We performed a comparison between KVM and Oracle Linux based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"Very cost-effective."
"What I like most about KVM is that it's very easy to use. Everything is built-in, even when writing command lines."
"The most helpful aspect of KVM is the fact that the interface is so minimal. It includes just what you need to set up the VMs and manage them, and it's very simple to do so."
"The tool's most valuable feature is backup. The product makes it easy to manage virtual machines. Other tools require third-party applications like VMware and vSphere. However, KVM doesn't require these applications."
"The GUI interface makes the management of KVM easier than ever before."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"I find the density of the product most valuable. It is density that a technologist can just assign page merging. This is what makes KVM one of the important players of the virtualization market."
"Oracle Linux's most valuable feature is flexibility."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It is a good solution, and the performance is good."
"It is a stable solution. We rarely face any issues with the machine."
"If we use Linux, Solaris, or some other operating systems, we have to build a lot of packages using RPMs (the packet manager). That's a difficult task. With Oracle Linux, we use a single command to update from the Oracle website."
"It is good for web, network, and file management."
"The stability of Oracle Linux is good."
"It is a scalable solution."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"One thing that maybe could be improved is making it easier to scale. It needs to be more clear on how to scale the storage space for virtual machines."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"The grid interface of KVM needs improvement. It could be more beautiful, especially when compared to VMware."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"The virtual manager and the graphical QEMU for KVM need some improvement."
"The stability of this solution is less than other products in the same category."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"The support process is time-consuming as it involves several steps."
"The solution could improve by giving the client or customer more control."
"The graphic interface could be improved to work better in a desktop environment."
"There were some problems when updating the operating system, which affected the system as a whole."
"The installation documentation needs to be improved"
"The documentation has room for improvement."
"Pricing could be improved."
"Time drifts happen frequently, and the database restarts automatically to protect data integrity."
KVM is ranked 4th in Server Virtualization Software with 39 reviews while Oracle Linux is ranked 3rd in Operating Systems (OS) for Business with 108 reviews. KVM is rated 8.0, while Oracle Linux is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Delivers good performance because of kernel-based virtualization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Linux writes "The operational system is the best and is packed with free features like CapsLive". KVM is most compared with Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere and Odin Virtuozzo Containers, whereas Oracle Linux is most compared with Ubuntu Linux, CentOS, Rocky Linux, Oracle Solaris and Windows 10.
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.