Nutanix AHV Virtualization Reviews

Nutanix AHV is a hypervisor and we are using it to manage multiple nodes. We are using Prism in Nutanix AHV.

Nutanix can be helpful if you save files in a file server where the data is identical and spread across multiple server numbers. We can recommend AHV.

The most valuable feature of Nutanix AHV is that it can be managed through Hyper-V, which is Microsoft's hypervisor, VMware, and Citrix XenServer.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for approximately six years.

Nutanix AHV is stable.

We have one client using Nutanix AHV.

The support from Nutanix AHV could be better. However, the response is okay.

The initial installation is complex. It took approximately four days.

One of the largest advantages of the Nutanix AHV is their license includes the de-duplication and the compression. This is the only hypervisor where there is no need to buy additional licenses, all the de-duplication and hypervisor for compression are available. If you chose vSAN, de-duplication is not possible without flash. You should have all-flash. Additionally, if you need de-duplication you need to buy additional licenses. That is not the case with Nutanix AHV.

The licensing overall from Nutanix AHV is very good compared to other solutions.

I rate Nutanix AHV a seven out of ten.

Using AHV, we have a built-in VR solution. It operates using a reduplication-based unique package transfer process. 

The software based controller has high consumption. This could be improved. 

I have used this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

I would rate the support for this solution a four out of five. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

The most valuable features are that AHV is highly secured, simple to set up, and easy and flexible to use.

Adding even more integrations would be an improvement.

I'm very satisfied with AHV's stability.

AHV is scalable.

Nutanix's customer support is good, one of its biggest selling points.

I would rate AHV as ten out of ten.

Nutanix AHV is one control plane for the entire infrastructure we operate.

It is very convenient.

Our customers like that it is license-free.

You don't need any other instruments for control, AHV. You only need to look at the prism to control all infrastructure.

AHV is a very powerful solution that is on par with VMware.

Nutanix has all of the features that customers require.

I would like to see more automation of Day One operations, such as DRS, and HA.

AHV has managing controls but could be better.

The disadvantage is that you must be familiar with Linux in order to delve deep into this solution if necessary.

I am aware of one disadvantage for AHV at this time, which is that Nutanix does not yet have a disaster recovery solution for AHV. We use another solution. Nutanix has metro clusters for VMware but no production solution for AHV. It would be an advantage if Nutanix would include this option.

I am an integrator. We resell and implement solutions.

I don't recall any major issues with AHV. Customers who are unfamiliar with Linux and KVM may encounter difficulties. It can be a problem. And I believe that the number of Linux specialists is significantly lower than the number of VMware specialists. It could be a problem. There is a steep learning curve.

It scales in the same way other solutions do. Scalability is good.

You only need to add nodes to the cluster, and it will automatically expand.

Their support is very good, and they can assist you with AHV issues. You don't need to understand this solution thoroughly, Nutanix can help you.

We work mostly with Nutanix, VxRail, and vSAN.

The initial setup is not difficult for me. I'm very familiar with the solutions, and it's always the same for me when I implement them; I don't notice any significant differences.

Nutanix AHV is free.

In general, the most significant issue for our customers is that Nutanix is the most expensive solution, and not all can afford the solution.

I am a partner and a hyper-converged system implementer. I sell for customers, and I need to understand the differences between various systems in order to explain and answer customer questions about what's best for their environment.

The customer should learn Linux, but is not necessary, because we are the main stack of operations is done with prism. Its GUI is ideal for user experience, and they don't need to go to CLI to do anything.

I would rate Nutanix AHV a nine out of ten. Because every vendor is required to rate it a 10, but I believe that AHV has areas in which they can improve.

We are a hosting provider that uses Nutanix AHV for our own needs. We have our platform that is using Nutanix and we use it for the needs of our customers in their companies.

Nutanix has allowed us to offer our customers a solid, scalable, and efficient solution for their infrastructures in order to support them in their digital transformation projects.

For our markets here in Morocco, we are mainly working with server virtualization, and the most valuable feature is the software-defined storage and hyper-converged infrastructure.

The management console needs to improve to make it easier for administrators. For example, to be able to reorganize our VMs, folders, and subfolders, similarly as it is provided in VMware. We can sort, manage, and organize VMs, folders, or subfolders in VMware.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for approximately five years.

The solution is very stable.

Nutanix AHV is scalable.

We have approximately 6 people using the solution in my organization.

The technical support is very good and the time that it takes for them to respond is fast, we are very satisfied.

Positive

The initial setup is easy, it takes approximately one hour to complete.

In-house team

The price of the solution can always be lower. However, the price of the solution is reasonable.

I encourage people to use this solution because we are a partner with them for about four to five years, and we are happy with them.

I rate Nutanix AHV a seven out of ten.

We are using Nutanix AHV for creating various production virtual machines and providing access to our customers.

The solution is user-friendly and provides good virtual machine backups. The user interface gets updated when there is a new release.

The solution could improve the call logging system to HPE, it is a bit tedious.

I have been using this solution for approximately four years.

The stability of the solution is excellent.

If I want to add one or two new nodes in the next three years, it is done very easily by installing the latest available hypervisor. Alternatively, I can upgrade the existing hypervisor.

We use paid support for the solution.

The installation process is straightforward.

The price of the solution is fair and if you want support there are additional fees. 

One of the main benefits of HPE products is when they are providing you a warranty or guarantee of, for example,  three years or five years, the product will work for seven to eight years. This is the most beautiful advantage for HPE products.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Nutanix AHV a ten out of ten.

Our primary use is as an application server.

This product is has helped us move from traditional infrastructure to an HCI infrastructure.

The entirety of the infrastructure resides in the same product, which makes it easy to troubleshoot and investigate problems. In a traditional infrastructure, it is separated according to hardware such as storage. When we have issues, we spend a lot of time investigating. With Nutanix, it helps reduce the time required to resolve problems.

Some of our applications do not support Nutanix. There are some compatibility issues and some of our software cannot run on it. It worked well in the beginning but after using it for some time, we found some limitations in terms of compatibility with other software. It has been okay because it does run our main applications.

I have been using Acropolis for between two and three years.

The stability is good and it can run our main applications. Aside from the issues with compatibility, it is quite stable.

Being our application server, we sometimes have almost 1,000 users. We have two or three administrators to maintain it.

We have obtained technical support from the vendor.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is quick to set up and start using it.

We brought in third-party consultants to assist us with the implementation.

We now deploy it using our own team, which has fewer than 10 people.

We don't have to pay extra for Acropolis because it is built into Nutanix. If we were using another product, like VMware, then we would need to have a separate license for the hypervisor.

There are many other options that we can choose from that will not have the same problems in terms of compatibility. In the future, we will probably move to Dell to use a different solution.

This is a product that is certainly good for some use cases, but it is not the best. It would be better if the compatibility with applications like third-party backup software was improved.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use the on-prem deployment model and our primary use case for this solution is for virtualization. We also use it for Calm & Karbon. 

Save on VMware Licencing costs. 

The most valuable aspect of this solution is that you don't need to pay for it. It's free, as opposed to paying for a VMware license. 

They need to work on the deployment of virtual machines. They need to streamline the process of templates and deploying virtual machines.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for over a year.

It is very stable.

It is very easy to scale. In terms of our users, we are running active directory on there, we spool due to migrating our exchange servers onto that platform as well. At the moment it's just active directory and a couple of other systems. There are around 500 users on the active directory. 

Their technical support is outstanding. They are unbelievable, the best support I've received from any IT company, ever.

We are a VMware shop but always keen on looking at new solutions which work well and save us money. AHV is great but we cant deploy it throughout as we rely heavily on VMware SRM for Disaster Recovery and BCP.   

The initial setup was very straightforward. We have partners that when we buy the kits, they come and do the installation for us. Our partners assist us with the installation. 

No, there is no other solution besides AHV that we would look at. 

It's a great product. It's relatively easy to use and it works well. Everyone that's moved their machines onto that platform says they are amazed by the performance. It works very well. Performance is good, management of the systems is pretty easy, upgrading and all that stuff is seamless. It's a great platform and I would recommend it to anyone.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We are distributors and to meet with our clients' requirements, it supports many OS systems. It monitors and protects the entire system.

Simplicity is the most valuable feature. With the management capabilities and monitoring tools, clients can do everything they need to do in their day to day operations.

There are some activities that need to be done by the GUI, but can't. The users should not be aware of this, only the engineers who are involved with the move of the system, sharing or reconfiguration.

When we need to share, publish, or encrypt something, we still need to perform it using the command line. We need to exit from the COI for the GUI to fix some of the features.

If we compare with VMware NSX the implementation is not quite as interesting.

I have been using this solution for almost three years.

We use several versions of this solution 5.0, 5.1, 5.5, and 5.10.

This solution is very stable.

Scaling is basic, as you just have to purchase new hardware. It connects to the network and discovers the ITVC. It's very easy.

Technical support is a critical part. They have provided a lot of work for us. When we open a case we save the facility, usually the FAMS meter on the V1 perspective.

Previously, we were working with another solid solution, but I am no longer working with them.

The main difference was the complexity. The tiers are very complicated. Nutanix AHV is easier.

The initial setup is very easy.

It only takes two hours to deploy.

Some of the features required additional licenses.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We used to have a traditional data center. When we changed to hyper-converged, it was simplified, more robust, and faster.

Nutanix AHV is based on KVM, which is the open-source version. In terms of improvement, I think that they could have more partnerships with providers. We had an issue with a software called ClearPath from Aruba. Aruba has a ready image that works for VMware, as an example, but they don't have a ready image that works directly with AHV. We have to use the KVM version and customize it to work for AHV. 

It would be beneficial to have more partners to improve the service. Not just any providers, but well-known providers in the market. Also, more integration with ready systems would be helpful.

I have been using this solution for three months. We acquired it three months ago.

This solution is very stable and it has been running for the last three months, with no issues.

From everything that I have read, this solution is scalable. It is one of the best on the market. It can be scaled up, even with earlier or newer versions of the software, but there are some limitations with VMware solutions.

We run a school and have 4500 students and 700 faculty members who are all end users. It is accessed and the information is used daily.

We have not contacted technical support, as it's been running with no issues.

The initial setup was straightforward. We didn't encounter any complexities.

We had a partner help us with the initial setup and implementation. It didn't take him very long.

We evaluated Dell VxRail and VMware solutions, but for us, this was the better solution.

We are comparing to the traditional system that had many problems. I think that all of these problems have been resolved with Nutanix AHV. At this time, as I have only been using it for three months, I am not able to say that there is room for improvement, especially since I am judging and basing it on a comparison with the old system. It has addressed all of the issues we were facing.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.