We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"It is easy to use, stable, and flexible. It is a pretty mature product, and it is faster than VirtualBox."
"Good screen and keyboard sharing feature."
"This solution is open source and easy to configure."
"KVM is stable."
"I like that it's easy to manage. It's also more powerful when it comes to security than others. That point of view is the one consideration. The other consideration is that it's cost-effective."
"The KVM service is well managed with a central policy interface."
"If you prefer command-line, there are all kinds of command-line options."
"Nutanix AHV is very scalable. It can go to unlimited nodes."
"The solution is user-friendly and provides good virtual machine backups. The user interface gets updated when there is a new release."
"This solution is very stable and it has been running for the last three months, with no issues."
"The most valuable feature is manageability."
"The entirety of the infrastructure resides in the same product, which makes it easy to troubleshoot and investigate problems."
"In terms of features, Acropolis is a good virtualization manager and that it is on-premise. I use almost every technology they provide."
"It has a vs switch for the people who know Linux, in case it's easier for them to use AHV than it is to use VMware."
"For our markets here in Morocco, we are mainly working with server virtualization, and the most valuable feature is the software-defined storage and hyper-converged infrastructure."
"Business continuity features need to be added."
"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."
"Monitoring and resolution could be improved."
"The initial setup of this solution is more difficult than some of the competing products and it could be improved."
"Its resource usage can be improved."
"In our setup, we do not have any dashboards or orchestration, and it is hard to manage. We have 25 gig network cards, but the software driver we have only supported 10 gigs."
"Lacks high availability across clusters as well as support for Apache CloudStack."
"There are some issues with the graphics and some software that is very complex."
"There is no web interface with AHV."
"Lacks integration with the cloud or other solutions."
"When we need to share, publish, or encrypt something, we still need to perform it using the command line."
"In terms of improvement, I think that they could have more partnerships with providers."
"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."
"My storage use is doubled; if I am creating a one TB virtual machine then my storage policy will take two TB from my cluster."
"It worked well in the beginning but after using it for some time, we found some limitations in terms of compatibility with other software."
"The solution could improve the call logging system to HPE, it is a bit tedious."
"It is free for everyone."
"We had some problems with the licensing."
"The price is fair compared to others. But in our local market, it's a problem to get budget approval from management. That's why they are trying to get those products so we can give them the price benefit. But if you consider the international market or other products, it's sometimes better than their price."
"The price of the solution is fair and if you want support there are additional fees."
"The price of the solution can always be lower. However, the price of the solution is reasonable."
"We don't have to pay extra for Acropolis because it is built into Nutanix."
"AHV is free, it's an open-source solution."
"Some of the features required additional licenses."
Nutanix makes infrastructure invisible, elevating IT to focus on the applications and services that power their business. The Nutanix enterprise cloud platform leverages web-scale engineering and consumer-grade design to natively converge compute, virtualization and storage into a resilient, software-defined solution with rich machine intelligence. The result is predictable performance, cloud-like infrastructure consumption, robust security, and seamless application mobility for a broad range of enterprise applications.
KVM is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 9 reviews while Nutanix AHV is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 12 reviews. KVM is rated 7.4, while Nutanix AHV is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of KVM writes "Stable, easy to set up, and very easy to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix AHV writes "Easy to set up with good stability and good technical support". KVM is most compared with Oracle VM VirtualBox, Hyper-V, Proxmox VE, VMware vSphere and Citrix Hypervisor, whereas Nutanix AHV is most compared with VMware vSphere, Proxmox VE, Hyper-V, Oracle VM VirtualBox and Citrix Hypervisor. See our KVM vs. Nutanix AHV 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.