We performed a comparison between Hyper V and Oracle VM Virtual Box based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results:
Our users like Hyper-V best. Many of our users are deeply committed to the Microsoft ecosystem, so it is an excellent seamless fit. Additionally, users find the failover feature very important and, as Hyper-V is not a heavy solution, it does not overuse resources. Hyper-V makes it easy to move any virtual machine across push servers without complication. Finally, Hyper-V is very easy to manage and offers great performance.
"The restore function of the virtual server is valuable to me."
"Using cluster with Hyper-V had a major impact on our protection environment. So all applications were virtualized using Hyper-V."
"One of the most valuable features of Hyper-V is ease to use."
"The interface is quite good."
"The virtualization aspect of the solution functions similar to VMware is one of its most valuable features…It is a stable product."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"II prefer customers to use Hyper-V because Hyper-V is mostly integrated with Microsoft solutions."
"The most valuable feature of Hyper-V is that it's very intuitive."
"The scalability of the solution is very good."
"This is a good and easy solution for running virtual environments."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that there is no cost because it is open source."
"I like that it is free and runs on Linux/Ubuntu - I wouldn't use any other solution. I am able to perform small developing tests."
"The flexibility and the closed platform, so it allows you to run in multiple platforms, Windows, Linux, Macintosh."
"The product gives us the flexibility to try different machines."
"It is easy to use and does not require complex knowledge."
"The pause feature is valuable. I can pause, which is something that not all hypervisors allow. The snapshot feature is also valuable."
"They can hot add NICs to the VMs. However, there is still not the ability to hot add virtual processors to running VMs."
"Status and availability became an issue and need."
"The biggest problem with Hyper-V is that the virtual machines are mostly running on top of the Windows Server, so we often need to reboot the machine and virtual machines when updating the host level. That's why we prefer VMware. It's much easier to patch the host. Also, Hyper-V has security vulnerabilities. It's easy to attack and compromise the host."
"The technical support is good but it could improve by being faster."
"The operating system is very, very heavy."
"Hyper-V's management platform falls short in terms of scalability, especially when handling multiple Hyper-V servers. VMware has a central console to pull in all your VM servers, so you can easily manage them all through one console. You can manage servers in Hyper-V's admin centers, but it's not as scalable. It's doable with a couple of Hyper-V servers, but it becomes harder to manage when you get over two or three Hyper-V servers."
"We would like to have a cloning function added to this product."
"In my opinion, read the documentation carefully. If you do not, you will have problems."
"The solution has to do a better job of promoting the product and its licensing capabilities."
"The solution lacks some open source remote administration tools. The reload of individual virtual machine definitions through the vboxweb service (via its API) without restarting it and the access to shared storage (to use teleport functions) need to be improved."
"The product lacks scalability since it is for desktops and not for servers."
"They could improve the graphics functionality of the product."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"The solution is a bit less stable than I would like."
"Oracle needs to improve its hot virtual machine migration. It didn't work as intended. It should allow us to migrate between virtual machines, without stopping the database."
"Having live migrations to move a running server to other hardware would be great."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while Oracle VM VirtualBox is ranked 5th in Server Virtualization Software with 61 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM VirtualBox is rated 8.2. 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 Oracle VM VirtualBox writes "The solution is versatile, simple to use, and stable". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas Oracle VM VirtualBox is most compared with Proxmox VE, KVM, Oracle VM, VMware Workstation and VMware vSphere. See our Hyper-V vs. Oracle VM VirtualBox 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.