7 has some clunkiness, but version 8 is very stable.

From a stability perspective, VMware is number one compared to other products that are available in the market. We have never had any major downtime, after going to vSphere 6.5 and afterward. Earlier, yes, there were challenges, but nowadays it's very smooth and very straightforward.

It is stable. But one of the drawbacks that Aria Automation had whenever there used to be an upgrade was that it never used to be very easy. It takes effort to upgrade from the current version to the new version. There used to be some challenges and changes that had to be done. 

The most recent release is based on the Kubernetes nodes now. So, it is easy now but it is not that easy because, with every new release, VMware comes up with something new. 

And how to adapt to new things and how to configure those things. And what all from the previous version will still get supported in a new version is always a new thing for us as well.

The tool is stable, but you will encounter issues when it hits the upper limit. 

Aria Automation is stable.

It is very stable. I've had no downtime from the vRealize Automation appliances or components. I think the biggest challenge is being communicative in the infrastructure as you change the infrastructure underneath the automation. This goes back to the naming conventions and the consistency, but you need to be cognizant, as you change your underlying infrastructure - whether that is new storage arrays you're adding, new DV switches you're creating, or new hosts that you're taking out or putting in - you have to be cognizant of your automation.

It would be nice if this product was a little bit more intuitive regarding what's connected to it.

The solution is stable so I rate stability a ten out of ten. 

The stability of this product is good. We use it on a daily basis.

It is pretty stable. This is based on what I have heard or seen for different projects.

The stability is 95 percent. There are some situations where it gets a little bit clumsy. When it gets really big, when you're dealing with a very large deployment, it can be a little bit difficult, but it's better than nothing. It does a significant job, given what it's tasked to do.

We haven't had major issues with vRA so far. Generally speaking, all the VMware infrastructure does work. I wouldn't say it's rock-solid, but we haven't experienced significant stability problems on the platform.

Once the product is customized and implemented, it is stable. We need a lot of effort during the initial stages.

We have had no issues with stability.

So far, stability has been good.

vRealize Automation stability is pretty good. They are always fixing bugs. The product team is doing a great job of addressing any issues that we might have.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues and we've been using it for roughly two years. We're upgrading to the 7.5 now.

The stability of the vRA platform itself is very good, but because of Workspace ONE, I would rate the overall stability at seven out of ten.

We have found this solution to be stable as long as we don't test its limits. We have had huge installations where we had some problems with performance and stability. 

We have not had any outages or crashes so far.

It is stable. We haven't had any problems with vRA and it has been working for more than three years. We upgraded to the new version without any problems, and the customer is using it.

The stability of the product has been good. However, I feel like the upgrade, doing more of the infrastructure administration, has been more problematic for my organization. But otherwise, it's been a good product.

I haven't had any stability issues with it.

We have no issues whatsoever with it. It's very stable.

In the later versions, 6 and 7, it seems very stable. Really, it's nothing within the program itself that ever seems to cause the failures. It's some other component it's reaching out to which tends to have a problem, and that's not vRA at all. It's very good about telling you what's dead. It's usually more that the other application is having a fault and vRA tries to utilize it and gets an error back from the application, which then gets back to vRA.

It's not an even an integration problem. It's the application that it's going out to is not working properly. Then, it lets us know that it's not able to, for instance, connect to a Linux VM to the management product and register it. If it gets a failure there, it tells the folks who are managing the vRA. They tell us, and we go in. We check the management server. "Oh, it's not working. Well, let's go ahead and we need to restart it."

It's the same story on the other side with it connecting to AD. If for whatever reason, there's a problem with it connecting to AD, they'll go look at it. "Oh, this is the main controller having a problem."

We did encounter some stability issues. I found the GUI that we use in vRA to be unstable sometimes. For example, there was no proper update of the tasks that were provided. Sometimes it took a little longer to provide new updates.

We haven't had any problems stability-wise with vRA.

The stability is why I rated it a seven and not higher. There were several cases where we had to restart some services because it wasn't working correctly anymore. People cannot extend their machine or replay their machine. There is no alert to say that there is a problem and that we should stop the service. The monitoring system is not very good.

It's very stable. We haven't had any downtime whatsoever.

Stability is good.

No issues with Stability now working on testing out the new version on NSXt via blueprints which will provide a whole new level of control and management for our SDDC virtualized networking stack.

It's stable. To my knowledge, we have not had any downtime. If there was any downtime, it had nothing to do with VMware. It could have been our infrastructure itself. Or what we might have had a misunderstanding regarding how to get certain things done.

The product was stable if no changes were being made. Adding a new endpoint, agent, or fabric often led to some sort of related or sometimes unrelated errors. We were usually able to catch these in our integration environment and avoid them in production.

The system functioned stable with no real issues. The one problem we encountered was around data collection at remote sites.

Stability is good. It helps us provide more services and give more capacities. It improved our infrastructure and gives us more possibilities to provide our users. It's a very good product.

There are some issues with stability. We discovered some bugs and we constantly have to work with VMware to figure out a way to fix them. There is no ideal product, it doesn't exist, which is why we are okay with this product. We don't have critical problems that are causing our production problems. 

I'm setting it up as a simple solution. It's much more stable than the highest available variant. We have a lot of intel machines providing a solution.

It is stable.

We have run into some issues with stability. Primarily, some of the components seem to go out of whack with each other sometimes but, for the most part, it's been stable. It's just that when it fails, to be honest, it seems to fail spectacularly. It has to do heavily with the authentication portion of it. That is one of our biggest issues with it.

Beyond that, vRO can get out of sync with vRA. We've run into that every once in a while. But it's very rare, compared to the authentication problem.

It is fairly stable. We've so far not had any major outages with it. If we have any misconfiguration issues, it's pretty quick to use the automated system to find the problem, diagnose it, and fix it, then you back it up.

The solution has been stable and smooth in operation.

Thankfully, where we're at, we don't have the need for the criticality, we don't need a quick reaction to stability issues. But having the right resources available will help the stability.

Stability has gotten a lot better. However, the vRO aspect, when you have a multi-vRA head, is a little bit finicky still. vRO still needs to stay on one appliance and be one application, because, when you have two, you can't see runs on the other one that are happening when you're not logged into that one.

It is a stable product.

It's very stable. And due to the software contracts - we have a subscription membership - we get the newer versions. It's going be around and, from what I heard at one of the sessions today at VMworld 2018, it's going to be around for a while.

It's stable. Doesn't die.

It's very stable. The one little hiccup we had was with some of the networking but I think that was more our physical switch configurations, supports and protocols. When you try to lock things down you have to know it end-to-end. But once it's in place, it's rock solid. I think the stability on the network side is there. It was more on us, to be honest.

We had a stability issue just this morning. This past weekend was patch day, so it was Monday and patches were done Saturday. The form didn't display properly, so I had to reboot the vRA. Due to the HA, we had to reboot the vRA appliances to get it working again. This might be because the database were ripped out from underneath of it and never reconnected. However, this is not a common occurrence.

On a scale of one to 10 stability is a seven.

There are a lot of moving parts and we often have difficulty with like an individual service on one of the components failing and bringing down the entire stack, and that's pretty regular. We've been using it since version 6 and that's been pretty consistent. As the components have been compressed, it's gotten better, but for each of the Windows servers and components that we have, there are regular service failures.

Because we're running on the older version, we've actually had a lot of stability issues. We're currently evaluating either upgrading or integrating the new version, but we haven't made the decision yet.

So far so good, it's very stable, rarely any issues.

in general, it took us a long time to get it off the ground. We had a lot of issues upfront and we determined that we just needed to scrap it. I think we scrapped it two or three times before we actually got it built the way we wanted, and we're still not where we need to be. We have had downtime. There have been some issues, but we're also two iterations behind on version. We're getting ready to move to a new HA environment and go on to the newest product line.

Up until now, it has been quite stable. However, we have not pushed it to its boundaries.

Stability is not great, although, the latest release has been better.

Stability is fine. Though, we have seen some issues with upgrades or installations. This means we have to raise a call every time with VMware.

Now, it's pretty stable, as long as you do not touch it. However, upgrades are always a pain.

So far, stability is great. We haven't had anything crash or be taken down by bugs that we've come across. 

The stability is good. It's one of those things that we can just stand up and forget. We haven't really had any problems with it. It's just there, and we can rely on it.

The stability needs a lot of work. The troubleshooting component of vRealize is a pain. The administration and the upgrades are not up to the mark. If they were able to improve on that, that would be the best thing and would make it much easier to run it in the enterprise.

The stability is pretty good now; previous versions, not so much, but it has improved. In earlier versions, we had issues with crashes, but the latest version has been much better.

I've been impressed with the stability so far. It does what we ask it to. That's always nice. You don't have to think about it. We haven't had any downtime.

We have been using it for the last couple of years, and it has pretty much worked for us without any issues.

So far it's very stable. We haven't had any crashes, any issues with it. The problems that we have had have been in configuring things because we're already in the last stage where we're accepting the consultant's work. So we're finding little things here and there.

But otherwise, generally, the system has been up. We haven't had any downtime with it, other than the stuff that needs to be configured a little better.

So far, it's been stable. Although, we have a few issues with it. Mostly, the issues that we encounter have been integrations with Horizon, integration with NSX, and a little bit the integration with Code Stream as well.

I will say the VRA has its problems. We have had issues with stability. We initially deployed on Version 7.1, and there are issues with the high availability feature that it had. It forced you to manually failover the database, and so it wasn't an actually automated HA feature. That has been solved in 7.3. I haven't seen any issues with it, yet.

I haven't had it deployed for very long, but just like small things like selecting stuff, the blueprint design campus, I've noticed, has a really bad memory leak, so it can be hard to edit blueprints. Overall, as long as you know how to administer the IaaS boxes, you should be good to go.

I haven't really had any issues with stability over the last four or five years that I've been using it.

We did have stability problems. I encountered several issues with the product after the upgrade from 6.2.0 to 7.0.1. I would highly recommend that anyone looking to move to 7.x from 6.x should do a migration rather than an upgrade. VMware did not do enough QA on the product in order to handle in-place upgrades.

We don't really have a stability issue with it. It's not a product that really goes down for us. Although it's not a product we consider to be in our "five nines" of availability, like our other systems are, it's more a tool. We're able to maintain it after hours and patch as needed. But I can't even remember the last time it went down during business hours.

They need to get away from Windows.

So far so good.

It's very stable. Just like any other project, it does have its quirks and kinks, but like anything else you work through it. You have to customize it to get it used to your environment. There are growing pains.

It has an HA configuration, which is pretty good. It could be better.

Stability is okay. However, this is one of the products which I have had support work on the most.

It is absolutely stable, at this stage. We are able to meet our customers' expectations. VMware is a company which has already grown up. That's the reason we're opting for these new technologies, even though it's taking some time. Even if it is going to be a little bit slower, it's going to be stable. We trust VMware.

Very stable solution. We've had very good luck with it.

We haven't really had any problems with stability. Usually, for what we use it for, it has been very stable, very dependable. I feel like it's done a good job.

So far, VRA seems stable to me. I don't have any complaints.

It is a very stable solution. It's a state-of-art kind of solution. It gives a lot of flexibility. It's customizable. You can tailor it according to how you want vRA to work for your organization. So it's a very stable tool. It's a very cool tool.

Stability is pretty important. For example, if the platform goes down and people can't provision anymore, people are relying on the automation versus old manual processes.

This solution is very stable.

The stability is good enough. 

We've been using this product for a while and the stability is fantastic. As long as we keep our hardware maintained, and we're doing everything we can on that front, I don't see any issues with stability.

It is very stable. It works well. It is easy to use once it's deployed, and is also easy to deploy.

No, it is definitely stable.

The stability is good.

My impression of its stability is "middle of the road." We've had some issues where it seems to be a little bit sensitive, where deployments fail and we don't really know a specific reason why. We'll dig through logs and try to figure out what's going on, but it's not always apparent why it failed. And you can kick it off again and it'll succeed. So stability could be better.

I'm happy so far, I haven't had any stability issues.

The product is stable. When we used it early on, the changes were so rapid that we had to be careful with versioning. We probably still have to be pretty careful between versioning. The environment includes NSX, as well as vRA. Therefore, we have to pay attention to making sure everything is compatible.

There's some issues that we've encountered while standing it up.

It's very stable.

Great. I haven't noticed anything.

Yeah, there are some issues with stability. I suppose with any product, when new versions come out sometimes there are bugs, and depending how wide-spread that is, it can take a varying length of time to clean a patch from a big crash or fault. I give it a seven out of 10 for stability. There are issues, but it's not dreadful. It is certainly better than it was in previous versions.

We have not encountered any issues with stability yet.

Stability is fine. 

7.4 is okay but we have had some issues with 7.5. We have issues with the approval process of the request. The link for the approval doesn't work. I opened a ticket with VMware and I still haven't gotten an answer. I don't like the infrastructure.  

We had a lot of issues at first. Especially with doing any kind of upgrades, it was a complete tear-down and a complete rebuild of all the Blueprints. The upgrade process was not easy or intuitive at all. But it seems to be getting better.

Earlier on there were some problems and with upgrades, and there were some other problems as well. But in between, it tends to run pretty well. We leave it alone.

It's pretty stable. Once in a while we'll have a problem, but it will be something that's inside the vRA database that got corrupted somehow and they have to clear something out. For example, sometimes, when I deploy a machine, it'll be in the request queue and it'll stay there for a while. Then someone will have to go in there and do something to clear that queue.

If you don't make any technical changes, it works. You need a test scenario before implementing changes.

So far, so good, in terms of the stability.

Its first iteration had some hiccups. It wasn't as streamlined. It crashed a lot more. This version has been way more solid.

Nothing specific to the product. Due to the complexity of the deployment, there can be issues with stability because you need to keep track of many moving parts.

We did not encounter any major stability issues.

I haven't had any issues with the stability.

It's fairly stable.

There are some things that we would like to see. Maybe they already are in the current versions of 7. We're still running 6.2.5, but we would like to see a little bit more seamless integrations with some of our other products, like our DevOps tools. We use Vagrant or other things where the developer sometimes just wants to do their job through Vagrant CLI to communicate with vRealize Automation. However, we have seen that as a pain point so far.

Yes, in older versions. For example, 5.1. There were a lot of stability issues. Now it seems pretty stable.

The stability on the 6.2 version is very bad. It crashes. VMware tech support knows the IIS component is a bit buggy.

It is a stable product. You can run your Tier 1 and Tier 2 apps on it.

It is very stable, especially for high availability features.

It does go down from time to time. We have some issues with the appliances sometimes and we have to do reboots in the middle of the day. That affects the ability for them to deploy. Existing stuff that is already deployed, there's no downtime for that, but it does keep them from deploying at that time.

Stability is really good. Once you got everything setup, even in its HA form, it's pretty stable.

It's very stable.

vRA 7.2 onwards is quite a stable product.

We have seen couple of bugs.

No.

The stability is good.

It's a stable product.

Performance of the service portal seems to be slow at times. Requires a reboot once a month.

Sometimes, we encountered stability issues, but they were negligible.

The stability is okay, but could be improved. We sometimes receive strange errors, which can only be solved with specialists.

It is stable.