We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Shams K
Vmware Administrator at Intertech
Real User
Top 5
Budget-friendly, but needs security and other feature improvements
Pros and Cons
  • "This is the best solution for customers with budget constraints."
  • "Security, computing balance, and taking snapshots could be improved. Features like DRS and memory ballooning could be added."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case is for customers who want to virtualize their infrastructure, but are on a budget and don't need advanced features. 

What is most valuable?

This is the best solution for customers with budget constraints. 

What needs improvement?

Security could be improved and they need to have some sort of a Distributed Resource Scheduler like VMware. Hyper-V doesn't have that kind of a solution. Computing balance could be improved. If you have three or four nodes in a cluster, it should look at the load and based on the algorithm they use, it will place the VMs automatically onto a utilized node in the cluster. Memory ballooning, where unused memory can be cleaned and given to demanded VMs, is a feature I would like to see. 

Taking snapshots could also be improved. It's not straightforward and I had a couple of issues with the Windows server 2000 tool when I took a snapshot of the active directory. When I went to restore that snapshot, I had a problem with active directory sync issues. VMware doesn't have this problem. Even if you're taking a snapshot of the active directory, you can easily revert back and you will not have any trouble with active directory replications. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Hyper-V since 2012. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable, especially if you do Hyper-V clustering. Some customers don't invest much into IT infrastructure, so I design Hyper-V-cluster-based solutions. The only potential problems are attacks on Windows servers, vulnerability issues, or receiving stolen packages could require you to restart it. But it does its job. 

How are customer service and support?

Some of my customers have software assurance from Microsoft, but those who don't have to pay if they need technical assistance. Microsoft Azure has support, but if a customer has deployed the infrastructure on-premises and they don't have software assurance, they will have a problem getting support from Microsoft. 

How was the initial setup?

The installation took about fifteen to twenty minutes for a Microsoft Windows server. 

For deployment, you need expertise in terms of storage, network, and computing. If a customer requires a high performance, we need to look at the computing, processor, and what kind of storage and network switches we're using. You need an expertise team in order to get the best solution. 

What about the implementation team?

I installed this product myself. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I recommend Hyper-V to customers with budget constraints. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

VMware has a lot of features. For example, with vMotion, if an administrator wants to do maintenance, they can do live migrations. Hyper-V does the job and is okay, but it's not the same as VMware. 

What other advice do I have?

If you are on a budget and can't invest too much into IT infrastructure, I recommend Hyper-V. If budget isn't a problem and you're looking for the best solution, I would go for VMware. I have about 85 customers that are using Hyper-V clusters at the moment. Hyper-V is okay for utilizing the file server, clusters, or active directory, but you won't get advanced features. 

I would rate Hyper-V a six out of ten because it is missing a lot of features. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
Flag as inappropriate
IT Operations Manager at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
Real User
An advanced solution with good management and the capability to scale
Pros and Cons
  • "I find that most of the competition is more or less the same. However, Hyper-V is, when you compare it to the older platforms like VMware, a little bit more advanced at this stage."
  • "If a person has never implemented the solution before, they might find the process difficult."

What is our primary use case?

We mostly use Microsoft Hyper-V in our production environment.

What is most valuable?

I find that most of the competition is more or less the same. However, Hyper-V is, when you compare it to the older platforms like VMware, a little bit more advanced at this stage. 

I like the System Center part of it, the System Center VMM, where you can manage all the stuff together in the orchestrator and those kinds of things. That was not really available when we looked at Proxmox and other options.

Microsoft's got the better deployment tools like MBT and conflict manager, which is not in the other platform.

For me, the initial setup was very easy.

The solution has been very stable.

The scalability on offer is good.

What needs improvement?

It's hard to compare it to other solutions. Everything has almost the same offering.

It's possible that more deployment tools might make it a bit better.

If a person has never implemented the solution before, they might find the process difficult. 

The next generation should at least include most of the tools of the next operating system.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution from the start. I likely started using it around 2006. It's been well over a decade. I've used it for many, many years at this point. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The product is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very simple in my case. I've got a certification, so for me, it's almost like second nature. For someone with less experience, it's possible it may be a bit difficult.

What about the implementation team?

I am able to handle the implementation myself. I do not need an integrator or consultant. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did look at Proxmox and Citrix Hypervisor, among other solutions. 

What other advice do I have?

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I'm using the 2012 and 2016 versions of the product.

I'm more familiar with Hyper-V and with Microsoft products. I've got certification in that as well. There are some management solutions out from Microsoft, which are not just for Hyper-V, but for a lot of things. With these, it's almost like an all-in-one product, which you don't really get when you look at your Linux-based virtualizers. For example, with Proxmox, there is not really management. You have these notes that you couple up and then you have a backup server, however, you don't really have something that you can orchestrate those things with. Citrix, I can't speak to as I didn't really work with Citrix that much.

If you run any kind of network solution, I would rather recommend Hyper-V over any other hypervisor at this moment - unless you are looking at it from a cost of ownership perspective.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. There's no such thing as a perfect product, however, I'm pretty happy with this.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Learn what your peers think about Hyper-V. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2022.
566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Solutions Specialist at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Powerful, easy to use, but more integration needed
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution is very powerful, easy to use, user-friendly, and integrates well with Windows. If you are looking for a hundred percent Microsoft environment it would be a good idea to go with Hyper-V. They work wonderfully together."
  • "In an upcoming release, they can improve by having better cloud integration. We are all moving towards the clouds and the integration is only through the Azure Stack, there should be tools built in to move the VMs natively to the cloud and infrastructure. Additionally, they could provide some form of multi-cloud integration."

What is our primary use case?

I have been making solutions around the Hyper-V bundles for my clients. For example, hyper-converged infrastructure, such as in vSAN and Vsphere for company data centers.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very powerful, easy to use, user-friendly, and integrates well with Windows. If you are looking for a hundred percent Microsoft environment it would be a good idea to go with Hyper-V. They work wonderfully together.

There are a lot more features and is easier to use compared to previous releases. They were using PowerCLI for the management but now it is all GUI-based which has made it a lot easier to use.

What needs improvement?

Hyper-V is not a type one hypervisor, such as vSphere. When it comes to Hyper-V, it is a role in Windows Server. Hyper-V could have been much leaner and much more powerful, but it becomes only the Hyper-V part of it. There should be some distribution or limit to Hyper-V, such as in vSphere.

The missing factor or parameter, in Hyper-V and all of the functionality, is a role it plays inside the Windows operating system. You have to enable those roles. That is something not appreciated in a data center because Windows is a general-purpose operating system, not for the sole purpose of doing these types of operations. They could skim down the version of the operating system and have it customized for virtualization, not as a general-purpose operating system.

In an upcoming release, they can improve by having better cloud integration. We are all moving towards the clouds and the integration is only through the Azure Stack, there should be tools built in to move the VMs natively to the cloud and infrastructure. Additionally, they could provide some form of multi-cloud integration.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been involved with Hyper-V for approximately two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable in my experience.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is good because there are a lot of administrators out there in the market who are well-versed in Microsoft technologies.

How was the initial setup?

The installation is straightforward. The installation time can vary depending on if you have preloaded configurations. If you were to do it from scratch then it would take approximately 20 minutes.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Hyper-V is cost-effective and is a one-time purchase. Microsoft has multiple licensing options available, such as a subscription model and an outside purchase model that customers can choose as per their requirements.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have evaluated VMware vSphere.

What other advice do I have?

Hyper-V is very popular in the market for data centers and most of my clients are using Microsoft in some form or another but it might not be their core ERP.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
CEO at ICES International
Real User
Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions and has high availability
Pros and Cons
  • "II prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions."

    What is our primary use case?

    I'm mostly implementing Hyper-V solutions. Most of my clients are implementing Hyper-V on-premises, and on cloud my clients are using Microsoft Azure.

    I am a Microsoft architect. I'm certified in Microsoft. My company is located in Cameroon and many countries in Africa and out of Africa. In my company we are working on Microsoft solutions at 80% on Windows Server, SQL, Exchange, Microsoft for Business, ISO. We are training with these solutions and implementing them.

    What is most valuable?

    Most clients are using Microsoft solutions. I prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions. For example, when you have Hyper-V, it doesn't make sense to pay more for another license to buy VMware. For me, it's a waste.

    With the Windows data center, I can have an infinite number of virtual machines. In the past, VMware was very important maybe 8 or 10 years ago, but with Hyper-V it has navigation ability and it's integrated with Windows Viptela 16 for free. People want navigation and high availability. All these features are included with Hyper-V for free when you have a license of Windows Server.

    What needs improvement?

    For Hyper-V, the copy and paste function could be improved. You cannot continue copying from the host machine to the virtual machine. It's very difficult. You can paste text if you want to extract the command from the virtual machine. You can save the command on the host machine and pass through the main activity to paste the command on the virtual machine. It's good but sometimes when we want to work very quickly, it would help if Microsoft integrated the possibility to paste a file from the host machine to the virtual machine.

    The integration tools are sometimes not very smooth. Most clients can't develop it very well because most administrators are working on host machines or from a laptop administering virtual machines. So the administrator working on a laptop  must have the possibility maybe from the host to paste on the virtual machine.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's very stable. I have never had a problem with Hyper-V's stability.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable because you can migrate the virtual machine for Hyper-V to the cloud easily. Each time they release a new OS, they are adding new features so far it's scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    I've never had an issue with Hyper-V where I needed to ask for support. I can resolve most issues myself.

    How was the initial setup?

    Deployment is very easy. 

    It depends, but it can take two or three hours to implement it. If the infrastructure is difficult, it can take one or two days. It depends on the number of virtual machines currently in use.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    RameshDasari
    IT Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Provided a good cost-saving from the management perspective but disaster recovery capabilities need improvement
    Pros and Cons
    • "It has provided a good cost-saving from the management perspective."
    • "Disaster recovery capabilities are the primary choice for improvement."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are an IT service company. We understand the technology and we provide Microsoft solutions, Linux, and Cisco solutions. We have a 360-degree relationship with Microsoft, Cisco, and two other companies. We are a premium partner with Microsoft. We use Hyper-V for virtualization and the consolidation of infrastructures. It is a cost-saving solution. We currently use 25% physical, and 75% virtual resources via Hyper-V, i.e. a ratio of 2.5 to 7.5. So we are using the virtual aspect to a greater extent.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It has provided a good cost-saving from the management perspective. It's easy to use, and understand. It's definitively great working on Microsoft Hyper-V. It was a great opportunity to really contribute while cutting down our company costs.

    What is most valuable?

    I would say that it's easy to use, and cost-effective. These are the two major factors why we like Hyper-V. I would say VMware ESX is the best, but Microsoft Hyper-V also is very good. It's easy to use and it's cost-effective compared to ESX.

    What needs improvement?

    Disaster recovery capabilities are the primary choice for improvement. There could also be improvements in virtualization, performance, management, monitoring, reporting, recommendations, integration, customization, and technical support. Performance and up-scaling are the most important areas in need of improvement.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have experience with Hyper-V for about 10 to 12 years. I'm an IT manager who manages multiples things, like virtualization and email.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's about 90% stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We would give it a scalability rating of 4 out of 5, compared to VMware ESX which in terms of scalability is excellent.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The support is not excellent, but it is very good. It could be improved.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward, it's easy. I did it on my own without assistance.

    What about the implementation team?

    We are a team of five to six members, who work on this product in-house. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Microsoft Hyper-V is not expensive and is easy to set up.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We considered App-V for publishing, but it is a costly solution and is not for virtualization technology but as an end-user solution. It is for application publishing. We have also considered VMware ESX. The main difference between VMware virtualization and Microsoft Hyper-V is the VR capabilities of VMware ESX are better, but both are good.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are very satisfied with Hyper-V. I would rate Hyper-V as 7 out of 10.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    IT & Security Team Leader at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    Stable solution but has a lot of room for improvements
    Pros and Cons
    • "It is stable."
    • "In general, based on my little experience with Hyper-V, I see a lot of obstacles. I think it falls behind the other competitors."

    What needs improvement?

    In general, based on my little experience with Hyper-V, I see a lot of obstacles. I think it falls behind the other competitors.

    There are several areas that can be improved. The network configuration, for example, can be improved. The storage as well, can be improved. I find it very dependent on the active directory as a service, overall. I think they have to review that. I understand that active directory is an integral part of that infrastructure for authentication and logging, etc..., but it can be an obstacle. I think they should review that mechanism.

    They have to review the overall architecture of that solution. It is a Type-2 virtualization, which means it is not bare metal. That is one problem or one issue that has to be reviewed. In my view as an engineer, the best solutions in this domain are those which are bare metal. Those that are deployed directly on the hardware get the most out of the hardware. But in Microsoft, this is not the case, it is implemented on Windows. If something goes wrong with the Windows machine, all the VMs on it are in trouble. And we all know that Windows has always been a target for viruses and bugs. So in my opinion, they have to review that, to remove that design.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I don't personally have strong experience with Hyper-V, but as a company we are reselling it.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Based on my experience, it is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is not that scalable or flexible.

    On a scale from one to 5, I would rate the scalability a three.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is easy.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I think Microsoft is a little better in pricing. But as I said, I'm not a pricing person, and I can't speak with great confidence on that. But in general, Microsoft is a little lower than BMI.

    What other advice do I have?

    I do not highly recommend Hyper-V.

    On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Hyper-V a six.

    In terms of advice to people looking to implement Hyper-V, I would tell them not to rely much on the Hyper-V solution in terms of flexibility and scalability. It is a stable solution, but overall, considering the backup, the replication, and the whole range of features that VMR offers, I think that it's better if they look at VMR or other contenders, in this technology.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    User at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    A compatible, easily installable, scalable and stable solution which allows us to utilize our physical environment
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution allows us to take advantage of our physical environment."
    • "Traditional architecture, such as converged infrastructure, should be done away with"

    What is our primary use case?

    The solution serves our needs as an education entity in the UAE.

    What is most valuable?

    Both Hyper-V and VMware have similar features, including network utilization. 

    The solution allows us to take advantage of our physical environment. We save on cost and computing. It has good performance when compared with the physical, normal, traditional way of computing. The VMs are easy to deploy and to manage from a central administration portal, in respect of managing the workloads. 

    What needs improvement?

    Traditional architecture, such as converged infrastructure, should be done away with. So, nowadays, we can save space, like space footprint. If one is using hyper-converged infrastructure, everything will be virtualized. So, basically, we can state that we are a completely software-defined data center once we move to the hyper-converged infrastructure. That is our target.

    At present, Hyper-V can be managed by the SCVMM, but it doesn't have the portal. In VMware vSphere there is a portal, through which the VMs can be managed. Microsoft is providing Windows helping center, but it should be dedicated to a certain extent. It doesn't have full features when compared to SCVMM. So, it's better to have something similar to that.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using Hyper-V for more than five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    While every product comes with issues, the solution works for us. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is the best.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was easy and pretty straightforward. 

    Since the solution is compatible with Azure Cloud and uses the same format, it will make it very easy for us to load the latter in the future, should we decide to do so. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Thanks to our enterprise agreement with Microsoft, Hyper-V is free for us. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    VMware vSphere licenses are very costly compared to Hyper-V because we have have our enterprise agreement with Microsoft, meaning that Hyper-V is free for us. We can use it without any problem.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would recommend the solution to someone who is fully Microsoft, one who is looking to implement Microsoft environment in its entirety. I recommend the solution to someone who plans to go with a hybrid environment through Azure. 

    I rate Hyper-V as a ten out of ten. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    Real User
    Easy to set up and scalable, but is quite expensive
    Pros and Cons
    • "The initial setup is very easy."
    • "The operating system is very, very heavy."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the product for multiple servers and for Dynamics AX, for example, the routing server, the load balancer, the application server, and stuff like that.

    What is most valuable?

    The initial setup is very easy.

    The scalability is okay.

    What needs improvement?

    The performance of VMware was better, which is why I've moved away from Hyper-V.

    The operating system is very, very heavy. Sometimes the system is pretty slow. Basically, the iOS performance is very slow, as compared to VMware. They must make the OS as simple and as smooth as they can to make it more user-friendly and faster.

    The product is quite expensive.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for about one year. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The performance isn't that great. If can be slow. 

    The stability is okay. I'd describe it as between 50 to 60% stable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability is decent. I'd say that it can scale to 60 to 70%.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We've had so many issues, however, we didn't really ask for help from Microsoft. We mostly did a lot of googling and worked to figure things out on our end. 

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I've recently moved over to vSphere. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The product is not difficult to set up. It's not overly complex. It's pretty straightforward. A company shouldn't have any problems with its implementation.

    What about the implementation team?

    The first time I did an implementation, I needed help from Microsoft. They assisted us originally.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution is quite expensive when you compare it to other products. Microsoft solutions aren't cheap. 

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm just a customer and an end-user.

    I have used the Hyper-V for Dynamics AX for a while, however, recently I moved to a virtual machine, VM.

    I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten. It's not the worst, however, it certainly is not the best either. 

    I would recommend Hyper-V to users, especially if they are dealing with a Microsoft OS.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate