Nutanix AHV Virtualization Reviews

The cluster is used for software tests, evaluations, or migration projects driven by Nutanix Calm. We needed a simpler approach with a higher grade of automation for testing purposes. As I already stated in my Nutanix Calm review, Nutanix Calm lets us do this. AHV was used so that we would not have any additional spend on a hypervisor. VM management does not require an additional management server like vCenter. Sizing the solution has always taken into account the need for Nutanix Controller-VMs (CVM) - the main part of AOS - to form the cluster and present storage to the hypervisor.

Nutanix AHV is the invisible hypervisor integrated into Nutanix AOS. Like with any other Nutanix solution, they do API-first. This way, it can be tightly integrated. Management is done through Nutanix Prism Web-Management. We deploy our machines using Nutanix Calm, so we get to have standardized VMs while tailored to the use case on hand.

Updates are done with the Lifecycle Manager (LCM) which too is integrated into Prism. It takes care of most cross-dependencies between Prism, Calm, AOS, AHV, and Firmware Updates.

AHV helps us because it is a no-brainer in regard to management.

There are no specific features we would consider special. It is the simple non-consideration we get with this product that's great. It just works. You can just do all the other things you are wrapped up with, so you can focus on anything but AHV. It is a hypervisor, not some exciting application server you have to tend to regularly. Therefore, the most valuable feature of AHV is "having time for other things".

As stated above, the lack of a need for something like vCenter has its perks, too. It is rather cool to have and underscores Nutanix's approach of "invisible infrastructure".

Since it is tightly integrated, you want to have it as a single installable thing. But that is against its nature. The tight integration with AOS makes it what it is. AHV is mostly on par with ESXi. Since it comes together with AOS you must compare it to ESXI with VSAN to get the complete picture. It can do vGPU just like ESXi, can move VMs just like ESXi, and snapshots won't make it "stun" the VM as it does on ESXi.

If you ever have a problem, hit up Nutanix Support. I've never had better support. Just do a Proof-of-Concept and have them wow you.

Just to be clear: If you have the need for special hardware like FibreChannel-Cards or such and there is no networked-way around it (such as you could work with USB Dongles via an HW-Dongle-Server of network), you have to use a separate hypervisor. That said, you could still present NFS from the Nutanix Cluster to VMware or use an iSCSI-Connection in-guest or in-host from the Nutanix Cluster.

We started using the solution back in 2019 with AHV. We still have our production system running with VMware.

We never had any issues regarding stability. There were a few vendor warnings (aka Nutanix field advisory) that mentioned possible stability issues in certain scenarios, depending on the customer's setup.

As with any solution, fixes are made and only an update away. Stability is always critical to a solution so you have to keep all components on a compatible level. To achieve that Nutanix introduced Life Cycle Manager (LCM) to help with this. LCM won't show any versions where critical issues are known to keep you from getting an issue just from updating. You always get a target version that is safe and compatible with your running components. 

To make it your own choice between safety and new features they have STS and LTS as known from other software. STS (Short Term Service) versions are updated very frequently and you can (and to some degree have to) update every few weeks and get the newest features. If you are not so keen on updating that frequently, you just stick to LTS. 

Alas, AHV is updated independently from AOS. So whether you are on LTS or STS with AOS you can just upgrade to a compatible AHV version with LCM, just make sure you have only AHV selected.

If you had (like me) an ESXi cluster paired with various components from NetApp, you really appreciate the Nutanix LCM that comes with it. I have seen more purple-screen-of-death than I'd like to admit. However, I've had nothing like that with AHV. 

All the Nutanix field advisories from the vendor are there to help you keep it running. Nutanix Support helps clear out any questions whatsoever.

Scalability is the true nature of a true HCI solution. You can scale as you like. If you just need storage, you would put storage nodes that are blocked for running VMs on. 

The support team is superb. Activating remote support on ticket creation gives them a head start at working on your issue. Ticket pickup-time is great and the support staff is polite and knowledgeable.

Positive

We just had some VM templates on ESXi but that did not cut it. Not by far. Handcrafting test VMs was just too cumbersome.

As easy as it gets. The servers came pre-installed. You just update to the desired version to start with.

We set everything up with a consultant from our local Nutanix Partner. His expertise was formidable.

Given an average of 2-5 days until a VM is ready before AHV and the free offering of the AHV hypervisor, that is difficult to calculate.

I'd advise users to get a proof-of-concept (POC) to evaluate the solution. Considering other HCI solutions, which AHV is a part of. The pricing is competitive with ESXi+vSAN.

Setup is done in a matter of hours. The longest part is racking it in the data center.

We had roughly 10 years of experience with ESX(i), so we knew what alternatives were out there.

This is for on-prem virtual infrastructure, for computing storage, and to apply the hyper-converged infrastructure concept while doing a lot of virtualization features, like HA, high availability, redundancy, and replication. We also do some reports and analyses based on utilization. The product has a lot of features.

There are many features we can leverage. 

The hyper-converged infrastructure concept is great. This is the best feature. I also like the high availability. This protects our workload against any failures, like a failure for load, or failure of a rack, drive, or network. It helps us create business continuity.

It's easy to set up.

The solution is stable.

It can scale well. 

Technical support has been helpful. 

I'm already looking into possibly adding micro-segmentation features. It will help control traffic better and make everything more secure. 

The solution can be pricey. 

I've been using the solution for seven years.

The stability has been good. It handles daily administrative tasks automatically. So far, there are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have around 1,000 people using the solution. 

It's scalable and easy to expand. 

It's easy to contact technical support. They are helpful.

I've also used VMware solutions. 

Both are basically the same. VMware is like Nutanix. Nutanix has an HCI feature. However, with VMware, we can use the vSAN. This is the same feature for hyper-converged infrastructure. That said, in VMware, you need a lot of licenses since every feature needs a license. In Nutanix, it's different. Everything is built into one product. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. However, it will depend on the design we go with. In our case, we needed just one week to get it deployed. 

The solution is a bit expensive. We pay a lot of money for S nodes. 

We're partners. 

While the solution is largely on-premises, we do have some infrastructure on AWS.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

I would recommend other companies deploy it. It's very powerful, whether it is on-prem or in the cloud. 

Our primary use case for this solution is utilizing it as a unified software. It's unified, easy to use and simplified. It has a lot of functionalities, such as replication and failovers, and we deploy it on-premises.

We have found the replication, analysis, and analytics tools valuable. It usually prompts when there is an impending issue that might occur. For example, if the failover is failing, or the remote site is down, it will alert you. The solution is very proactive and can even anticipate an issue that might occur. You can know in advance and be able to fix it.

The price of the solution can be improved.

We have been using this solution for one year.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable and there are currently 60 end users utilizing the solution. You can easily add resources. For example, when a server uses more resources, you can continuously optimize and reduce the server's resources, which uses less and the other, which employs more. It's very flexible and scalable, so you can take the flexibility you want. They are based on the usability and the resources of the infrastructure.

I rate customer service and support an eight out of ten. We had an issue and raised it with the Nutanix AHV Virtualization team, and they were able to resolve it. In addition, they have resolved any problems we request when we cannot manage them.

Positive

We previously used VMware and Hyper-V. However, we switched to this solution because of its flexibility, usability, and responsiveness. So, when you interact and have VMs running, or there's downtime or an issue, it usually transfers VMs from one node to another when there's an issue on one part of the node.

I didn't install this product, so I cannot comment on the setup. However, based on the research I've done with others, it's usually the same. It's efficient. The setup is efficient.

The licensing costs are a little bit expensive.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten, the solution is very good, but it could be cheaper. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a very good solution, and I recommend it to anyone.

I've configured the solutions for two or three customers. It's my first time with Prism Central, Prism Element, and the CVM (Control Virtual Machine).

I haven't come across any limitations. Nutanix doesn't support externally attached storage through Fibre Channel.

However, Nutanix doesn't support Fibre Channel connectivity. This, in my opinion, is a weakness. For instance, it does not support Cyber Talent. To clarify, you cannot connect external Fibre Channel storage or NAS storage resources with Nutanix. However, VMware vSAN supports such solutions.

I have been using Nutanix AHV Virtualization for 2 to 3 years.

It is still working fine. However, when compared to VMware, I consider VMware to be more stable. I would rate the stability of Nutanix around 8.5 or 9 out of 10.

It is highly scalable, and I recommend it for larger companies. Adding nodes to expand clusters is straightforward. However, due to its cost, I don't recommend it for smaller companies as they might find it challenging to afford.

I'm highly satisfied with their support team.

My initial choice for high availability (HA) solutions is VMware ESXi. If someone asks for an alternative, my first recommendation is usually Dell EMC PowerFlex. In comparison to Nutanix AHV Virtualization, VMware ESXi has the advantage of supporting external storage, making it more flexible for integrating existing storage solutions. VMware ESXi is also perceived as more affordable than Nutanix AHV Virtualization.

They should make the product more competitive by working on their licensing model. Lowering the price would help make it more affordable.

I recommend using Nutanix AHV (Acropolis Hypervisor) for hyper-converged computing processes because of its simplicity in deployment and configuration. The platform also offers good support and is versatile, supporting various hypervisors such as VMware, Microsoft Hyper-V, and its native AHV. I would rate this product a 9.5 out of 10 overall.

Our primary use case for this solution is for different Omni Calculator applications and other applications of certification.

The redundancy factor features are valuable. Additionally, the storage features and volume system are great.

The price could be lower.

We have been using the solution for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. It allows us to manage and scale out a square and have nodes. Additionally, we shepherd nodes between different clusters as well. Currently, six people are using the solution in our organization.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. They are very supportive.

The initial setup was not complex because we had received training.

The solution is very expensive and is one of our concerns as we intend to upgrade.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the price could be lower.

Customers often choose Nutanix AHV Virtualization for its leading position in the hyperconverged segment. The primary use case is virtualizing workloads, whether migrating from a physical environment or transitioning from other virtualization platforms like VMware or Hyper-V.

Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a private cloud platform offering integration with various public cloud providers. This integration allows for a multi-cloud approach. In my opinion, Nutanix AHV Virtualization's strength is its storage. It innovates and excels in the hyper-converged storage segment, making it the number one choice in this area. 

Honestly, there's a lot to work on the product, especially for someone like me who has worked on VMware. VMware offers a significant level of customization when configuring virtual machines, and that level of detail is not as pronounced on Nutanix AHV Virtualization. 

I have been working with the product for six years. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I have not contacted the tech support team yet. 

The tool is pretty easy to set up. While I haven't deployed it for a customer, I have set it up in my home lab. It may require some resources, but the process is straightforward overall if you have the correct equipment and follow the deployment steps. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

Depending on the customer's environment and other details, people can set up Nutanix AHV Virtualization clusters in a week or two. Assuming all prerequisites are in place, one week should be sufficient to deploy it. 

The tool is not as expensive as VMware. It is essentially KVM, a Linux-based virtualization with a rebranded version and a web interface. While it does the job, it may not offer the same level of detail as VMware.

The solution's pricing is cheap for a new customer but becomes expensive during renewal. Especially when a customer plans to expand their environment, feedback in the market from end customers and partners becomes crucial. There have been instances where customers who chose between Nutanix AHV Virtualization and VMware opted for Nutanix AHV Virtualization due to cost considerations. Yet, as they aimed to scale, the pricing factor became a more significant consideration and changed their mind. 

The product stands out in the hyper-converged market due to its user-friendly nature. Automation minimizes manual configuration tasks, reducing the operational burden and making it less headache-prone for administrators.

In light of recent developments, especially with Broadcom's acquisition of VMware, there's a sense of uncertainty and potential disruption in the market. Broadcom's history, as seen with the Symantec acquisition, raises concerns about the impact on licensing renewals. VMware no longer selling perpetual socket licenses adds to the uncertainty.

In such a scenario, Nutanix AHV Virtualization appears to be stable. Unlike VMware, it hasn't undergone frequent changes in ownership. We have small, medium, and enterprise businesses using it. 

When considering it, it's important to assess third-party integrations. While the product has a mature platform with an expanding ecosystem, it may not be as mature as VMware regarding integrations. Therefore, potential buyers should ensure their desired integrations have native support within the tool's ecosystem. Whether it's an existing backup solution or other third-party products, compatibility checks are crucial before adopting Nutanix AHV Virtualization to avoid any issues with integration.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

We implement the solution overall in an on-premise environment. We primarily use the solution for business continuity plans and disaster recovery plans. We use Nutanix for our infrastructure as a service.

Nutanix is well implemented for business continuity and disaster recovery plans as it's a technology with full tolerance and is good for these cases.

AHV is free. When you implement Nutanix, when you buy a Nutanix appliance, AHV is free. It is inside of the appliance. You can decide if use it or choose another hypervisor such as VMware.

The user interface is fine.

It integrates well with other Nutanix solutions. 

The initial setup is very fast.

It offers very good stability.

We find it to be highly scalable.  

It's user-friendly.

I don't have enough knowledge to answer this question. I'm not extremely technical. 

VMware does tend to have more features than AHV. It's more of the leader in this space.

It's a stable, resilient solution.

The solution scales well. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

The support is outstanding. You can choose the kind or the type of support you need and they are always available. 

I'm also familiar with Microsoft and VMware. VMware has many or more features than AHV. However, for example, the Microsoft Hypervisor is not in competition against Acropolis Hypervisor. It's not as robust. If I had to choose between AHV and Microsoft, I would choose AHV.

The product offers a very simple, very straightforward setup. It's very fast as well. I'd give it a four out of five rating in terms of the ease of the process.

We are an information technology company. We are an integrator, we are a service provider and we have consultants. We can handle any installation for ourselves or clients.

The solution is free to use with other Nutanix appliances. There is no licensing cost, no managing cost, and no maintenance cost.

We are partners of Nutanix. I work as an IT project manager. We are resellers of the infrastructure as a service and we internally have a Nutanix environment to handle reseller infrastructure as a service to our customers. My skill set does not include a technical skillset with Nutanix.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

In terms of features, Acropolis is a good virtualization manager and that it is on-premise. I use almost every technology they provide.

Nutanix AHV, like every hypervisor, still has room for integration with the cloud. Nutanix is a very, very good product in regards to integration with the Amazon services, but it can be improved, especially in my country, Turkey. In this area, both Amazon Web Services and other solutions have different prices and different currencies. Nutanix actually promised to build clouds once they made the new generation moving the clients or the servers on-premises, and that's not working as advertised right now. So I believe that it can still be improved. Every service depends on this because the flexibility is what makes this product good in the first place.

I use Vaults with three hypervisors in my projects. One is the Acropolis from Nutanix, SCC from VMware, and of course Microsoft Hyper-V. This user interface is easy to understand. The dashboard is mostly okay and gives relevant information for the users. It has a good user interface but it's not flexible. It's more flexible than VMware and Hyper-V which don't even compare. The mechanics and the user interface are good. I like how it looks, but it can be improved. For example, if they had a comment line option directly from the Web UI, I could use PowerShell add ons. That would make the UI more flexible for me. Overall, it is the best of the three options right out there right now. ,

Again, I would also like to see a comment line option for integration with other products. Nutanix already has a comment line integration with the publisher. I also run some mini-systems and I don't have the same kind of comment line options for Unix systems. If I'm working on another shell, for example, Bash or SSH, we need a solution for that aspect. Console command is many times a faster way to do it because with UI you have to wait, but with your comment line, you can script it and can automate it more easily. So I believe they need a Linux version of the comment line.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for more than three years.

In terms of stability, Nutanix is actually very stable.

These days I don't worry about anything working or not.

Nutanix AHV is much easier than other systems. We can focus on the infrastructure and not the product so it gives us the flexibility to not worry about the scalability of the systems - we just need more modes to scale up. That makes it easier for system and engineers support.

I don't actually need any technical support. But I do hear feedback about it. For example, if a customer has an issue, such as some discs are broken, the support fixes it immediately. They don't even have to call the support center because they are monitoring the system. I don't do it directly, but I hear from and talk to customers.

I worked with VMware for more than ten years. The first versions of VMware to come out worked on Red Hat 6.3 servers and they were almost unusable sometimes.

Nutanix, in its first version, worked as it should.

The initial setup is nice, actually straightforward. The other systems are not easy. For VMware, for example, if you want to use full spec hyper-converged systems, including storage and the other options, it's very complex. Only the hypervisor option is easy with them. But the other options, including storage, are complicated. Nutanix and its products are very easy and pretty useful. And even migration is easy compared to all the other systems.

Some other firms were working with HP on their systems, but in the end, they migrated to Nutanix because of support issues.

On a scale from 1 to 10 I would rate it a 9 - I believe there is always room for improvement.