We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and VMware Workstation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are very comparable and receive similar ratings in most categories. However, VMware Workstation users are more satisfied with the technical support they receive than are Hyper-V users.
"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."
"We appreciate how easy this solution is to implement on standalone severs."
"Microsoft's a good name for legacy support and solutions"
"I value the simplicity of configuration because it has worked as expected for my client."
"Using cluster with Hyper-V had a major impact on our protection environment. So all applications were virtualized using Hyper-V."
"The virtualized applications and real time audition of the VMA is quite a good feature."
"It is a very stable product. We have not had any issues with Hyper-V crashing itself."
"The simplicity and intuitiveness of the platform. It was a very simple adaptation, if you have any experience in virtualization."
"The technical support is good."
"VMware Workstation is great for migrating and patching operating systems."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"It will not harm any of the computer settings to run a specific program. For example, if a program needs a specific security policy, we don't have to use the shared configuration. We have an individual copy of Windows installed on the virtual machine, so anybody can access that. It helps us a lot."
"VMware Workstation is easy to manage and understand."
"I like that it's easy to use. It's easy to deploy virtual machines. You have to insert your ISO and the image of your OS and configure it. They provide a step-by-step guide, and you have to follow it. In the end, you have to start the machine, and that's all you have to do. I liked that they synchronized the mouse, keyboard, and everything. When you finish the installation, it directly links to your laptop. This makes copying and pasting things from my laptop inside the virtual machine easy."
"The features are good."
"The simplicity of the deployment and the implementation, and the footprint for the hardware are some of the solution's valuable features."
"Microsoft increased the price for this solution when adding the Storage Spaces Direct feature."
"ometimes a server or machine shuts down and doesn't automatically restart."
"They should include a few more hardware components for integration with servers."
"We have our scientific network, and it's run off the university sever, and we need two servers to optimize our scientific work, such as the mathematics work. Then you have to work with Python and Java, and Microsoft isn't the best option for this kind of work"
"The cost and licensing can be improved."
"Sometimes there's a bit of slowness in the VMs."
"Some of the interfaces need improvements, like the virtual switch or virtual VLAN interfaces."
"The live migration feature needs improvement."
"They could bring in many different features from VMware vSphere to Workstation."
"VMware Workstation could improve the export and import of virtual machines."
"The product’s virtual machine data backup feature needs upgrading."
"There could be more integration with different tools."
"For some virtual machine configurations, you have to go to the text editor and make the configuration changes, which could be improved."
"It could have more platforms and CPUs."
"I would like to see more detailed reporting capabilities, particularly around snapshot activity. It would be helpful to have a summary of changes made prior to deploying an application, allowing us to provide comprehensive reports to our management on a regular basis."
"Installing VMware Workstation isn't so easy. It's highly complex compared to Windows. I rate it four out of 10 for ease of installation. Setting up a remote desktop only takes a minute or so, but the Workstation itself takes some time."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while VMware Workstation is ranked 2nd in Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) with 42 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while VMware Workstation is rated 8.8. 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 VMware Workstation writes "An easy-to-manage solution that has really good customer support compared to other market players". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, Proxmox VE, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware Workstation is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, VMware Fusion, Proxmox VE and Oracle VM VirtualBox.
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.