RHEV Reviews

RHEV pricing varies, with many finding it affordable and some noting it higher than expected. It is often cheaper compared to competitors like VMware. Users appreciate the flexibility of licensing options, noting that costs can depend on server usage or subscription level. Although open-source, additional costs arise for support and licensing when needed. A few users mentioned substantial savings with comparative products from Canonical, SUSE, and occasional competitive pricing from Oracle.

• "RHEV offers pricing based on a per-physical-machine licensing model."
• "It's a budget product as far as I'm concerned. It's way cheaper than any of its competitors. The only thing cheaper than Red Hat is that the people who take the Red Hat code clone it and then self-support it."
• "Price-wise, RHEV is okay, in my opinion."

RHEV is primarily used for hosting virtual machines, supporting ERP, and integrating Linux environments for businesses transitioning from physical to virtual setups. Companies deploy RHEV for high-volume computing, including AI and big data analytics. It is utilized to consolidate workloads, manage virtual environments, and create privacy clouds. Organizations see cost savings and performance enhancements by migrating legacy systems and workloads to RHEV, which assists in diverse computing and operational needs.

Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization's customer service receives mixed feedback. Their technical support is generally praised for being responsive, cooperative, and satisfactory. Users appreciate the automatic updates through their subscription model. However, challenges include difficulty obtaining on-site support in Malaysia, slow response times in certain situations, and offshore support issues. Some rely on their own engineering teams. Compared to other vendors, Red Hat's support quality varies, with some users rating it highly while others find it average.

Initial setup experiences with RHEV vary. Some found it straightforward, with installation times as short as 20 minutes, while others encountered complexities requiring experienced personnel. Complexity increases with advanced features. Although comparisons with VMware highlight RHEV's greater technical requirements, the system's reliability and functionality are praised. Documentation quality and good planning significantly impact ease. Users typically deploy RHEV with one to two staff, though extensive customization may extend setup time.

RHEV demonstrates strong scalability with flexibility across various organizational settings. Users manage varying workloads effectively, often requiring minimal personnel for operation. Some report no issues when scaling, while others enhance scalability through additional components. Multiple nodes can be easily added, accommodating a wide range of company sizes. Although some note challenges with specific applications, RHEV generally aligns with other platforms in capacity planning and management. Access to resources and budgets can further influence scalability outcomes.

RHEV demonstrates high stability, with many noting it as reliable and free from bugs and glitches. While it often outperforms competitors, some express concerns related to upgrade cycles. In-memory updates are anticipated in future versions to ease these concerns. Some users compare RHEV favorably against other systems, while others find VMware slightly superior. Most assessments rate its stability highly, with scores typically around nine out of ten, indicating user satisfaction with its performance and reliability.