We performed a comparison between Oracle VM VirtualBox 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."It's a pretty good product in terms of monitoring."
"The flexibility as well as performance wise and as well as data volume, we have huge volume stored."
"Oracle VM Virtualbox is easy to use and does not require much training."
"The versatility, simplicity, and stability of the product are it's most valuable features."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to manage multiple operating systems through one application."
"Technical support is good."
"The configuration and installation is pretty straightforward."
"The cloning is a very useful tool."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward and well-documented. The process is very similar to its competitors. The success of your setup depends on how well you plan."
"The platform is scalable, allowing for the installation of multiple nodes."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization is its pricing."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"The price is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's much cheaper than, for example, VMware."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"Stability and speed are the most valuable aspects."
"The solution makes migration easy."
"Oracle VMs don't have a solid web interface of their own. This is an area where Oracle is lagging behind. Now, we use headless servers, install Oracle VMs, and manage them remotely. We could use phpVirtual Box, but it is a third-party solution. A lot of people contribute to it, and it's not authenticated by Oracle. As a result, I don't find it to be a good option. Therefore, I would like to see Oracle offer an extension pack or a licensed version that fixes this problem."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is not flexible, It's not like VMware."
"This should have better support for multiple network cards and some parts of the GUI should be improved."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"The solution is not flexible."
"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."
"The installation is difficult and could be improved."
"It has some issues when you have some weird device drivers. For instance, when you have a weird sound driver working on your machine, and the VirtualBox needs to output the sound of the virtual machine into the sound driver of the physical machine, the bare metal, it doesn't work too well. If you tweak lots of drivers and play around with the different kinds of drivers and machines, you will probably break something. I have not played with it too much and maybe it already supports it, but it would probably be good to have the ability to use a container from the virtual machine environment instead of spinning off a complete virtual machine. There are other tools for that. On Linux, you have a DXE, LXC framework, and you have Docker as well. Docker is good because it is multi-platform, and you can run Docker on pretty much anything, even different processors, but it would be good if we had a VirtualBox running on it while spinning off containers instead of full virtual machines. The other thing that will become important, and I'm pretty sure that they are thinking about it as well is that there's this new hardware platform that Apple is releasing, which is an ARM-based new chip. So, VirtualBox will probably have to work on ARM-based CPUs as well."
"The documentation is not as good as it should be."
"There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference."
"Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability."
"It lags behind in that you need to go to something like Fedora to get all the extra bells and whistles."
"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."
"A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware."
"The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement."
"This solution could be more secure."
Oracle VM VirtualBox is ranked 5th in Server Virtualization Software with 62 reviews while RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 33 reviews. Oracle VM VirtualBox is rated 8.2, while RHEV is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Oracle VM VirtualBox writes "The solution is versatile, simple to use, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". Oracle VM VirtualBox is most compared with Proxmox VE, KVM, Hyper-V, Oracle VM and OpenVZ, whereas RHEV is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V and Citrix Hypervisor. See our Oracle VM VirtualBox 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.