Microsoft Virtual Server offers virtual environment solutions that enhance connectivity, management, and resource efficiency across cloud and on-premises setups.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Virtual Server | 7.5% |
| Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) | 22.4% |
| Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) | 14.9% |
| Other | 55.2% |
| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Application Virtualization | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | Microsoft Virtual Server vs Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | Microsoft Virtual Server vs Microsoft App-V | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | Microsoft Virtual Server vs Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) | 4.2 | 22.4% | 93% | 128 interviewsAdd to research |
| Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) | 4.4 | 14.9% | 96% | 25 interviewsAdd to research |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 16 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 7 |
| Large Enterprise | 14 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 43 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 10 |
| Large Enterprise | 16 |
Ideal for virtualizing environments, Microsoft Virtual Server enhances operational efficiency by integrating with existing tools while offering robust security and network integration. Its scalability and high availability support hybrid deployments, benefiting engineering, administration, and business functions.
What features does Microsoft Virtual Server offer?Microsoft Virtual Server finds use in engineering, administration, and testing applications across industries, leveraging cloud databases for better connectivity and enabling efficient operation in complex environments. It's particularly attractive for businesses needing centralized Active Directory management and file server access.
Microsoft Virtual Server was previously known as Virtual Server, MS Virtual Server.
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Software Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees | 4.5 | I use Microsoft Virtual Server on Azure as an end-user for basic server tasks. It's stable, scalable, and cost-effective, though identifying VM owners is tough. Snapshots are helpful, and overall, the service has been satisfactory. |
| Department Manager, Certification Project Management at Institute for Information Industry | 4.0 | I've used Microsoft Virtual Server for around ten years and find it stable, cost-effective, and easy to manage, though some technical support can be costly. Overall, it's served our on-premises needs well alongside Microsoft Azure and Outlook. |
| Senior Engineer Identity and Access at a government with 201-500 employees | 4.0 | I use Microsoft Virtual Server primarily for authentication and user management. Its performance, pricing, and PowerShell commands are valuable. However, the user interface needs improvement, and better integration and drag-and-drop features would enhance report formation and monitoring. |
| Azure cloud support engineer at Tek Experts | 4.5 | I find Microsoft Virtual Server convenient for deploying various Windows versions quickly without needing physical hardware. It offers useful features like detachable storage and network security, but I wish it had better compatibility with macOS in the Azure Marketplace. |
| Student at Queens University Belfast | 3.5 | I found Microsoft Virtual Server convenient and compatible with Mac for using Windows tools, despite occasional lag issues. It's easier to use than other virtualization options but could improve in performance. Overall, it's a good alternative for virtualization needs. |
| IT Director at Library of Congress | 4.0 | I use Microsoft Virtual Server for application virtualization across multiple locations because it is easy to deploy and manage, improving our operational cost and efficiency. However, it needs better customization. We switched from physical servers for these benefits. |
| Co-Founder at Mandelbulb Technologies | 4.0 | In my company, we use Microsoft Virtual Server alongside Visual Studio Code for decision-making regarding PaaS or virtual machine deployment. While cost was a concern, Microsoft Fabric addresses this, potentially replacing Virtual Server with a unified service. |
| CEO at WilCom Systems Ltd | 3.5 | We find Microsoft Virtual Server valuable for its ease of use and performance, particularly with familiarity in Microsoft products. Its pay-as-you-go model offers immediate ROI. However, improving currency localization for pricing would be beneficial. We evaluated other cloud and on-premise options. |
| Sr. Technical Support Engineer at Netcon Technologies India Private Limited | 3.5 | I find Microsoft Virtual Server's security, integration, and interface valuable, though improvements are needed in features like recording manager, failover, pricing, and scalability. These areas have shortcomings that require development to enhance the overall experience. |
| Senior lead Enterprise Designer Architect at a government with 10,001+ employees | 4.0 | I find Microsoft Virtual Server to be stable and user-friendly, offering a return on investment by reducing hardware expenses. However, it needs improvements in security and cost performance. I've not considered other solutions or used alternative cloud providers. |
I am using Microsoft Virtual Server as an end-user. I am using Microsoft Virtual Server Discovery and Microsoft Virtual Server ITSM, which is a basic tool, not a development or discovery tool. I am just an end-user now.
We are not using it as a risk management tool. It is just a ticketing tool that we are using.
Virtual Servers are valuable to us. We have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for the last five years.
We use it for common applications and server applications. Microsoft Virtual Server machines are good compared to on-premises infrastructure. You can take a snapshot whenever we require it, and we can rebuild it. The data is safe, easily accessible, fast, and scalable.
For snapshots, whenever we do any maintenance activity, the admin team takes snapshots. If there are any issues or upgrade problems, they revert back to the old one.
For improvements, sometimes users use service accounts to log into the server. Identifying the server owner or the virtual machine owner is a difficult task for admins. Manually, someone needs to update owner information. If something were available automatically instead of updating manually, that would be beneficial.
We have been using it for the last five years.
Microsoft Virtual Server is stable.
It is scalable.
Microsoft Virtual Server is affordable. We can save 50% compared to on-premises infrastructure. We can reduce costs almost 50% compared to on-premises.
I do not use any centralized dashboard as an end-user. I use it as an end-user application for the server. Microsoft is good. It is easy to use. I have it only on Azure. We acquired it through Azure Marketplace. The service is satisfactory. I gave this review a rating of 9.
Today, we mainly use Microsoft Outlook, the Azure version, for our email server. It is basically still an Exchange server, but it is hosted by Microsoft. We are not using Exchange server by ourselves.
For our web server, SharePoint is a product for the portal, but we are not using SharePoint right now. We just use ASP.NET to develop our portal.
Our company uses Microsoft Virtual Server. We use Microsoft Virtual Server for all our servers, so we rarely use the real server right now. We always use virtual server to serve our application.
The advantage of Microsoft Virtual Server is that it is easy to manage, and we can share the hardware for many servers. The space consumption is very low.
I have seen a positive impact from Microsoft Virtual Server that saves money.
I do not know about disadvantages as I am not a system engineer, but something can be challenging or complex.
I have been using it for a few years, maybe eight years or 10 years.
I think it is stable for us, and if I would rate stability from one to 10, I can give it nine.
In general, I have not heard about any limitations on scalability, or I never heard about any problems.
I would give technical support from Microsoft a seven because some advanced technical support is not free. We must pay for advanced technical support, and sometimes it is expensive.
Positive
I do not get the detail of the money saved, but I am not a system engineer, so I do not know how much we saved.
From one to 10, I would give it eight in terms of expense.
It is deployed on-premises.
In general, I rate my overall experience with Microsoft Virtual Server as an eight out of ten.
Positive
It's more like having your local PC or laptop on the cloud. You can spin up your virtual servers or virtual machines on the cloud, eliminating the need to purchase physical hardware. You still need a laptop to access the virtual server, but the virtual server on the cloud isn’t tied to a specific brand like a local PC.
Cloud services are not platform-dependent, so you can deploy various versions of Windows, such as Windows 2016, 2019, and the latest versions, within a few minutes. In contrast, deploying these operating systems locally might require a dedicated network. They can be up and running on the cloud in a few minutes.
You can detach and reuse the storage drive without disrupting the virtual server, which is quite useful. Additionally, it provides options like network security groups to protect virtual machines from unauthorized access.
The tool offers compatibility with various operating systems through the Azure Marketplace. You can access a wide range of Windows operating systems, both enterprise and commercial.
One feature I would like to see is better compatibility with macOS. Due to business policies, macOS isn't currently available in the Azure Marketplace. Microsoft should come to agreement with it.
Microsoft Virtual Server is highly stable. It offers different SKUs based on the intended workloads, allowing you to deploy according to your needs.
The machine scale set is ideal for scalability. It enables the handling of heavy workloads by scaling based on your configuration.
The setup is straightforward. First, you need an Azure account with a subscription. Then, you create a virtual network. Once that's done, deploying the virtual server takes 10-20 minutes. After that, the virtual machine runs, and you're ready to connect.
I rate the tool a nine out of ten.
I wasn't able to work on SQLite using the desktop version, so I needed to update my assignment. I feel like Microsoft Virtual Server is a better, more convenient choice.
It is easy to use. It offers good compatibility with other operating systems. That's one of the reasons I used it. I am a Mac user.
Sometimes, it can cause a lag. It depends on the operating system and the working machine. If your machine is good and has a fast processing time, then maybe you can work on the desktop version easily.
Otherwise, you might find some challenges working on the desktop version because it causes lag.
Even I was using it on my Mac, so it was lagging a bit. I got some references, and then it stopped lagging after that. They asked me to work on a loop, and then it started working on the saving.
Microsoft Virtual Server could be easier to use. Otherwise, it's a good substitute for other virtualization options.
I would rate the stability a six out of ten. So, it can be improved.
I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten.
In my university, if people have a Windows operating system, then they might not have a server or anything. They already have everything.
The reason I chose Microsoft Virtual Server was because I had to use some Windows tools. I was working. Actually, I just had to use some Windows tools from the university for IT.
The setup process was straightforward. It took a couple of minutes to set up.
I had to install an application for that. Then maybe it asked for some credentials.
I deployed it myself.
For me, I have been provided everything from the university.
Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. If you have a Windows operating system or if you can find a substitute, then you can go for the substitute.
I use the solution for application virtualization. We have deployed the tool in multiple locations.
The solution is easy to manage. It can be deployed easily. The product has improved our operational cost and efficiency.
Customization must be improved. The tool must provide more freedom to the customer.
I have been using the solution for 5 years.
I rate the product’s stability a 9 out of 10.
The product’s scalability feature has supported our growth well. We have different numbers of users on different sites. We have around 200 users. I rate the scalability a 9 out of 10.
The customer support is fine.
Positive
We have used physical servers before. We switched to Microsoft Virtual Server due to its cost and ease of management.
The initial deployment was complex. Now, it is straightforward. I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. The deployment can be done in days. The time taken for deployment depends on the infrastructure.
Microsoft Virtual Server is a low-cost solution.
I will recommend the tool to others. My advice depends on the infrastructure someone is using. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.
I use the solution in my company depending on our client's problems. My company has used Visual Studio Code based Modeler along with Microsoft Virtual Server.
In my company, we have been using Microsoft SQL Server on virtual machines to help us decide if we want to use the tool as a PaaS solution offering or if we want to use it as an offering meant for virtual machines. Microsoft SQL Server on a virtual machine is known as Microsoft Virtual Server.
Microsoft Virtual Server has already been improved since Microsoft Fabric is available. Microsoft SQL's data warehouse is available as a component within Microsoft Fabric.
Microsoft Virtual Server's cost was an area of concern. Microsoft Fabric and the shared costing structure have already mitigated the price-related shortcomings of Microsoft Virtual Server.
I feel Microsoft Virtual Server will be stopped in a couple of months or a couple of years, and it will be completely replaced with SQL Server data warehouse and Microsoft Fabric. Microsoft Fabric has unified all the technologies, like real-time analytics, with data warehouses and then with the use of Power BI on top of data warehouses. Microsoft plans to get rid of all the separate components and start pitching Microsoft Fabric as an alternate solution to all its different or related services offered, but it could take some time, and it will not be an overnight switch. The long-term plan for Microsoft is to unify all its services under Microsoft Fabric.
I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for more than a year. My company has a partnership with Microsoft.
It is a stable solution.
The performance and scalability offered by the tool meet our company's expectations.
My company deals with small, medium, and enterprise-sized companies that use the tool.
The support provided for the product is satisfactory. If the product team gets involved, I rate the support a ten out of ten, but otherwise, I rate it seven or eight.
Positive
The product's initial setup phase was easy because of the documentation.
The time required to deploy the product depends on the requirements of the tool's customers. From site to site, requirements may vary, but I can say that the product can be deployed in a couple of minutes to a couple of hours.
The cost of the tool was an area of concern since users were forced to buy licenses for Microsoft Virtual Server and ADF separately. The tool's cost has been taken care of with the help of Microsoft Fabric and with a consolidated or unified interface, where the entire product serves as a SaaS offering for the user.
Amazon Redshift was a product that my company had tried, but it can't be compared with Microsoft Virtual Server.
The product is used for testing and development. The effectiveness of the product in the area of testing and development is something that depends on the problem faced by our company's client. Nowadays, our company prefers to do everything on Microsoft Fabric because it also includes Synapse Data Warehouse, which is Azure SQL Data Warehouse's alternative.
The most beneficial area of the product for virtualization needs stems from the fact that one of our company's customers could deploy it on an on-premises system. The tool had always caused issues in areas like security and maintenance, but the product's virtualization has helped as it offers a layer of protection on top of the virtual machines, making it easy to maintain, and in the future if a user wants to move away to a different offering, it is easier to do that on Microsoft Virtual Server.
When it comes to the integration capabilities, similar to the data warehousing capabilities offered by any other solution, the tool offers connection strings, and you have the ability to connect and pull the data, which is usually something that depends on the ETL tool, but Microsoft Virtual Server is quite compatible with the ETL tools, like ADF.
One person can maintain the entire solution.
If people plan to use Microsoft Virtual Server or any other services by Azure, they need to look into Microsoft Fabric since it is a tool with some nice offerings.
I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
We use the product to host applications for a connection management solution.
The platform’s value lies in the outsourcing of concerns related to infrastructure management. It allows us to redirect our focus toward managing cybersecurity.
The platform’s most valuable features are ease of use and performance. Familiarity with Microsoft products makes the application easy to navigate as well.
They should introduce a way to localize the currency for product pricing.
We have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for four years.
The platform is sufficiently stable. We have to restart the system once in a while. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.
The platform is scalable. The number of users for Microsoft Virtual Server varies from 200 to 500 in our organization. We plan to increase the usage.
The initial setup is straightforward. The process involves deploying the services on the cloud servers. Occasionally, the need to download and install additional components that are not compatible with existing ones may pose a slight challenge.
The return on investment for Microsoft Virtual Server is almost instant due to its pay-as-you-go model, eliminating the need for upfront capital expenses.
The product is expensive.
We thoroughly evaluated various options, including both cloud-based servers and on-premise virtual servers.
We use Microsoft Virtual Server for a manual approach to deploying and managing virtual machines. It involves logging in to the Virtual Server and performing tasks such as initiating remote services, executing updates, and installing necessary components.
It has proven to be most effective for workloads associated with running web portals. While we do not engage in highly complex integrations, the product seamlessly accommodates our integration requirements.
The platform is scalable. We can easily scale it depending on workload. It works flexibly for scaling down when the workload decreases as well.
I advise others to consider the server size that aligns with their current needs rather than opting for extremes. It would help in optimizing the prices and making it economical.
I rate it a seven out of ten.
Security, integration, and interface are the best features of Microsoft Virtual Server.
Microsoft Virtual Server has a lot of features like recording manager or failover, which need to be developed since such areas have shortcomings where improvements are required.
The pricing and scalability are areas of the product with shortcomings where improvements are required.
I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for seven years.
Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
With Microsoft Virtual Server, my company caters to the needs of all clients, including SMBs, enterprise-sized companies, the government sector, PSUs, and all of the other types of customers as well.
My company has not faced any issues with the solution's technical support. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.
Positive
I rate the product's initial setup phase a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.
Compared to the other products in the market, I believe that the prices of Microsoft Virtual Server are on the higher side.
Speaking about how Microsoft Virtual Server has streamlined the consolidation efforts for our company's clients, I would say that my company deals in a few projects involving Microsoft Virtual Server and Hyper-V. My company works with projects involving products like VMware or Nutanix.
The product has helped my company's customers improve the testing workflow.
The most beneficial part of the product to deal with the virtualization part stems from the ability it provides to deal with the application virtualization part and in the consolidation of applications on Microsoft Virtual Server while providing a single dashboard that gives a view of the complete workload.
My company has experienced some scalability issues with Microsoft Virtual Server as our company's clients' operations grew, especially in the area of licensing, which doesn't come as a built-in component in the virtualization card.
I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.
The solution can be used for lowering hardware expenses.
It is stable and easy to use.
The security performance and cost.
I have been using Microsoft Virtual Server for eight years.
It is a stable solution.
It is a scalable solution.
The initial setup is easy.
I have seen a Return on Investment.
Overall, I would rate the product an eight out of ten.
