We performed a comparison between Hyper-V, IBM PowerVM, and RHEV based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."The Failover Clustering feature allows us to be able to make our most critical workload highly available."
"For me, the setup of Hyper-V was an easy process, which took only one hour from start to finish."
"The implementation process is simple."
"The most valuable feature is that it's an end-to-end solution."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to integrate the Hyper-Visor center from one console."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the storage virtualization."
"Hyper-V helps to make a replica server between two machines. It is very easy to learn."
"I value the simplicity of configuration because it has worked as expected for my client."
"What I like about this solution, is that it is easy to configure."
"It's in English, so its exceptional qualities make the control environment more flexible, easier, more stable, and easy to recover after issues."
"Technical support is great."
"We always recommend PowerVM to our customers; it is better than most solutions."
"The most valuable feature of IBM PowerVM is the performance of the database workload."
"The valuable feature of the solution is the technical aspects, focusing on elements like processor infinity."
"It is a complete solution."
"It is a stable solution with reliable performance."
"It's a scalable solution."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"Red Hat is the most stable system."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable features of RHEV are all the tools, such as virtualization, management of cloud platforms, and integration of container environments. The solution has good compatibility between virtualization, content management, and cloud management. Having the full set of these tools is the advantage of it."
"It is very stable."
"The solution is lacking in numerous features and lacks flexibility."
"Enhanced visibility and reporting capabilities are desired for better insights and analysis."
"In terms of performance, when compared to VMware, it is much slower."
"The live migration feature needs improvement."
"It would be nice if it was turned into its own product because that's the problem with it. It doesn't have a single place where you can manage things. You have to go into all different screens to be able to configure it. And then you have no idea what the performance is. It's really just a feature added to Windows, and Microsoft does not really have anything that pulls it all together well. Compared to VMware, it does not have everything collaborate on one screen."
"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."
"There needs to be more functionality overall in the Hyper-V manager."
"The only issues we have had recently are with Windows updates that are built into the Windows server with Hyper-V."
"SRM for site recovery is a feature that should be included."
"If it could actually virtualize the entire platform it might be better. If you're having more than one virtualization technology, maybe there's a way to actually have less - one technology to run the data center and maybe one special virtualization for power. If it integrated with other platforms more effectively it might be better."
"The program has very limited solutions for the virtualization of containers"
"The hardware licensing model could be improved because the licensing model is a bit different from the standard hardware procured."
"The product's pricing could be less expensive compared to other competitors."
"The performance should be improved."
"The cost of this solution is high."
"IBM should review the price of this solution in my opinion; it is too high."
"This solution could be more secure."
"The UI should be more interactive with additional features."
"The support is tricky in a few places. We're facing some challenges within Malaysia where we don't really have the system integrators available who can provide extended support. When we need personnel on-site, we can't get them."
"In comparison to VMware, this solution isn't as stable. We're testing it right now, and we're not trusting the stability of the product."
"Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"RHEV can improve by keeping pace with new features and new enhancements. They should not be halted or delayed innovation because over the past quarter the enhancements have not been as fast as they have been previously."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
