We performed a comparison between Hyper-V, KVM, and Oracle VM VirtualBox based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."The support with Microsoft is great."
"Hyper-V can expand storage. For instance, if I have a VM running on NetApp or another platform, I can expand the storage without interrupting operations. It is useful when I need to quickly allocate more storage without causing downtime or performing maintenance tasks."
"I find the ease of use the most valuable asset of the solution."
"I like that Hyper-V comes for free with Windows Server. You don't need to buy the license, and you only have to pay for the management aspect in System Center."
"With each update, the security of this solution just gets better and better. It is very stable."
"It is an affordable platform."
"The solution's technical support is the best."
"Live migration, SMB3."
"Documentation and problem-solving troubleshooting are the most valuable features. Performance (when fine-tuned and with "special" HW) is awesome, equal to or more than other enterprise closed-source solutions."
"KVM is stable."
"The performance is great."
"The product's scalability is good...It's a very stable product."
"There is a strong emphasis on availability, and they have numerous API interfaces for distributed storage and the solution is quite known for its openness."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"KVM has a rich options set which can be directly used or via wrappers, such as libvirt."
"If you are a Linux desktop user, KVM is the solution to go with if you have to start virtual machines with Linux or other operating systems with almost zero extra configuration needed."
"The configuration and installation is pretty straightforward."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution were the support and performance of the product and the flexibility it gives you to work."
"This solution creates a snapshot of virtual machines so you can create test environments."
"It's very simple to use."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is easy to use."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to manage multiple operating systems through one application."
"The versatility, simplicity, and stability of the product are it's most valuable features."
"The cloning is a very useful tool."
"The operating system is very, very heavy."
"The pricing and technical support can be improved."
"The solution should be compatible with different systems."
"Storage via SMB3."
"Microsoft tech support is horrible."
"We'd like a template feature to help deploy VMs quickly."
"Hyper-V requires improvement with manageability."
"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"
"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."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"We would like to have a software lifecycle solution included in this solution. We can handle the software needed for KVM, but also the software that we provide. A lifecycle component would be very beneficial."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"It should have the functionality where if I move the mouse away from one screen, the context changes automatically."
"It could improve slightly with enhanced reporting capabilities that show the current status of the network."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"It would be good if we could use Hyper-V Windows subsystems with Linux and VirtualBox on the same instance. Currently, to be able to use VirtualBox, we have to restart the machine into an instance of Windows where Hyper-V is disabled, which is understandably very inconvenient."
"The solution could be more user-friendly."
"It has some issues when you have some weird device drivers. For instance, when you have a weird sound driver working on your machine, and the VirtualBox needs to output the sound of the virtual machine into the sound driver of the physical machine, the bare metal, it doesn't work too well. If you tweak lots of drivers and play around with the different kinds of drivers and machines, you will probably break something. I have not played with it too much and maybe it already supports it, but it would probably be good to have the ability to use a container from the virtual machine environment instead of spinning off a complete virtual machine. There are other tools for that. On Linux, you have a DXE, LXC framework, and you have Docker as well. Docker is good because it is multi-platform, and you can run Docker on pretty much anything, even different processors, but it would be good if we had a VirtualBox running on it while spinning off containers instead of full virtual machines. The other thing that will become important, and I'm pretty sure that they are thinking about it as well is that there's this new hardware platform that Apple is releasing, which is an ARM-based new chip. So, VirtualBox will probably have to work on ARM-based CPUs as well."
"The solution is a bit less stable than I would like."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is not flexible, It's not like VMware."