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."We find there are good central maintenance and central management panels."
"The compatibility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It's compatible on almost every cloud these days."
"The onboarding process is pretty straightforward."
"Citrix Hypervisor does a great job overall, such as the virtualization of the host. It's very easy to manage the virtual machine, to create, and configure high availability."
"We can easily migrate VMs from one host to another."
"The support for this solution is phenomenal."
"The ability to move a virtual machine while it is running is a big advantage."
"Scripting can automate procedures."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox is easy to use."
"The pause feature is valuable. I can pause, which is something that not all hypervisors allow. The snapshot feature is also valuable."
"The configuration and installation is pretty straightforward."
"The versatility, simplicity, and stability of the product are it's most valuable features."
"This product is very user-friendly and easy to use."
"It's a pretty good product in terms of monitoring."
"The scalability of the solution is very good."
"The flexibility as well as performance wise and as well as data volume, we have huge volume stored."
"The licensing costs are too high on the solution. They should work to make the costs more reasonable."
"Network management needs improvement because it is not very stable."
"I find that the features in Citrix Hypervisor are not as rich as with VMware. It would be a benefit if they had some of the other features VMware has, such as the ability to expand a drive on the fly. You do not have to take down the machine to do it but in Citrix you do."
"We'd like them to add more automation to the product."
"I would like the possibility of updating the hypervisor by applying security patches."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"The solution should be more flexible and allow for greater customization."
"The built-in networking features are a little limited."
"I find the solution to be incredibly unstable, constantly falling over and not working properly."
"They could improve the graphics functionality of the product."
"Oracle VM VirtualBox doesn't work properly with an antivirus tool."
"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 user interface needs to be improved."
"The solution could be more user-friendly."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"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, Hyper-V, VMware vSphere, 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.
