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 initial setup is easy."
"The onboarding process is pretty straightforward."
"Citrix Hypervisor integrates easily and I can manage the infrastructure better. If I need to take a machine down to expand the hard drive, I do not have to physically be here. I do not need to order new equipment or new hard drives. I can shut it down, increase the drive space and bring it back up."
"The feature I find most valuable, is its performance"
"We can easily migrate VMs from one host to another."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is very fast. It also works very well for physically small servers."
"Citrix is easy to use and is stable."
"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."
"This product is very user-friendly and easy to use."
"This product is extremely easy to install, use, has a great GUI and is incredibly stable."
"It is a stable product."
"This is a good and easy solution for running virtual environments."
"It's very simple to use."
"The product gives us the flexibility to try different machines."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to manage multiple operating systems through one application."
"It's a pretty good product in terms of monitoring."
"The manageability of the solution needs improvement. It's an extremely bad product to handle."
"Overall, I can't think of a feature that is lacking. We've been pretty satisfied overall."
"It can be useful to have a web management program because we have to install our client-server. We have to properly manage the host, if we had administration tools through a web interface it would be a benefit."
"Citrix Hypervisor is expensive if you get it as a stand-alone product, so this is one area for improvement. Its price could be cheaper. We also found other areas for improvement in Citrix Hypervisor, for example, we can't use SCIM provisioning, and there are limitations to the size of the HDD. Another area for improvement is the pass-through storage, in particular the removable storage, because that also has limitations where you can't connect to the drive if it is more than one TB."
"The graphics user interface is pretty bad."
"The interface has to be updated."
"Citrix could provide more tools to help the client manage the solution because we need to build our own tools in some cases. Everything is available through PowerShell, but then you need to build your own scripts to do the more advanced work."
"Assigning the order of virtual server startup is not very easy and this can be improved."
"Oracle needs to improve its hot virtual machine migration. It didn't work as intended. It should allow us to migrate between virtual machines, without stopping the database."
"There are a few bugs that need to be updated."
"This should have better support for multiple network cards and some parts of the GUI should be improved."
"It's not as robust as server platforms, nor does it need to be."
"It could improve slightly with enhanced reporting capabilities that show the current status of the network."
"One valuable feature would be for it to work right the first time but it doesn't necessarily do that."
"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."
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.