We performed a comparison between KVM, Oracle VM, and VMware vSphere based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Proxmox, VMware, Microsoft and others in Server Virtualization Software."The initial setup was very easy."
"KVM is stable."
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"The most helpful aspect of KVM is the fact that the interface is so minimal. It includes just what you need to set up the VMs and manage them, and it's very simple to do so."
"I have found KVM to be scalable."
"The key aspect is that the KVM directly interacts with the Kronos. There's no clear indication of indirect communication with Kronos. It is not linked to Kronos, and interaction is straightforward without any intermediaries."
"It is an open ecosystem, and we see there is a benefit in open-source solutions."
"A very reliable solution which can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with reasonable overhead."
"It is simple and straightforward, and it will only require you one system integrator to do the job."
"Its technical support is quite good."
"The Foundation is the most valuable feature of Oracle VM."
"It's a very flexible solution because you have all the commands that you can do yourself."
"The solution is easy to use. You can spin one up when you need to and then shut it down."
"Ability to patch with no downtime."
"Virtualization platform that's easy to set up, and has good scalability and stability."
"The cloning is a great feature and live migration is very easy."
"Server Virtualization is the most important feature because that helps me to utilize 100% capacity of my physical server or box. Its redundancy, uptime, or high-availability is also valuable. Storage-sharing is also valuable. In vSAN, I can utilize the maximum storage. In the physical boxes, if you don't require storage, it lies idle, but with VMware or any kind of virtualization, you can utilize the full storage."
"VMware Tanzu (container) is the most valuable addition because you get an efficient solution to manage the VM and container in a single pane of glass."
"The enterprise direction is very complete and the data center provides almost everything you need."
"It is easy to manage the solution. It is scalable and very stable."
"The DRS feature of this solution is a very valuable feature."
"Technical support is quite good and very responsive."
"The connectivity is fantastic, and many functions can run together in one server. If you need to scale, we can continue to add components or modules. It's a beautiful virtual solution that has many advantages over physical hardware, where you have to use devices and wiring to connect all your projects."
"The initial setup is easy."
"In KVM, snapshots and cloning are areas where there could be a little more sophistication, like VMware."
"I have previously used VMware and KVM is easier to use. However, they both have their strengths depending on their use cases. They are mostly equal. One of VMware's advantages is it has better support."
"The networking with wireless devices needs improvement."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"I believe KVM offers a unified answer, while ProxMark addresses orchestration. KVM lacks orchestration. If the aim is to centrally oversee multiple KVMs – let's say to freeze them – a centralized management solution is absent."
"Technical support is not top-notch."
"Technical support could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an improved user interface and dashboard. This type of improvement will make it easy or help our engineers understand the solution from a requirement point of view."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Integration with cloud products would be beneficial."
"There is no memory over-subscription and CPU over-subscription. That has to be improved in terms of Oracle VM perspective. The other leading virtualizing software solutions have this feature."
"The management can be improved more, and become more agile. It would be nice for it to become more rich in terms of UI. In addition, the replication to disaster recovery needs improvement."
"There are currently issues with centralized storage."
"Oracle VM should have centralized storage, without which you can't clone or move one VM to another."
"It doesn't monitor everything, which is a little bit more difficult. It doesn't seem to have as many features or metrics to monitor as some others do, so you have to make some homemade scripts to do it."
"With our current OVM Manager version, migrating a VM from one repository to another repository was really complicated, especially editing and manually matching the configuration."
"Its database management features could be better."
"The implementation of VMware vSphere is easy. For integration companies, it's easy, the final client cannot do it alone but for an implementor it's easy."
"I would like to see support for endpoint virtualization."
"I would like to see VMware head towards a more GPU friendly environment."
"I think the pricing could be lower, and the technical support could be improved."
"Two improvements that I would like to see are higher resolution console modes for guests and easier switching between consoles."
"VMware vSphere could be improved with cheaper costs."
"When we talk about the overall private cloud stack, I would prefer for it be a lot more seamless."
"It could use a smaller learning curve."
