What advice do you have for others considering RHEV?

I do not currently deal with RHEV in my current role. I suppose I could update my RHEV review. Since I am the only one using RHEV, I have never really done a lot with that. I just give myself admin rights and go, so I am probably not the best person to ask about that. You need to have a Red Hat background to operate RHEV. I would love to work with OpenShift to get some experience, but it is not open source and it is not free. I cannot download it and play with it. It is a commercial product that you have to buy before you can touch it, and it is not cheap. I would rate this review a 7.

We are already working with Red Hat and some open-source solutions for our container management. We are using Red Hat OpenShift, specifically OCS. We purchased it directly from Red Hat Turkey and Red Hat partners. We have been both a customer and partner of Red Hat. We are using both RHEV and the OCS side, along with some small JBoss. Our technical team uses Red Hat Virtualization Manager for managing virtual machines and host systems. Our application team is working with JBoss ESB. On a scale of 1-10, I would rate RHEV an 8.

I advise keeping an open mind. It's an excellent solution. You have to know Linux pretty well. I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

One aspect to note is that the platform's disaster recovery needs to be managed manually, underscoring the importance of having hypervisors on different physical servers for redundancy. Given that RHEV is nearing the end of its product life cycle, I would advise exploring alternative solutions. However, it remains an enterprise-grade solution, akin to other Red Hat products, and is well-suited for virtualization needs in an enterprise environment. Overall, I rate it an eight out of ten.

These solutions and tools we use daily are available to our customers. Our toolkit includes various tools, such as migrations, which are all valuable to our operations. People often ask me about taking sessions on backups, configuration, and performance tuning. I usually advise them to follow best practices. If you don't have good knowledge, RHEV might require some time to learn and test scenarios in your lab environment before implementing it in production. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I love it. It's easy to use and manage, even at a large scale. I've worked with hundreds of virtual machines in the past, all managed from a single location. It's pretty good. But it also depends on your needs. There may be legitimate reasons to go with an all-Microsoft solution, especially if you're an all-Microsoft shop. Pricing, volume discounts, and what your team knows how to use all play a role. If your team doesn't know Unix very well, RHEV might not be the best fit because they won't be able to support it as well. It's just a tool in the toolbox. You have to ask, 'Is this the right tool for me?' It may be for some people, but not for others. That's how I look at this. If your team can support it, buy it for sure. It does virtualization really well. I like it. I even use the open-source version of it in my home lab. Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. The only reason I don't give it a ten is because of the third-party support.

All enterprise customers use RHEV. All servers run on Linux. It is already the market leader. From a virtualization point of view, VMware is the market leader. It is easy to manage and troubleshoot VMware. It is better than RHEV. Overall, I rate the product a six or seven out of ten.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

Two engineers are required to deploy and maintain Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization. Overall, I rate Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization a six out of ten.

I rate the solution as seven.

I recommend this solution. It will save money and you can also leverage the benefit of virtualization of unlimited caps. I rate this solution seven out of 10.

We would advise organizations who are considering this solution, to ensure that their requirements are clearly defined, as this will impact the level of support needed with implementing and deploying the product. I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

If someone is looking for server virtualization, VMware is a better choice. VMware is easy to deploy, easy to learn, and easy to manage. This solution is not. I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

We're just a customer. I was only involved in the decision part, I'm now in the implementation. It's a very good platform to build your virtual machines on and highly integrated with Red Hat itself and its satellites. That's one of the main reasons we like it - it's all integrated. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

RHEV is a good solution and it's a stable product. When any organization needs end-to-end infrastructure deployment, configuration management, and automation, then RHEV is the best fit. The solution has all the best components in each of these areas from a competitive point of view. It is a benefit of having all the tools from one vendor, it make management easier. There are many other solutions available, such as IBM OpenShift, but when comparing RHEV it is very good. I rate RHEV an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to other users. I rate RHEV a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. We would like to keep using this solution. We are very satisfied with it. I would rate RHEV a nine out of ten.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine. There is no other server equivalent to this one available on the market at the moment. Not HP, not IBM, and not Dell.

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.

I would definitely recommend this solution. Everywhere the cloud is the choice and by offering this solution locally this give it a plus. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

We're integrators. We have a partnership with Red Hat. In our country, we have two business segments. We have cloud and integration segments. Regarding the integration, we help clients layout their requirements or the needs and propose what we can do for the requirement. If the customer wants to have a POC to see how the solution works, we can do POC for them and so on. We specifically use the cloud version of the solution, because it's to provide cloud solutions to our end customers. We have built our cloud solution on Red Hat and our end clients like to change it can have a private tenant to manage their own virtual machine, their networks, and their routers, and so on. We have many, many end customers on the platform. Some of our clients currently use Red Hat Virtualization and they are looking for a private cloud solution now. We probably need to migrate the existing Red Hat Virtualization to the Red Hat OpenStack platform for these clients. It's a very good solution. It works very well. We haven't had any issues with any technical aspects and it works well. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

There are other platforms like Proxmox that are very stable and good because they run on KVM just like we do. But if you have hands-on experience with Proxmox, for example, you know that the entire thing is full of buttons and switches and I believe most clients don't like that. Red Hat, and Gerome HCI keep that to a minimum and give the customers what they need to do to get their work done. I would suggest people take a serious look at Red Hat and open source, and what KVM offerings can provide to end users. KVM and Red Hat, the open source community, are different to what they were 10 years ago. They are so advanced today and so mature in what they do that they could easily give any top-notch industry leaders a run for their money. They are definitely the market leader in terms of open source. No one can beat them at the moment. I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.

We still have Red Hat version five running on our environment. We don't have Red Hat in Malaysia. We don't have direct contact with Red Hat. We have to go through either distributors or system integrators in order to get the product. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I would recommend Red Hat virtualization to other customers who are actually looking into moving from a physical environment to virtualization environment. It will optimize their space utilization and their cost optimization.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I can rate Red Hat Virtualization as a seven-out-of-ten. It is a seven and not higher because of the various issues like lack of availability of on-site support. Even with these issues, I would definitely recommend Red Hat virtualization to other customers who are actually looking into moving from a physical environment to a virtualized environment. Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization can help to optimize their space utilization and optimize their costs.

I wouldn't recommend the solution currently. We don't trust the product, so to use it as a mission-critical solution wouldn't be advised. However, overall, it's okay. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. Red Hat solution is not the best, in my opinion. It's not as stable, but it is much cheaper than VMware, so companies can save money using it if they need to.

I've always used separate hypervisors so it's difficult for me to give advice. I'm more familiar with the other products so I would rate this product a six out of 10.

RHEV is a good solution and I would rate it a nine out of ten.

If someone asked me, I would strongly recommend using Red Hat. I have spoken to many other Red Hat users. The main issue is the lack of knowledge with most engineers and system admins. They don't know how to use Red Hat. They found that Windows, for example, is easier to manage. I would recommend Red Hat, though, and I would like to do something to raise the awareness of how to use Red Hat. I would strongly recommend they work hard to introduce people to Red Hat and how to manage Red Hat. I know there are courses, workshops, and seminars. Red Hat is doing all of that. The main issue which I think Red Hat has to focus on, however, is that colleges, universities, and most institutions focus on Windows-based solutions. Red Hat has to be there in the education sector, so engineer or system admin graduates will at least have a small knowledge of what Red Hat is. I would rate Red Hat as seven out of ten. I think it's really hard to get a ten because this is technology and technology is always improving. We'll never stop. Ten means perfect, no improvement required. So I would never rate any tech solution as ten or even nine of ten. I can say, however, that this solution is fine for me.

I have always recommended using other platforms versus Windows. I didn't like using any Windows system, Microsoft system or any system with heavy traffic like ERP and Websites. I recommend Linux. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are resellers of Red Hat. We deal with various deployment models, however, we generally deal with on-premises. I would recommend the solution. Of course, it depends on what an organization is looking for in terms of virtualization. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We are not using the most current release of this solution because from our perspective, it is not mature enough yet. Another example is that we are moving our Enterprise Content Management (ECM) solution, which is similar to Microsoft SharePoint, to Red Hat. We have already moved all of our big data systems, as well as all of the digitalization systems to Red Hat. Our Splunk is also on Red Hat. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.