We performed a comparison between Oracle VM and VMware VSphere based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, VMware VSphere got better user reviews. One major difference between the two solutions is that users say VMware VSphere is more user-friendly than Oracle VM.
"The support staff in the tech support team at Oracle has improved. I find them extremely helpful and they give very solid support."
"It provides enhancements for network and storage configuration, policy-based management for delivering application resource flexibility, and a GUI."
"It's a very mature product."
"What I like the most is the failover and the quick restore of virtual machines."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the resource management from the OVM Manager."
"VMware is user-friendly, with clear integration and detailed migration."
"The network capabilities are good."
"The stability is rock solid."
"It is a very stable solution. Integration with other environments was simple to achieve."
"Once you have everything configured, it is relatively straightforward."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the overall virtualization technology and the new features that allow you to move servers from one system to another."
"I have found the Storage vMotion feature to be the most valuable."
"being able to manage a lot of servers in one pane of glass makes things a lot simpler. Basically, a lot of things just happen in one area. You can roll things over, move things around more dynamically, without having to hit multiple systems."
"There is the simplicity of management, accessibility, and availability."
"It cuts down on hardware costs by being able to virtualize multiple hardware and multiple machines on a single piece of hardware."
"It stands out as a comprehensive and advantageous solution, providing a full package that effectively caters to our needs for managing our private cloud."
"The solution is an outdated Xen-based application."
"Something that could be improved are the snapshots that go in the ZFS Storage. If you want to enjoy Oracle VM, you will definitely want it to go together with ZFS Storage to maximize on the snapshot facility."
"The usage could be easier, and more user-friendly."
"Oracle VM should have centralized storage, without which you can't clone or move one VM to another."
"We do have a little trepidation with systemd, as it does have a learning curve."
"The solution needs more features and flexibility in terms of communicating with other platforms. If it had that, it would be the perfect product."
"Oracle VM should be more feature-rich."
"Integrating with the internal system is not very easy."
"I would like them to move into having a containerized application to manage the vCenter."
"I do not find it to be simple and efficient to manage. The tools, the interface to manage it, are a pain. In the latest version, they moved us to web-only, the Web Client and it's terrible. It's slow. It crashes. It's annoying. I used the Web Client in the older version and was happy. I would go back to the regular thick client but I don't have that option anymore, so I am always fighting it."
"The initial setup could be better. It manages all the setups, but it's not very straightforward, and it takes time."
"The reporting could be improved."
"We've been using vSphere on Windows 7, and it had less fluff associated with ThinApp. Currently, with Windows 10 version that we have, it adds a lot of bulk to ThinApp. We have offices spanning across Canada from the east coast to the west coast. A ThinApp that is roughly around 400 MB in size would take minutes to open up. With Windows 7, the same ThinApp used to be close to 75 to 80 MB in size. So, I'm really not happy with the extra fluff that is bundled in Windows 10. It really messes things up for us at times."
"It is expensive."
"It's inherently complex. Operating a large virtual infrastructure is not an easy task for anyone."
"I would like to see the UI incorporating all of the functionality that the thick client had."
Oracle VM is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 77 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. Oracle VM is rated 8.0, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Oracle VM writes "A cheap option available for Linux environments which is useful for many workloads". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". Oracle VM is most compared with KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V and RHEV, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Hyper-V, Proxmox VE, VMware Workstation, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Oracle VM vs. VMware vSphere 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.
VMware VSphere is better than Oracle VM because on Oracle Virtual machine migration is not an easy task as in VSphere due to complications existing in Oracle VM.
Also, Oracle VM is limited in features compared to VMware.
Oracle VM is limited also in communicating with other virtualization platforms like VMware.
If you need performance then Oracle OVM is more reliable.
Otherwise, VMWare is good enough. We are using 4 virtualization platforms in the production, development and test environments.
Technically, Oracle OVM is the best for Oracle products apps/databases. VMware is for Linux guest OS.
And hyper-v is for a Windows guest OS but hyper-v lacks network security and configuration.
Oracle VM seems to me to be kind of outdated. Nevertheless, it is fairly straightforward to use and maintain. The solution can just be set and you can forget about it, and the scalability is considered to be quite good. Oracle VM’s customer service and technical support are really outstanding. With this solution, you have the ability to patch with no downtime. Oracle has been around for a long time. It is complete in terms of its features, functionalities, and sophistication. It may provide good documentation and be easy to set up, but it has a terrible licensing structure. Oracle VM may help a company manage its costs, but that can come at another expense for a company - you have to work with an antiquated system.
VMware VSphere is fairly priced. Like Oracle VM, it provides near-zero downtime services. I think the way information is monitored needs to be improved. I feel like they need to have a better solution for hybrid clouds and migration to the cloud. It would also be nice to have additional integration options with different solutions at the application level (for example, Kubernetes). One of the biggest issues I have with it, is the firmware management of the underlying hardware. For firmware upgrades, for example, you have to take down your entire system. Even though it makes it easy to create virtual machines, it could be more user-friendly. In addition, the customer service and technical support seem to be average, but nothing spectacular. Overall, I would say that VMware VSphere is pretty stable and implementation is fairly easy.
Conclusion:
I’m not overly thrilled about either solution, but having had experience with both, I think VMware VSphere is better because it is easy to scale, pretty easy to use, easy to maintain and is mostly stable. And also, while Oracle VM may be more well known, I am not willing to work with an outdated product, especially since there are multiple other modern solutions available.