"Hyper-V is much easier to deploy because Hyper-V is already installed inside Windows Server OS. You only need to turn on Hyper-V as a service, and then you can use it. The most convenient thing about Hyper-V is the operating system."
"The initial setup is simple. There's not much to do. We input one command or just one or two clicks on the UI. Initial setup in the Windows environment for any software is not that difficult."
"The solution is easy to configure."
"It is very easy to install. It can be done in a day."
"The installation was straightforward."
"We've probably seen a 50 percent speed increase on our SQL server. Hyper-V has also significantly reduced our downtimes with faster boot-up and reboot. If we have to reboot a server, there is maybe two or three minutes of downtime. When we were on a bare-metal server, it could be five to ten minutes due to the total boot time."
"The solution is highly stable."
"It has provided a good cost-saving from the management perspective."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"KVM is stable."
"Very cost-effective."
"I like that it's easy to manage. It's also more powerful when it comes to security than others. That point of view is the one consideration. The other consideration is that it's cost-effective."
"This solution is open source and easy to configure."
"It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready."
"We have our scientific network, and it's run off the university sever, and we need two servers to optimize our scientific work, such as the mathematics work. Then you have to work with Python and Java, and Microsoft isn't the best option for this kind of work"
"Traditional architecture, such as converged infrastructure, should be done away with"
"Hyper-V's management platform falls short in terms of scalability, especially when handling multiple Hyper-V servers. VMware has a central console to pull in all your VM servers, so you can easily manage them all through one console. You can manage servers in Hyper-V's admin centers, but it's not as scalable. It's doable with a couple of Hyper-V servers, but it becomes harder to manage when you get over two or three Hyper-V servers."
"Security, computing balance, and taking snapshots could be improved. Features like DRS and memory ballooning could be added."
"The product can be a bit difficult to use."
"The operating system is very, very heavy."
"The solution is heavily reliant on Microsoft's active directory for authentication, for coordination between nodes. Therefore, it inherits all the issues that are within the active directory."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"In our setup, we do not have any dashboards or orchestration, and it is hard to manage. We have 25 gig network cards, but the software driver we have only supported 10 gigs."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"One thing that maybe could be improved is making it easier to scale. It needs to be more clear on how to scale the storage space for virtual machines."
"Technical support could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an improved user interface and dashboard. This type of improvement will make it easy or help our engineers understand the solution from a requirement point of view."
Hyper-V is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while KVM is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 8 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 7.6, while KVM is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Hyper-V writes "It's a low-cost solution that enabled us to shrink everything down into a single server ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KVM writes "Stable, easy to set up, and very easy to use". Hyper-V is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Citrix Hypervisor and Nutanix Acropolis AOS, whereas KVM is most compared with Oracle VM VirtualBox, Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Oracle VM and RHEV. See our Hyper-V vs. KVM report.
See our list of best Server Virtualization Software vendors.
We monitor all Server Virtualization Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
