We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Get our free report covering KVM, VMware, Oracle, and other competitors of Oracle VM. Updated: January 2022.
563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Oracle VM alternatives and competitors

Server Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Good high availability, easy to scale, and pretty stable overall
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution has high availability."
  • "The biggest pain point is probably the firmware management of the underlying hardware. It could be a lot better."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for everything Microsoft-related for the most part. I would say our visualization platform is about 99.5% of all our workload from a Microsoft point of view

What is most valuable?

The solution has high availability. 

The on the fly changing of the resources on a VM is very helpful. 

You've got the underlying capacity, that's greater than what the actual server has, and therefore you have the ability to do on the fly add capacity. I would say that's by far the thing we use the most. 

The VRS, to a lesser degree, is also quite useful to us. It does work in the environment. 

The solution is very good from a recoverability point of view. Everything can be stored much easier on a virtual server than on a physical box. 

What needs improvement?

The biggest pain point is probably the firmware management of the underlying hardware. It could be a lot better.

We use HP hardware. The biggest thing is the firmware upgrades and other items at the backend. You have to take down the system. It's an in-memory database and that can sometimes cause issues. If you have to do firmware upgrades, it's organizing downtime and all sorts of things, which normally in a VMS space isn't an issue. They have embedded some of this in 7.1, however, I haven't tested it or seen it in action as yet. 

That said, one of the problems is that when we're sort of behind big memory servers and the databases in them if you migrate it, it potentially breaks the system off. That's a big pain point that the firmware management of the underlying hardware should handle. VMware doesn't really cater to it, however, Nutanix to some degree does cater for. It gets pretty expensive, however.

We are always sort of one or two versions behind. We never test the latest version. I would say for me personally, the management aspect with large memory and in-memory databases for the motions and stuff like that is what it needs. That's one of the key things that I need really, from a support perspective. That's caused a number of issues already. 

You do get something called host profiles, which they've also improved slightly, however, I still think it's a bit clunky in terms of the way you can manage it. They can produce something to improve that aspect slightly.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for more than 12 years. It's been over a decade at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is mostly stable.

We've had issues, however, if you think about it, it's quite complex if you look at stuff like a three-tier architecture with different stories, subsystems, and things like that. It's not really VMware if it's unstable perhaps. 

VMware itself isn't necessarily unstable, however, they might present as a VM-ware issue due to the fact of the storage latency or a driver issue. We did a firmware update and VMware itself I think is quite stable. Every now and again, there's an issue that creeps in, however, it's because we use different vendors for storage and a different vendor for computing. Overall, by and large, VMware is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

From the way we set it up, it is relatively easy to scale as long as you've got the planning in place for where you're going to. We use something called blade technology, and that is relatively easy to scale.

There's a total of ten people that are actually on the solution at any given time.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've used technical support a couple of times. I'm quite happy with it. We've got an agreement with HP. We offer our support via HP or via Data Centrix with HP. Durin the couple of times I've used it has been quite fast and thorough.

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

I've never used a different solution. I started using VMware or VMware server, about 20 years ago. vSphere ESX is probably the first visualization tool I've used. Subsequently, yes, we've tested one or two other options, for example, Hyper-V and what used to be called Acropolis. We've also used Oracle VM. However, for production and for everything else we've done, we pretty much speak to VMware. It's tried and tested and we're quite happy with the stability. Therefore, we stick with it.

How was the initial setup?

If all your hardware requirements are met, it is a relatively simple implementation. However, you have to have the boxes ticked in terms of connectivity, capacity, and all that sort of stuff. The actual VMware part of it is not the biggest complication of everything now.

We handle maintenance ourselves. My team consists of five people, and of those, only one of them really works on the maintenance of the hardware and the software. It doesn't take a lot of personnel.

What about the implementation team?

Initially, we did use a vendor for the initial setup. That's even before I started at this company. The company uses their local vendors to output the hardware deployment and with the software deployment, however, it's my understanding that it's been done in-house mostly.

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

It's not a cheap solution. The maintenance specifically is quite expensive. I also find that it's more expensive than the higher tier products. 

We've looked at buying into something like a vROPS or whatever they call it today. However, when you look at the cost and the benefits, although there is great benefit in the product, it's just never been a cost discussion that we've been able to entertain with management. 

Similar to vSAN, we looked at that a couple of times. It's a great product and it has proven itself. It's brilliant. It's stable. However, as soon as you look at any peripheral products, it becomes quite expensive, as it's licensed per socket or per blade or per server or whatever. 

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers.

We are a little behind the latest version, which I believe is 7.1. We're using 6.5 for the most part. We still have a little bit of a legacy in 5.5, however, that is just hardware related. It doesn't support the newer version. We trying to rectify that as soon as possible.

I would recommend the solution to other companies.

Overall, I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

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.
Senior Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Simple to use and feature rich but challenging to update
Pros and Cons
  • "Proxmox VE is simple to use and it is feature rich. The fact is that it performs,"
  • "The only issue I have with Proxmox VE is updating it. You have to manually update it or you have to have a way to update it automatically."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case for Proxmox VE is for virtualization and a little bit of SaaS storage, basically for virtual machines.

What is most valuable?

Proxmox VE is simple to use and it is feature rich. The fact is that it performs,

What needs improvement?

The only issue I have with Proxmox VE is updating it. You have to manually update it or you have to have a way to update it automatically.

The main area for improvement is with the automatic updates, if it's even possible, even if you have to pay for the cloud services. Updates are very important.

If they could fine tune the updating process that would be good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Proxmox VE for two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Proxmox VE is stable. We have a few issues where all of a sudden you can't update it, because maybe you have taken too long to update the repository. This is a concern for us. Like I mentioned before, the updating feature is very important to us because there could be some security issues.

There are a lot of actions that you need to do with commands, which have not been automated yet. I believe that with time it will be automated.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, we didn't have any need for scaling because just the fact that you can put them in a cluster and manage one unit is a very good feature. I don't have to manage it individually, I can just put them together in a cluster and manage them for one single piece. I'm about to test the backup feature and also maybe upgrade it to the next version, which is 7.0. I'm expecting that there will be a lot of improvement.

Right now we have about six users on a project that I'm deploying. I'm still managing the project, but due to COVID it has gone on for two years, but we're just about to hand it over. Because of the COVID issue, nobody wants to come to one place to sit down and do anything. All of last year was just wasted, but this year we're able to do a number of things with them. The manual process of updating one by one is relatively stable. In the account, you have to centralize the management. You have to log in one by one and you can have a different password for for each one, it's not unified. They have not unified the authorization process.

One thing I have noticed is that because I put a password on one it is expecting me to manually put a password on the other node. I would expect that for better management you can have the same propagating password. Maybe there's a better way to do it, but that's what I have been seeing and I found that I have to be doing this for each one on each node. That is an issue, but so far it's been very good. It's been very stable. I never had any issues with it. It's cool stuff.

I  really like the software storage. I used it on one of the cloud servers that we set up and it's working very well.

We do plan to increase the usage in the future.

How was the initial setup?

Proxmox VE is very simple to use.

The deployment took a long time, but it was not because of Proxmox. It was some other issues for other projects. Installing the Proxmox software is very easy. It just takes a day or two.

What about the implementation team?

We did it in-house.

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

Our license is on a yearly basis.

There are no other costs, just the license fee and the license is flexible. You could decide to go subscription only or you could decide to pay for support.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to anyone considering Proxmox VE is that they should study it to understand it, because it is feature reach, so you have to read the manuals. They have to read the manual and unfortunately the manual training level is on the high side, so for people who are experimenting or who are just coming into the free version, it might be a little bit hard for them. Proxmox should try and market more on the training side so users can speed it up and have a good adoption. I hear that people understand the product very well, because right now I don't think it has a rival. It's trying to beat the Oracle VM or the other VMs in the market.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Proxmox VE a seven.

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
Bhupesh Arora
Presales Manager at Integra Micro Software Services, Bangalore
Real User
Top 5
Cheaper to run than other solutions
Pros and Cons
  • "Customers are moving to open source and Red Hat is the leader in this particular space. I think customers feel more confident running Red Hat Virtualization than VMware."
  • "When we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat."

What is most valuable?

Many of our customers are moving to open source-based technology and VMware is leading the virtualization space, but slowly customers are moving to open source and Red Hat is the leader in this particular space. I think customers feel more confident running Red Hat Virtualization than VMware. And if you talk about a lot of other features that VMware provides, Red Hat does that too. I mean, it's not only Red Hat, I would say, Oracle and Red Hat, both of them are providing good capabilities. I think customers like this.

In terms of cost, VMware is really expensive for many of the customers, so that is another reason why they want to switch to these technologies.

What needs improvement?

Most of the time we're engaged with the kind of discussion where we have to compare them with VMware. So when we do a direct comparison, then obviously VMware does better in terms of having Fault Tolerance and doing active disaster recovery and these kind of things. This is something that can be improved within Red Hat. That is one aspect.

But when you talk about the latest changes that are happening, I think both VMware and Red Hat are working on something like virtualization on top of the Kubernetes platform, so I think that will take it to altogether a different level. Because Red Hat is working on OpenShift Virtualization, and I think VMware has its own Tanzu, they both are competing well.

I think the future looks good for both of them. Red Hat may beat VMware in terms of when you compare it with OpenShift Virtualization. But looking at the present KVM, I don't know what things are going to look like.

In terms of what can be improved, I can't say right now because I don't know how much they are willing to do that or their roadmap looks like for this technology. In virtualization, like I mentioned, I think there are a lot of things that they are doing. In fact to be very frank, I'm not aware of the latest container-based virtualization that they're working on or what kind of features they have, so I'm not in the right position. I can't comment on that.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using RHEV for at most a couple of years now.

I am not a system admin and not into the infrastructure. My role is mostly on solution architecture infrastructure so I don't do hands-on on these technologies, but I have my basic lab set up where I play around with them because my job is to provide solutions and advice for customers. That's how I am engaged with it.

What other advice do I have?

On a scale of one to ten, I would give RHEV a nice eight.

I would definitely recommend for people to use Red Hat Virtualization. That is for sure.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
IT Manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Easy to use, stable, and reasonably priced
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution is very convenient and easy to use."
  • "The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use the solution to build a machine and transfer it to vCenter. I also occasionally use it to transform from a VirtualBox machine to an ESXi machine.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very convenient and easy to use.

I tend to use it for personal use, and I also use it for testing the Fortnox platform and it works very well.

The starting and stopping of the machine are much faster than other solutions.

The pricing is reasonable.

What needs improvement?

The solution needs support for the USB 3. 

The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine.

The product needs to make dramatic changes to the guest machines. For example, they need to improve changing the disks, and the resources used and to make the back and forth transfer to other platforms like Nutanix, VMware, or Microsoft.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for five years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable when you start the machine. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It works quite well.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The personal version isn't so scalable. You have to shut down the guest and change the parameters and restart the guests.

How are customer service and technical support?

The solution leverage a passionate user community that is very, very informed. There's lots of documentation within the community that is quite helpful.

I've never actually contacted Oracle directly. I rely on what's online to assist me when I need to troubleshoot something.

I did, however, use the official support for VMware, and I took advantage of insights I could find from their community as well. I found VMware lacks clear documentation for a lot of items, especially if you were integrating with virtual storage other than VMware or Dell.

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

I've previously worked with VMware and Workstation. In those cases, the starting and stopping of the machine took far too long. Oracle is much faster.

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

The pricing is lower for VirtualBox. It's much cheaper than VMware, for example, which has very high pricing in comparison.

What other advice do I have?

We're just Oracle customers. We don't have any business relationship with the solution.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

While I can recommend the solution for personal use, in a professional context, I've never actually tried it. A company would have to do some research first to ensure it fits their needs.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten overall if I was rating it on personal use alone.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Get our free report covering KVM, VMware, Oracle, and other competitors of Oracle VM. Updated: January 2022.
563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.