We performed a comparison between Citrix Hypervisor and Oracle VM VirtualBox 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."Installing Hypervisor is really simple. It's the simplest setup I've ever done before. We used a team to deploy it, and it doesn't take much time, like two or three hours tops."
"The solution integrates well with other solutions, which makes it really strong as a primary solution to deploy."
"What I like the most is the support of the GPU Graphics and the VM Live migration."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The most valuable features are being able to host many virtual machines and being able to patch machines."
"I've found the following features to be the most valuable: user personalization layer, app layering, provisioning, and notification services for integration between different domains."
"We find there are good central maintenance and central management panels."
"Ability to move your virtual machines from one host to another."
"This solution creates a snapshot of virtual machines so you can create test environments."
"It's very simple to use."
"The product gives us the flexibility to try different machines."
"VirtualBox provides an isolated, consistent environment"
"The solution has high performance and is easy to use."
"The solution is very convenient and easy to use."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is easy to use."
"The flexibility and the closed platform, so it allows you to run in multiple platforms, Windows, Linux, Macintosh."
"The solution is too expensive and people are kind of moving away from Citrix. It's starting to become a problem. It is a primary reason that while we are rebuilding we're going to seek out open-source solutions."
"Citrix is not investing in the virtual surroundings."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"Live migration is something that can be improved."
"The self-service user portal needs to be more granular and be more customizable."
"Assigning the order of virtual server startup is not very easy and this can be improved."
"The licensing costs are too high on the solution. They should work to make the costs more reasonable."
"The solution would benefit from faster technical support."
"The technical support needs to improve."
"The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."
"I think that this solution should be more user-friendly."
"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."
"The user interface needs to 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 solution should have more enterprise features, like migration, high availability storage, disaster recovery, and the ability to deploy to enterprise-scale usage. They should not just offer desktop usage."
"When I select the Ubuntu operating system from within the virtual machine, it sometimes hangs."
Citrix Hypervisor is ranked 8th in Server Virtualization Software with 45 reviews while Oracle VM VirtualBox is ranked 5th in Server Virtualization Software with 61 reviews. Citrix Hypervisor is rated 8.2, while Oracle VM VirtualBox is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Citrix Hypervisor writes "Good features, fair pricing, and excellent reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle VM VirtualBox writes "The solution is versatile, simple to use, and stable". Citrix Hypervisor is most compared with Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere, Hyper-V, KVM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas Oracle VM VirtualBox is most compared with Proxmox VE, KVM, Hyper-V, Oracle VM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization. See our Citrix Hypervisor 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.