We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and Odin Virtuozzo Containers based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."We chose this solution because of the pricing and the simplicity of the product."
"I like that Hyper-V is like a virtual environment. I like to use VMware because of the resource requirements. In Sri Lanka, most of the customers use the Hyper-V GUI. When installing the interface with the Windows version, we also install the Hyper-V feature on the server. This is because they require more features and memory. There are so many features that they have embedded in Hyper-V that are useful."
"The virtual SAN feature is helpful."
"Hyper-V improved the infrastructure drastically, not only from a performance perspective but from a control/administration view as well."
"The most valuable feature is being able to do checkpoints then roll back to the checkpoint because that's what we need to test the software. We're testing the installation and then we roll it back and retest it."
"The most valuable feature is that it's an end-to-end solution."
"It allows for quick deployment of servers and workloads."
"We appreciate how easy this solution is to implement on standalone severs."
"When you run templates on the containers on Virtuozzo they have a lot of back-ups."
"It needs additional administration and monitoring capabilities."
"The solution could improve by having virtual restore."
"Hyper-V could benefit with improvements to their management interface."
"The area revolving around operations in the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"Many vendors, such as Cisco and HPE, are discontinuing support for Hyper-V as they believe it does not have a significant market share."
"It would be better if it demanded less memory. Once you have allocated those memory spaces for the installed server, fewer resources are left to allocate for the Hyper-V virtual environment. That's the drawback with that. For example, once you install Windows 10, and let's say Windows 2019, Windows 2019 will take at least 10 GB of memory. If a customer has only 16 GB of RAM on the system, they think of installing Hyper-V. Because when you have windows 2019 or something else, they give two free Hyper-V virtual licenses. But we can't because there's not enough memory. We can, however, install this as a VMS. But this UI isn't that user-friendly for most customers. They like to have a user interface with VMI, and it's not easy when you install VMI. It would also be better if they can improve their core Hyper-V version to be a bit more familiar and user-friendly with its interface. I think it would be much easier. We had a few issues with the VM Hyper-V virtual network. Once you have such issues, it's very difficult to find out where they came from. They had such issues, and we had to resolve the system again. But other than that, if it's useful and keeps working nicely, it will work very nicely even if something happens. But it's very hectic and challenging to find out where it's happening. In the next release, it would be better to control this data store part in a manageable way. This is because once we install and create a Hyper-V machine, it goes everywhere. It would be better if it had a single location and a single folder with a heartbeat and virtual machine information. You can just go forward, and the data store and everything are going into one place like the C drive. But something always goes fast, or everything gets lost if the customer doesn't manually change the direction of where the virtual hard drive routes, the more serious the problem. It would be better if they could merge all that together. This includes the virtual machine and the virtual hard drive in the same folder when creating the virtual machine. I think that it would be much easier to manage and in case something happens. Technical support also could be better."
"They can hot add NICs to the VMs. However, there is still not the ability to hot add virtual processors to running VMs."
"The solution should improve its native integration with other public cloud solutions."
"Odin Virtuozzo has poor support and needs to improve."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while Odin Virtuozzo Containers is ranked 12th in Server Virtualization Software with 2 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while Odin Virtuozzo Containers is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of Hyper-V writes "It's a low-cost solution that enabled us to shrink everything down into a single server ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Odin Virtuozzo Containers writes "Significant backup for containers, but the customer service is terrible". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE and KVM, whereas Odin Virtuozzo Containers is most compared with Proxmox VE, Nutanix AHV Virtualization, KVM and VMware vSphere.
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.