Purpose of this post is simple and obvious... bring back development to thick client. THANKS!
I want to shoot myself for upgrading the hardware.... to version 10.... I can not add harddrives, or cd drives... at all... I can submit the task and it just hangs there Starting Task.... so I am pretty much screwed with the new web client... anyone know the CLI commands to add a CDROM drive connected to the host and make sure it is powered on? Their documentation sucks for that too, it gives a great example of a client connect but not a host.
I also regret the fact that my coworker upgraded all of our VMs to version 10. The WebClient is horrible. I can't find the options I want. The tree display on the left keeps changing on me when I'm trying to select something. I feel like I really have no clear idea of the stat of my VMware environment 'cuz it's so tough to find things or see the status now. Whoever decided at VMware that this current interface is the way to go should be fired. I'd bet it's the same idiots that built the horrible web interface for Altiris.
Two major areas of concern functionality wise and one of resource usage in addition to the questionable choice of flash as the client:
1). Unacceptably slow.
2). No real time updates (this is a HUGE step backwards as compared to the original client).
3). Unacceptable resource consumption. By this I mean that it must be installed either as a virtual appliance, or in your own server VM. Either way it uses gigabytes of storage and a dozen megabytes of memory. For all practical purposes one might as well consider the overhead of this approach as overhead required by the hypervisor itself, because you can't manage ESXi properly anymore without it. For those of us using an essentials package this overhead represents a significant fraction of the total computing resource we wish to make more efficient use of by purchasing VMWare in the first place. At least before we could choose to manage the machines individually with the native client and not incur any overhead, which is practical in a small shop where essentials would be used and funds are often very tight. Now, we basically have no choice.
I guess we are all in the same situation.
We just bought a new server HP DL 380 G8 with two sockets and 12 cores each. 32 GB of RAM. SSD´s....
All to make the Web Client faster. I could remember last VMworld in Barcelona someone talk about performance of the webclient.....
He recommend to install the webclient on an ssd drive...
But now, when i log on the webclient and wan´t to do some work, it looks like we have an old Întel i486 dx2 CPU!!
It´s sad, but i agree with the posts here. It´s not worth to think about the cost and the get for that product.
For me, hardware Version 10 as an example is never an option. Without, i am able to do some work with the old Client.
It´s the same with the last vSphere Updates. First, an major release, shortly after that an update 1, than an update1 a, update1 b, update1 c.
What the hell should that be? Is there no department for program testing? And thats the same with the web client. I could not understand why you let die the C# client (which works for most customers) to build something that is not working (for all customers).
If you wan´t to build something new, then please, develop both possibilites as fas as your web client could not do the same work with the same speed.
As a daily user, admin, engineer, and evangelist of VMware I have to agree with all of the above posts. I was just thinking about this earlier today. If VMware phases out the client, it will be a damn nightmare to admin my 25-30 host environment. Please for the love of mercy, don't push the web client on us. Flash is terrible, response time is second-rate, not intuitive at all.. Look, I'm all for change.. I've been in the business of change for the last 5 years.. I took my current employer from 5% virtual to 99.9% virtual in 4 years...trust me, I get change.. BUT FOR THE BETTER!!! The web client is step backward... sorry, I'm just venting and agreeing with the above posts...
VMware leave things as is do not take away the fat client not yet. You know you have made mistakes before and because of customers you have had to turn things back around. Do the right thing and make your improvements to the Web Client but let the comunity let you know when we are ready for this as of right now VMware you are not ready. As an admin I have not and will not upgrade our VM's to hardware level 10 I do not want to rely on using the web client just as everyone else said in these post too many pains. Once fixed trust me we will let you know to get rid of the fat client, but as of now nah not yet.
Listen to your cutomers VMware, listen to us.
I don't know, I really don't mind the webclient that much unless I am using internet explorer or I have underprovisioned the ram for my vCenter server. Even through a vmware view session with 3D acceleration enabled it works fairly well.
The web client hasn't matured very well but did a considerable jump in 5.5; you can also force the HTML5 on the VCSA version if you want to ditch flash.
I have to jump in here, as both a VAR selling servers on which vSphere is frequently deployed, and as a casual user of ESXi for my own internal projects and development.
I frankly like neither the web client nor the legacy desktop client, for different reasons. The web client is very slow, confusing due to the poor organisation of its menus and dialogs, and the console plugin simply does not work well over VNC/RDP/Citrix.
The desktop client is also slower than it should be (speaking as a rusty developer), has absolutely horrendous error reporting, lacks lots of what I consider essential functionality, for example patching hosts and various batch operations. On the upside, it works well for the most common tasks of starting/stopping and deploying VMs, and basic configuration tasks. It is good enough for perhaps 80% of my daily tasks, with the rest currently handled via clumsy CLI/scripts.
Here's what I would expect from the ideal client:
- it MUST be my go-to for all management and maintenance tasks
- it MUST give the option to remember my login credentials, because my workstation is already secured via other means
- it MUST let me patch hosts without needing some convoluted toolchain like VUM or the command line
- it MUST let me configure every aspect of individual hosts and clusters via context menus and wizards
- it MUST give meaningful error messages when something does not work as intended, and the means to fix such problems (e.g. killing a hung VM process)
- it should let me save multiple sets of IP / credentials, because I often work with multiple, separate sites
Most importantly: it should be pleasant to use, because the last thing I need during an outage or system failure, is frustrating software that slows me down by being unreasonably sluggish. The server is *one* hop away from my workstation, on a gigabit or better pipe. Why should I wait several seconds to populate a list of VMs or check a performance graph ?
I see this being most readily achieved with a desktop client. The web interface can come later, or better yet: publish good API documentation and let the community produce a web interface. Just look at the variety of clients out there for Xen and KVM... those technologies aren't as mature as ESXi, but the tools are light-years ahead and scripting is a breeze. Why don't we paying customers have tools at least as good as the free stuff ?
Hard to belive that vmware force his management down to hyper v and ignore all shouts of the community for one complete major release.
Just to clarify i love esxi the hypervisor relieable and high end technology but this web client is a pain and the customers ignored it in 5.1 and complained about the "performance" 24/7.
But vmware does not need to listen and going straight forward in 5.5 and promised better performance. They missed to in fix the performance issues (which is by design with java and flash and this is a known fact since 10 years) wich does not exist in the vic client in the most of my customers environments.
Now we are at the stage that you cant belive the vic client because lot of features are not maintained to display stats and settings (like port number of standard switch) of the vsphere version 5.5 and we have an increadible useless for all web client not for use in an enterprise enironment because of the dependency of java, flash, ie security, local admin rights, gpos and all the other security features vmware ignores for one major release.
Thank you vmware to close the management tool gap between vmware and hyper v wich is increadible shit.
And keep stop listen to the companies below gardner top 100, no one need them!!
And by the way i want Maps back, this feature disappeared completely.
VMware hears you!
We understand that the vSphere Web Client is not meeting expectations and we are actively working on solutions. We apologize for our missteps and hope that you will continue to provide candid feedback so we can get this right.
A global team has been assembled and is working around the clock (literally) in parallel work streams to address the concerns expressed by our customers. Performance and usability of the vSphere Web Client will be addressed in both near-term and long-term product roadmaps. In addition we are exploring the feasibility of extending the life of the vSphere Client (aka C# Client) and future options with HTML5.
If you would like to be directly involved in this process please give us your contact information at http://www.surveymethods.com/EndUser.aspx?D4F09C85DD91888ED2
Group Product Line Manager
Thanks for info, Matt. At least we see someone is listening and VMware is aware of the situation, working on solution. Too late imho, but better late then never...
I do not want to mix into your business, but if (as you wrote) VMware is trying a) to extend C#-client life, b) to improve performance & usability of current web-client and c) to develop (I hope!) new html5-based client, you are terribly splitting your dev-resources. Maybe it would be better to skip "b". Just to fix C#-client asap so that it can do everything what current web-client can (except freezing, crashing, etc), then to concentrate fully on developing "next-gen" (maybe html5-based) client.
I mean, forget current flash-based web-client. It is not worth the effort. Even if you improve it, who is going to use it? And for how long? I see it in my everyday life: more and more of my business-partners strictly forbid any flash on corporate-network. No exception, not even for ESXi, period. Some of them even moved to different hypervisor, just because of this (and if they accepted those extra costs, they will probably never move back to ESXi). You know it is happening, and it should fire alarm in VMware-headquarters (if it is not already ringing).
I remember reading somewhere 2014 being called "the year when flash died". The clock is running, so you'd better have something ready ASAP. I personally could live for year or two with C#-client (with added functionality which I'm terribly missing). But I'm pretty sure I will not be able to manage ESXi-servers with your flash-based web-client for year or two even if web-client was much faster...
MATT - thanks for your reply! I hoped this post is a catalyst for change, and in the meantime its a good place to vent when dealing with the web client, we all need a place to scream without disturbing the neighboring cubicles..
Matt, I thank you as well for the response. I ran across this thread from a search for "vsphere web client lacking" after a somewhat frustrating day of working with it. I'm a newcomer to vMWare in general, so I don't have a huge background with the C# client or a bias toward it all that much. But I can say that trying to work with the web client is hard to get used to, even with only a little exposure to the alternative.
Menus are in different places (different doesn't mean bad, necessarily, but it seems like there isn't much reason to many of the changes). It runs much slower than the old client, but I do also know as another poster mentioned that this could be due to resources being underprovisioned on our vSphere (as well as the rest of our virtual environment). That said, the C# client still operates much faster than the web client. In general, I don't like web-based management solutions because they all seem to be less efficient than their predecessors (Lync 2010/2013 vs OCS, for example).
I may be brave and join that volunteer corps myself...
Frustrated Enduser Hat on:
Being in the IT for more than a decade, I always hated the new technology that has come up at first since I had been so much used to the older one but got used to the new ones in due time and started loving it. For ex: facebook interfaces changing 6 months, Win8, Mgmt UI for Servers.
But in the specific case of webclient, doesn't matter how much I try to like it by using it every day in my day to day work, it still stands to be hated tough, given the base idea that it is supposed to ease our work with one point of management on different products of VMware. It stands out an exemplary example to have a look at other options and the Basic question "Why the force move asking users to use web interface rather than the C#"? Its the move like these which got several giants topple..
Frustrated Enduser Hat off:
I do have to agree that VMware is trying to patch up the issues addressed on the webclient front. But with heavy products relying on vSphere platform and more and more features being available only on webclient, its a very very slow process in a race to the mountain"
"In other words, VMware bought a knife to a Bazooka fight "
Just to add a few more, I have been using from GSX time and was very attached to the web browser we need to use to manage servers till 3.0.x and when I heard about webclient coming back, I was pretty happy to install and use it . Meh...
I fully agree. I can see a reason to have a webclient to create a portal for a user that has delegated access to one or more VMs. Even for monitoring the environment from an operational point of view. But to do the main management of your VMs as an admin on a day-to-day basis you need either a client or a really fast responding webclient (which this one is not). The vSphere client isn't blazing fast either but at least it feels more comfortable.
Since I am not the only one saying this I hope VMware will listen to what customers are saying and will make the right decisions. The options I see are:
- either find a way to make the websclient super-responsive and as comfortable as a desktopclient
- or go for the desktop client again
- or start developing for both clients again
I totally agree, and absolutely hate the web client. Web apps in general suck, but for an app as complex as the vSphere client it is totally insane. DUMP THE WEB APP, NOT THE WINDOWS CLIENT!!!!