Nutanix AHV Virtualization Reviews

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.

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.

The primary use case is for virtualization.

The most valuable feature is that it is open-source. Also, the customization for Linux VMs is good. 

It has a vs switch for the people who know Linux, in case it's easier for them to use AHV than it is to use VMware.

VMware has a vSphere client GUI and currently, AHV is command line only.

AHV is easy for people who are administrators of Linux and Unix, but it's not easy for a normal user who connects using a web interface.

There is no web interface with AHV. It would be great if they could provide a web interface.

There is no dashboard, it works only with Nutanix Prism.

I come from the world of Unix and the only thing that customer is asking for is the web interface.

I have been using Nutanix AHV since 2015.

It's a stable solution.

Nutanix is very scalable, you can go to unlimited nodes.

The initial setup is easy and straightforward. You click and you install. 

With one click it installs all, including AHV and all of the Nutanix software.

There is an Excel spreadsheet where you put the IP addresses, then you go to the Nutanix installer GUI, click, wait an hour and everything is up.

AHV is free, it's an open-source solution.

We use many solutions with Nutanix. We use Nutanix AHV, Nutanix CVM, Nutanix Calm, and more.

For normal users, they need a web interface, but for users who are more experienced this solution is the best.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The features that I've found most valuable are that it is customized like Linux KVM and it is open-source for people who know Linux. It's easier for them to use AHV than MWeb. Plus, AHV is free. For Linux people it's easy and also it's free.

As for any improvements, the only thing the customer has been asking for is that it should be like VMware where they have the Vsphere Client, whereas in AHV there is only Command-line. It's like AHV Client Web. AHV is easy for people who are administrators of Linux Unix but it's not easy for normal users who like to connect using a web interface because there is no web interface for AHV. It would be great if they could provide an actual web interface. The dashboard works only in Prism.

I have been using Nutanix AHV since 2015.

It is a stable solution.

Nutanix AHV is very scalable. It can go to unlimited nodes.

In terms of initial setup, Nutanix is a one-click install and it installs all AHV and all Nutanix software, everything. There is an Excel sheet where you put the IP addresses, then you go to the GUI of the Nutanix installer, it's one click and everything is up.

We have many customers using AHV.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a nine because it needs a web interface.

No one in our organization can ignore the value of Nutanix because of the cost reduction that it has afforded us compared to converged products from Cisco or HP.

The most valuable feature is the integration between storage and compute services. You can use these two resources together as one unit.

The monitoring and reports for all activities are integrated on one dashboard.

Support for more Red Hat solutions would be an improvement. As of now, Nutanix only officially supports three hypervisors. These are VMware, Microsoft Hyper-V, and Nutanix AHV. There is minimal support for Red Hat.

It is very important that in the future, Nutanix supports bare-metal implementation. This means that you can install the hypervisor directly to the hardware.

In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for containerization.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for three years.

This is a stable product.

This solution has endless scalability. You can scale up and scale out as much as you want. All you have to do to scale out is add nodes.

I have used several other solutions. With both Cisco and HP, there are limitations in terms of scalability. If you are using VMware then there is a limitation at the host-level.

Implementation and deployment is straightforward. Within half an hour it can be set up and running.

There are solutions by HP and NetApp, but you cannot compare them to Nutanix because it supports HP, Hyper-V, and VMware as well.

There are rumors around the globe that suggest Nutanix cannot be used for heavy software. However, I have tested it on all levels and it performs well. I have used it for big data and it works great.

The biggest lesson that I have learned when using this solution is related to the sizing of the system. If you define your requirements accurately then you will not see any issues in terms of performance. This means that it is very important to know what you want and what kind of applications will be hosted on Nutanix. You should also understand the use case for Nutanix, itself. When you understand all of this, it prepares you very well for calculating the resources that will be needed.

For me, this is the number one hyper-converged solution. I am a fan of VMware, but I can see that in Nutanix, the internal components combine very harmoniously. There is a huge development team behind Nutanix and they are working daily to develop the product and come out with new technologies.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

In terms of features, Acropolis is a good virtualization manager and that it is on-premise. I use almost every technology they provide.

Nutanix AHV, like every hypervisor, still has room for integration with the cloud. Nutanix is a very, very good product in regards to integration with the Amazon services, but it can be improved, especially in my country, Turkey. In this area, both Amazon Web Services and other solutions have different prices and different currencies. Nutanix actually promised to build clouds once they made the new generation moving the clients or the servers on-premises, and that's not working as advertised right now. So I believe that it can still be improved. Every service depends on this because the flexibility is what makes this product good in the first place.

I use Vaults with three hypervisors in my projects. One is the Acropolis from Nutanix, SCC from VMware, and of course Microsoft Hyper-V. This user interface is easy to understand. The dashboard is mostly okay and gives relevant information for the users. It has a good user interface but it's not flexible. It's more flexible than VMware and Hyper-V which don't even compare. The mechanics and the user interface are good. I like how it looks, but it can be improved. For example, if they had a comment line option directly from the Web UI, I could use PowerShell add ons. That would make the UI more flexible for me. Overall, it is the best of the three options right out there right now. ,

Again, I would also like to see a comment line option for integration with other products. Nutanix already has a comment line integration with the publisher. I also run some mini-systems and I don't have the same kind of comment line options for Unix systems. If I'm working on another shell, for example, Bash or SSH, we need a solution for that aspect. Console command is many times a faster way to do it because with UI you have to wait, but with your comment line, you can script it and can automate it more easily. So I believe they need a Linux version of the comment line.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for more than three years.

In terms of stability, Nutanix is actually very stable.

These days I don't worry about anything working or not.

Nutanix AHV is much easier than other systems. We can focus on the infrastructure and not the product so it gives us the flexibility to not worry about the scalability of the systems - we just need more modes to scale up. That makes it easier for system and engineers support.

I don't actually need any technical support. But I do hear feedback about it. For example, if a customer has an issue, such as some discs are broken, the support fixes it immediately. They don't even have to call the support center because they are monitoring the system. I don't do it directly, but I hear from and talk to customers.

I worked with VMware for more than ten years. The first versions of VMware to come out worked on Red Hat 6.3 servers and they were almost unusable sometimes.

Nutanix, in its first version, worked as it should.

The initial setup is nice, actually straightforward. The other systems are not easy. For VMware, for example, if you want to use full spec hyper-converged systems, including storage and the other options, it's very complex. Only the hypervisor option is easy with them. But the other options, including storage, are complicated. Nutanix and its products are very easy and pretty useful. And even migration is easy compared to all the other systems.

Some other firms were working with HP on their systems, but in the end, they migrated to Nutanix because of support issues.

On a scale from 1 to 10 I would rate it a 9 - I believe there is always room for improvement.