We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and RHEV based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Virtualization Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"I think all of these improvements are going in a good direction. For me, its direction is good and I'm very satisfied with this product."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"I like that Hyper-V is like a virtual environment. I like to use VMware because of the resource requirements. In Sri Lanka, most of the customers use the Hyper-V GUI. When installing the interface with the Windows version, we also install the Hyper-V feature on the server. This is because they require more features and memory. There are so many features that they have embedded in Hyper-V that are useful."
"It is easy to use, and it is stable. It is a good solution."
"The most valuable feature is that it's an end-to-end solution."
"Hyper-V provided freedom to spin up development and test environments. As projects were created, an environment could be created and applied."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"The platform is scalable, allowing for the installation of multiple nodes."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"It is very stable."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"It is easy to deal with when comes to application migration and its compatibility with the multiple component applications."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS."
"The solution should be compatible with different systems."
"If you have a bigger implementation, you need more tools to coexist with many, many features that are not present in the base Hyper-V."
"When one server or one virtual machine fails, or one is turned off, the virtualization stops, and we have to initiate again with human intervention."
"The live migration feature needs improvement."
"It needs to improve compatibility with third party software."
"VMware has antivirus protection that covers the entire VM. If Microsoft could have something similar to this in Hyper-V, that would be great."
"There is a hard limitation of 20 gigs per file with Dropbox, so you've got to overcome that by chunking the zip files into something smaller and manageable."
"In my opinion, it would have been better to truncate the site-to-site replication."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"We hope that Red Hat can produce a paradigm edition. We are looking for paradigm computing and paradigm storage. Its scalability can be improved. It is not easy to scale, and we hope that Red Hat can provide a more scalable system. They should also provide local service and support. Our customers are looking for a good software vendor to provide professional services."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"The solution has a very small lifecycle."
"I heard that there are big differences between Red Hat eight and seven, but it's still quite difficult for me to judge it. I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier. In term of features, though, it is still not yet clear which is better. I have no clear idea of which features need to be changed at the moment."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"Specifically, enhancements in managing virtual machine migrations, cloning, and the creation of different VMs could further optimize its functionality."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 33 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while RHEV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Hyper-V writes "It's a low-cost solution that enabled us to shrink everything down into a single server ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, KVM and IBM PowerVM, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Hyper-V vs. RHEV report.
See our list of best Server Virtualization Software vendors.
We monitor all Server Virtualization Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
