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 easy to deploy. It's very easy to understand problems and read logs."
"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."
"We find there are good central maintenance and central management panels."
"I've found the following features to be the most valuable: user personalization layer, app layering, provisioning, and notification services for integration between different domains."
"The solution's security is its most valuable aspect."
"Ability to move your virtual machines from one host to another."
"Citrix is easy to use and is stable."
"The solution is extremely user friendly."
"It's very simple to use."
"The snapshot feature is very powerful; it protects us from disaster."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that there is no cost because it is open source."
"The versatility, simplicity, and stability of the product are it's most valuable features."
"The flexibility and the closed platform, so it allows you to run in multiple platforms, Windows, Linux, Macintosh."
"Technical support is good."
"Oracle VM Virtualbox is easy to use and does not require much training."
"This is a highly scalable solution."
"It needs improvement with the security features."
"The solution should be more flexible and allow for greater customization."
"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."
"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."
"Live migration is something that can be improved."
"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."
"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."
"We're working with them to be able to allow the local USB ports to be ported over to the remote desktop, running VirtualBox."
"The solution needs to improve its flexibility. It's not as flexible as VMware."
"Basically, the GUI and command-line interface need improvement."
"The solution needs to improve the methods used for starting and stopping the machine."
"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."
"I find the solution to be incredibly unstable, constantly falling over and not working properly."
"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.