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."The performance is great."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"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."
"Documentation and problem-solving troubleshooting are the most valuable features. Performance (when fine-tuned and with "special" HW) is awesome, equal to or more than other enterprise closed-source solutions."
"The initial setup was simple."
"I like that this is an open-source solution. It is very powerful, and it's easy."
"The product is really good...One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization."
"I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product."
"We find the consolidated support for this solution and other same vendor systems to be an extremely valuable feature. This allows for faster resolution of issues and consistency of support personnel."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It's mostly reliable."
"The solution's technical support team answers all our queries."
"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."
"Oracle Linux is very compatible with other platforms."
"The tool's performance is good."
"It helps us to create users and groups. We can also plan on the access that will be given to them. I use it for identity management during the installment and configuration process. We use it to start or stop processes and services. Another use case of the solution is post-opening."
"Support for VF is needed, where you can, for example, export from VMware to KVM."
"We would like to have a software lifecycle solution included in this solution. We can handle the software needed for KVM, but also the software that we provide. A lifecycle component would be very beneficial."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"I have encountered difficulties in getting the tool's documentation."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The only negative aspect of needing hardware support is a fully functional KVM can be dropped. It would be nice if the support for other platforms, like ARM or Risk, were as good as the x86 one. However, with the democratization of Chromebooks based on these chips and mobile devices, it will not take long for that to happen."
"The KVM tech support is really bad. They are not very responsive."
"We still occasionally build Interlaced Wireless Protection within our environment. The ecosystem entails areas, where we support agents, and release backup and security solutions. Collaboration with independent software vendors (ITOLs or ITOLED) is necessary to offer these solutions to customers. However, the scope of the ecosystem in KVM is not as extensive as that of VMware's. In contrast, VMware boasts a robust partner network, allowing for comprehensive customer solutions. On the other hand, KVM’s ecosystem is comparatively limited in comparison. I would like to see FT features in KVM."
"The documentation has room for improvement."
"For usability, the GUI options during the initial setup could be included with advanced functionalities that are now currently only possible on the CLI."
"The licensing price could be better."
"The support process is time-consuming as it involves several steps."
"It will be better to consolidate all the features in one release instead of sporadic releases."
"The solution could improve by giving the client or customer more control."
"The product's support is expensive."
"It could also have a more user-friendly interface."
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.
