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."The feature I find most valuable, is its performance"
"The solution's security is its most valuable aspect."
"Citrix Hypervisor is simple to use."
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"I find it very easy to manage and at a cost that small customers would never refuse (free)."
"Citrix Hypervisor is quick to deploy and easy to manage."
"This is a good product for virtualization and it is easy to use."
"What I find most valuable in Citrix Hypervisor is its licensing policy, because you'll get it for free if you buy a Citrix XenDesktop license. You don't need to spend additional money on the Citrix Hypervisor because you can manage both the Citrix XenDesktop and the Citrix Hypervisor with just one license, so you can save on cost. I also like that the solution is good support-wise. Hardware support is also faster compared to other solutions."
"The installation is easy."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It's very simple to use."
"The flexibility as well as performance wise and as well as data volume, we have huge volume stored."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy bidirectionally between the desktop and the virtual machine."
"It is easy to use and does not require complex knowledge."
"Oracle VM Virtualbox is easy to use and does not require much training."
"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."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"I would like the possibility of updating the hypervisor by applying security patches."
"The product could be faster and licensing options could be improved."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"Live migration is something that can be improved."
"You need a licensed account to look up technical support."
"Citrix is not investing in the virtual surroundings."
"I find the solution to be incredibly unstable, constantly falling over and not working properly."
"One valuable feature would be for it to work right the first time but it doesn't necessarily do that."
"The solution should work to simplify the system. However, it should be flexible enough to allow for special cases."
"The solution could be more user-friendly."
"The communications setup lags. It does not connect properly so the batching and networking is a bit slow."
"The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."
"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."
"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."
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.