We performed a comparison between RHEV and VMware VSphere based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, VMware VSphere got better user reviews. One major difference between the two solutions is that users say that RHEV’s scalability is not great.
"RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware."
"It is very stable."
"I can control and manage everything. I know everything that's cooking inside. This is the best part for me."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward and well-documented. The process is very similar to its competitors. The success of your setup depends on how well you plan."
"This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products."
"Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal."
"What they provide is way beyond the essential requirements of customers."
"It's easy to use and very user-friendly."
"VMware vSphere helps us in not wasting resources like we did when we were using physical servers. It changed our whole environment."
"The most valuable feature of VMware vSphere is the ability to work in a big system infrastructure."
"In the past, we struggled with VM encryption. We couldn't encrypt the virtual machines with older versions of vSphere without some kind of third-party tool. Now, with 6.7, it's all in the application itself, in vSphere. We no longer have to procure additional products to meet that requirement. We can just do it on the fly, and pass our audit with no issues."
"The main benefit of the version 6.7 is that it makes end-users able to use the interface much more effectively. They don't have to install a client on their machine, they can do it from their phone, their laptop, their tablet, any OS, anytime. It's a better experience for the end-user."
"Since it is riding inside of a multi-hardware environment, downtime is virtually nothing."
"VMware vSphere has useful tools for management and support."
"The most valuable features are stability and support."
"I heard that there are big differences between Red Hat eight and seven, but it's still quite difficult for me to judge it. I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier. In term of features, though, it is still not yet clear which is better. I have no clear idea of which features need to be changed at the moment."
"The support is tricky in a few places. We're facing some challenges within Malaysia where we don't really have the system integrators available who can provide extended support. When we need personnel on-site, we can't get them."
"We'd like it if it would be possible on Red Hat Virtualization to possibly connect two or three VMs to the same disk."
"It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period."
"The documentation is not as good as it should be."
"Red Hat by itself is not scalable. But you can have third party add-ons like Ceph to make it massively scalable."
"We would like the dashboard feature of this solution to be improved, as it is not very detailed at present."
"While everything needs improvement in some way, I have no specifics."
"Technical support is not that great. It is too slow."
"We've been using vSphere on Windows 7, and it had less fluff associated with ThinApp. Currently, with Windows 10 version that we have, it adds a lot of bulk to ThinApp. We have offices spanning across Canada from the east coast to the west coast. A ThinApp that is roughly around 400 MB in size would take minutes to open up. With Windows 7, the same ThinApp used to be close to 75 to 80 MB in size. So, I'm really not happy with the extra fluff that is bundled in Windows 10. It really messes things up for us at times."
"We stopped using a lot of cloud services. However, I see that VMware has integrated with Amazon Cloud. We will now to have to move everything to the cloud."
"They should improve their storage management part. vSphere has its own file system type, called VMSS, and that file system doesn't report on proper data usage or things like that. There are certain loopholes wherein it sometimes shows you erroneous data. Again, their VMSS file system, their data storage management system, and its reporting must be improved a lot."
"I recommend that VMware vSphere continue to release more features."
"I think the pricing could be lower, and the technical support could be improved."
"When we talk about the overall private cloud stack, I would prefer for it be a lot more seamless."
"vSphere itself is great when you don't need to make updates, but any time you have to touch it, unfortunately it's always the little bit of a fight to get it to do what you want."
RHEV is ranked 10th in Server Virtualization Software with 32 reviews while VMware vSphere is ranked 2nd in Server Virtualization Software with 446 reviews. RHEV is rated 7.6, while VMware vSphere is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of RHEV writes "Offers frameworks with well-documented API and easy to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSphere writes "Offers good performance and is useful for banking systems". RHEV is most compared with KVM, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, Oracle VM and Nutanix AHV Virtualization, whereas VMware vSphere is most compared with Hyper-V, Proxmox VE, VMware Workstation, Oracle VM and Citrix Hypervisor. See our RHEV vs. VMware vSphere 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.
Hi Sridhar, This is Rajkumar Gera, VP IT in one of the Telecom. Below are some of the points, may help you: