It should be more affordable and available. It should target companies, especially new ones, that need servers with capacities of around 518+ units. It should be priced appropriately because it might compromise quality if it's too cheap.
Linux Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Mar 11, 2024
It's a budget product as far as I'm concerned. It's way cheaper than any of its competitors. The only thing cheaper than Red Hat is that the people who take the Red Hat code clone it and then self-support it. Companies like Canonical and SUSE do the same thing – they sell similar products with a cheaper support model. Oracle, I think, is probably competitively priced with Red Hat because they use the same solution.
Project Manager Cloud Infrastructure at Path Infotech ltd
Real User
Jan 10, 2024
It is an open-source solution. We do not need to pay the license cost if we install and manage the tool. We must purchase the license and support if we need a global patch. The subscription fee depends on the type of license we purchase. The license fee must be paid annually.
This product has a variety of licensing options available. However, the level of licensing, and therefore the cost of licensing, is dependent on the number of servers being utilized.
Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Consultant
Apr 5, 2022
We have a three-year licensing agreement. They do offer a fair price. I would rate them at a four out of five in terms of value for money. There are no other fees on top of the standard licensing fee.
Corporate Counsel at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Feb 14, 2022
The price of RHEV is high. It is an open-source solution, the price should be less. The price should not be on par with a solution, such as VMware. It's not more or equal to VMware, it's less, but the difference should be more substantial. If the price starts getting too high people will start going back to pure open source products. If the prices are the same as compared to VMware, then why would they use any Red Hat solution, such as RHEV. The features, robustness, and suitability for enterprise VMware has an edge over RHEV. The price should come down.
Project Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Consultant
Mar 19, 2020
Red Hat is easily three to five times cheaper than the nearest competitor. Our business model is slightly different. If you look at Gerome HCI, for example, the core product that we sell, it is not Red Hat based but certain components use Red Hat components, for example, sales and subscription. It would cost about $USD5,000 per year to keep that going. Instead, we charge slightly more initially, maybe $USD7,000-$8,000, and then reduce the annual support fee to maybe $USD1,000.
RHEV offers a cost-effective virtualization platform with support for up to 160 cores and 2 TB of RAM per host, emphasizing open-source accessibility and integration with applications like OpenStack.RHEV stands out with features such as high performance, stability, ease of migration, and robust security. Its integration capabilities with diverse applications and the self-service Power user portal enhance its appeal for IT environments. While the platform's affordability compared to VMware is...
It's the open source. There's not much cost. It's very minimal comparably. Compared to what I am paying for VMware, it's negligible.
RHEV offers pricing based on socket pair per-physical-machine licensing model.
It should be more affordable and available. It should target companies, especially new ones, that need servers with capacities of around 518+ units. It should be priced appropriately because it might compromise quality if it's too cheap.
It's a budget product as far as I'm concerned. It's way cheaper than any of its competitors. The only thing cheaper than Red Hat is that the people who take the Red Hat code clone it and then self-support it. Companies like Canonical and SUSE do the same thing – they sell similar products with a cheaper support model. Oracle, I think, is probably competitively priced with Red Hat because they use the same solution.
It is an open-source solution. We do not need to pay the license cost if we install and manage the tool. We must purchase the license and support if we need a global patch. The subscription fee depends on the type of license we purchase. The license fee must be paid annually.
Price-wise, RHEV is okay, in my opinion.
The solution's pricing depends on the use cases.
Licensing costs are very reasonable.
This product has a variety of licensing options available. However, the level of licensing, and therefore the cost of licensing, is dependent on the number of servers being utilized.
I'm not sure about the pricing. It's not an aspect I'm involved with.
We have a three-year licensing agreement. They do offer a fair price. I would rate them at a four out of five in terms of value for money. There are no other fees on top of the standard licensing fee.
The price of RHEV is high. It is an open-source solution, the price should be less. The price should not be on par with a solution, such as VMware. It's not more or equal to VMware, it's less, but the difference should be more substantial. If the price starts getting too high people will start going back to pure open source products. If the prices are the same as compared to VMware, then why would they use any Red Hat solution, such as RHEV. The features, robustness, and suitability for enterprise VMware has an edge over RHEV. The price should come down.
The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable.
We buy a license for commercial use, and we also use the free editions.
We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance.
I am not fully sure, but I believe we pay on a yearly basis.
Red Hat is easily three to five times cheaper than the nearest competitor. Our business model is slightly different. If you look at Gerome HCI, for example, the core product that we sell, it is not Red Hat based but certain components use Red Hat components, for example, sales and subscription. It would cost about $USD5,000 per year to keep that going. Instead, we charge slightly more initially, maybe $USD7,000-$8,000, and then reduce the annual support fee to maybe $USD1,000.
The pricing is a bit expensive.
The solution is quite inexpensive.
We are using the free version of Red Hat.
I would say the price is acceptable.
This is an open-source solution.