We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor, Hyper-V, and VMware vSphere based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."Installing Hypervisor is really simple. It's the simplest setup I've ever done before. We used a team to deploy it, and it doesn't take much time, like two or three hours tops."
"I find it very easy to manage and at a cost that small customers would never refuse (free)."
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"We can easily migrate VMs from one host to another."
"What I like the most is the support of the GPU Graphics and the VM Live migration."
"Citrix Hypervisor integrates easily and I can manage the infrastructure better. If I need to take a machine down to expand the hard drive, I do not have to physically be here. I do not need to order new equipment or new hard drives. I can shut it down, increase the drive space and bring it back up."
"This is a good product for virtualization and it is easy to use."
"Citrix is easy to use and is stable."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"The performance is very good."
"Hyper-V integrates well with other Microsoft solutions."
"The most valuable feature of Hyper-V is that it's very intuitive."
"It has provided a good cost-saving from the management perspective."
"It is a very stable product. We have not had any issues with Hyper-V crashing itself."
"II prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions."
"Microsoft's a good name for legacy support and solutions"
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the ease of deployment. It's also user-friendly and has been on the market for more than a decade, so it's a leading technology in hypervisor solutions."
"I find that the Virtual Center Management, iSCSI support, and VMotion hot migration are very beneficial."
"The most valuable features are stability and support."
"The virtualization is set by itself. vSphere is the best way to have a non-host based fixed solution. We always try to find an agnostic environment where we can restore agnostics or just say, "I need resources, capacity." That's why VMware vSphere in particular, has been the best in the past but now also with the evolution of their product. Nowadays, you don't have to use any STEM infrastructure anymore because the bandwidth and the land speeds are getting steeper."
"Server Virtualization is the most important feature because that helps me to utilize 100% capacity of my physical server or box. Its redundancy, uptime, or high-availability is also valuable. Storage-sharing is also valuable. In vSAN, I can utilize the maximum storage. In the physical boxes, if you don't require storage, it lies idle, but with VMware or any kind of virtualization, you can utilize the full storage."
"It is a very mature solution that is easy to use and flexible."
"I definitely like the stability, performance and ease-of-use."
"We scale it both vertically and hortizonally. We have many data centers on it."
"The interface has to be updated."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"The solution needs better backup facilities that are available for virtual machines to create servers on."
"The built-in networking features are a little limited."
"Network management needs improvement because it is not very stable."
"The solution is only in English. It would be ideal if it was in Portuguese."
"The solution is too expensive and people are kind of moving away from Citrix. It's starting to become a problem. It is a primary reason that while we are rebuilding we're going to seek out open-source solutions."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"I encounter issues such as mouse cursor problems, dependencies, lagging, freezing, and unresponsiveness using Hyper-V."
"I have found it difficult to manage more than one virtual machine."
"Traditional architecture, such as converged infrastructure, should be done away with"
"The weakness of Hyper-V is in its interaction with iSCSI protocols."
"There is a hard limitation of 20 gigs per file with Dropbox, so you've got to overcome that by chunking the zip files into something smaller and manageable."
"They can hot add NICs to the VMs. However, there is still not the ability to hot add virtual processors to running VMs."
"In terms of performance, when compared to VMware, it is much slower."
"The initial setup was complex. It was nearly six years ago, but I remember it was complicated."
"It would be great if the free version included a management tool that was a scaled-down vCenter Manager."
"The ability to run ARM based VMs on an x86 platform for testing purposes. With the growing use of SBCs running on ARM architectures for IoT devices, it would be very useful if developers could build and deploy VMs running operating systems like Raspbian used on Raspberry Pi devices on their existing x86 ESXi environments. Even if this is not possible through some form of emulation, the ability to add ARM hypervisors to vSphere environments would be very useful. This will enable more rapid development cycles for customers just getting started with IoT but already existing vSphere users."
"Higher cost than other similar solutions."
"They have multiple components required for the setup. It would be better to integrate it into one solution, especially for small business companies."
"Both the price and the licensing fee are expensive, especially for our clients with a smaller workload."
"It is expensive."
"The technical support is not too bad, but not the best."
"Two improvements that I would like to see are higher resolution console modes for guests and easier switching between consoles."
