nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

I miss 5.0 ....

jibbajabba

Just tried to install 5.1 - that must be the first release where I actually failed to get the vCenter installed without issues (now restoring the system the third time from backup).

That Single Sign On service seems to be a *bleep* to setup - especially when it comes to remote SQL databases ...

Sigh ... I want my 5.0 back ...

Find more posts tagged with

SAVE $250 on Your Boot Camp — Use Code "EXAM26"

Exclusively for TechExams members for Infosec Boot Camps starting before April 30, 2026

View Boot Camps

Comments

dave330i

I've heard 5.1 breaks View. Gonna wait until 5.1 U1 comes out.

jibbajabba

What bothers me is the requirement of very specific SQL database called RSA and its associated user - and of course the supplied scripts don't work with SQL 2012 so our DBA had to fix them .. bad bad ..

pumbaa_g

Let me know if you guys manage to fix it, I am planning to install 5.1 on my home lab in a few weeks.

jibbajabba

pumbaa_g wrote: »

Let me know if you guys manage to fix it, I am planning to install 5.1 on my home lab in a few weeks.

Fix ? It is not broken - it is just annoying

SteveLord

I considered topping off my View 5 install by having the contractor put in 5.1. But after they quoted me on the hours involved in powering down/powering up the entire environment + the potential bugs that may exist in 5.1....I held off.

jibbajabba

SteveLord wrote: »

I held off.

Good you did : ALERT: vSphere 5.1 is not compatible with any versions of VMware View | VMware Support Insider - VMware Blogs

blargoe

jibbajabba wrote: »

What bothers me is the requirement of very specific SQL database called RSA and its associated user - and of course the supplied scripts don't work with SQL 2012 so our DBA had to fix them .. bad bad ..

SQL 2012 isn't supported is it?

QHalo

I'm building a new environment currently and I'm staying with 5.0. Too many things aren't upgraded to support it like NetApp VSC, Veeam, etc.

scott28tt

Why do so many people expect other existing VMware products and existing third-party products to just work or be supported on Day 1 with a new vSphere version? I find that an odd expectation.

jibbajabba

Personally I don't - my problem are requirements such as database names and authentication methods of SQL server. A lot of larger companies have dedicated SQL infrastructures and the need of the above might just not work in every environment.

QHalo

Yeah I don't think anyone was complaining about stuff not working. Not sure why so defensive about it.

jibbajabba

Speaking of compatibility, no wonder people are confused, based on comments like that:

ALERT: vSphere 5.1 is not compatible with any versions of VMware View | VMware Support Insider - VMware Blogs

Rick Blythe wrote:

... when we say 5.0 and up is supported, it does not include 5.x

Anyway, my point is, we preach not to hard code certain settings into websites or applications and VMware somewhat does exactly that.

blargoe wrote: »

SQL 2012 isn't supported is it?

Problem with SQL2012 is the transcript supplied for SSO uses deprecated procedures, which was easily fixed by our DBA.

PM if you want the updated script - can't post publicly

sratakhin

jibbajabba wrote: »

Speaking of compatibility, no wonder people are confused, based on comments like that:

ALERT: vSphere 5.1 is not compatible with any versions of VMware View | VMware Support Insider - VMware Blogs
Anyway, my point is, we preach not to hard code certain settings into websites or applications and VMware somewhat does exactly that.

Sounds like a plan to make more money by forcing customers to upgrade to newer versions...

jibbajabba

sratakhin wrote: »

Sounds like a plan to make more money by forcing customers to upgrade to newer versions...

Bear in mind, no one forces you to upgrade. Same deal with the initial Ram entitlement implementation for vSphere 5 licensing - none of my customer even considered upgrading .. if it works - leave as is .. Only reason to upgrade is really

1. Do you miss features
2. Do you have issues fixed in the new version
3. Is the new version cheaper

dave330i

Finally got around to reading what's new in 5.1. Lots of really cool stuff for Enterprise environment. Will probably start testing it when they fix View.

dave330i

Finally got around to installing vCenter 5.1. I don't like the process. They should have made SSO optional, similar to Linked-mode.

jmritenour

Personally, I love 5.1. I found the simple install is anything but, and I just elect to install the components one by one. But man, the new web client is AWESOME and makes it all worth it.

John Cook

The View 5.1 and vSphere 5.1 issue is fixed VMware KB: vSphere 5.1 compatibility with VMware View

jibbajabba

jmritenour wrote: »

Personally, I love 5.1. I found the simple install is anything but, and I just elect to install the components one by one. But man, the new web client is AWESOME and makes it all worth it.

It is just bloody slow - especially when you rely on RDP. But it is a requirement obviously as some features aren't available using the c# client (vm version 9 for example, important when running nested set-ups).

But agree - SSO can be a pain ... Just responding again to what Scott said - Actually considering the involved costs I DO expect a working product. What is more shocking than that though is the level of knowledge of the support staff.

You certainly don't get what you pay for. I had some very specific SSO questions and first, the guy didn't seem to know what I am talking about and then all he did was tail'ing the logs over and over again.

If you don't know something, bloody say so and don't pretend.

Getting offtopic here but I really dislike VMware support. Got a lot worse in the last two - three years.

dave330i

Sigh... did some more poking of 5.1. It's not just vCenter that's more complex to install. Both vDR (vDP now) & vMA are more involved.

blargoe

I hope I have better luck than you guys. I'm pulling the trigger on a POC and will go with 5.1 for the vDP and for stateful Auto-Deploy. We're not using View and not using SQL 2012, so hopefully we won't have many hiccups.

dave330i

More 5.1 joy. vDP is only accessible from the web client while VUM is inaccessible from the web client.