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 solution is extremely user friendly."
"Citrix Hypervisor is simple to use."
"The ability to move a virtual machine while it is running is a big advantage."
"It is quite flexible and rugged. It is also easy to understand and user-friendly. It is not as complicated as some of the other solutions. It has its technicalities, but it is easy to understand. You can easily pick up in a short period of time and understand how to manage the infrastructure."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"This solution allows the end users to clone, start, stop, or remotely control their VMs."
"Citrix Hypervisor is quick to deploy and easy to manage."
"This product is extremely easy to install, use, has a great GUI and is incredibly stable."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"This solution creates a snapshot of virtual machines so you can create test environments."
"The cloning is a very useful tool."
"The configuration and installation is pretty straightforward."
"The solution is very stable."
"This is a highly scalable solution."
"The installation is easy."
"The self-service user portal needs to be more granular and be more customizable."
"The interface has to be updated."
"I would like the possibility of updating the hypervisor by applying security patches."
"Integration with other vendors and other applications could be improved."
"The solution is only in English. It would be ideal if it was in Portuguese."
"The USB support for the virtual server needs improvement."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"The product could be faster and licensing options could be improved."
"The solution has to do a better job of promoting the product and its licensing capabilities."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox doesn't work properly with an antivirus tool."
"It would be good if we could use Hyper-V Windows subsystems with Linux and VirtualBox on the same instance. Currently, to be able to use VirtualBox, we have to restart the machine into an instance of Windows where Hyper-V is disabled, which is understandably very inconvenient."
"This should have better support for multiple network cards and some parts of the GUI should be improved."
"Having live migrations to move a running server to other hardware would be great."
"One valuable feature would be for it to work right the first time but it doesn't necessarily do that."
"The solution lacks some open source remote administration tools. The reload of individual virtual machine definitions through the vboxweb service (via its API) without restarting it and the access to shared storage (to use teleport functions) need to be improved."
"The technical support needs to improve."
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.