We performed a comparison between Hyper-V and Oracle VM 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 implementation process is simple."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy to install."
"The solution is very powerful, easy to use, user-friendly, and integrates well with Windows. If you are looking for a hundred percent Microsoft environment it would be a good idea to go with Hyper-V. They work wonderfully together."
"It runs our most critical workloads and supports all our branch offices."
"The product is easy to manage. It improves our VM management."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"I find the ease of use the most valuable asset of the solution."
"Hyper-V can expand storage. For instance, if I have a VM running on NetApp or another platform, I can expand the storage without interrupting operations. It is useful when I need to quickly allocate more storage without causing downtime or performing maintenance tasks."
"Oracle VM is user-friendly and facilitates compliance with Oracle Licensing, a feature not provided by competitors like VMware or Hyper-V. Oracle prefers customers to use their technology. It is also easy to implement, clone, and deploy machines with Oracle VM, making it a convenient solution."
"Overall, the biggest performance is around virtualization and automation, you can build private clouds with Oracle VM using Enterprise Manager."
"The network capabilities are good."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The support staff in the tech support team at Oracle has improved. I find them extremely helpful and they give very solid support."
"In terms of server provisioning, it only takes a few clicks of a button and a bit of install automation."
"The cloning is a great feature and live migration is very easy."
"Its ease of management and simplicity are most valuable. It is free, and you can provision an unlimited number of VMs at no cost for clients. They also provide perfect support."
"Hyper-V's management platform falls short in terms of scalability, especially when handling multiple Hyper-V servers. VMware has a central console to pull in all your VM servers, so you can easily manage them all through one console. You can manage servers in Hyper-V's admin centers, but it's not as scalable. It's doable with a couple of Hyper-V servers, but it becomes harder to manage when you get over two or three Hyper-V servers."
"We have our scientific network, and it's run off the university sever, and we need two servers to optimize our scientific work, such as the mathematics work. Then you have to work with Python and Java, and Microsoft isn't the best option for this kind of work"
"One of the network problems I face is I cannot introduce other security layers on top of Hyper-V as you can in VMware. When it comes to the network the VMware is more flexible than Hyper-V."
"There needs to be more functionality overall in the Hyper-V manager."
"The cost and licensing can be improved."
"There are some storage problems which do occur in high load systems, especially SQL workloads."
"Failure capabilities are insufficient for disaster recovery."
"I think the console could use some improvement for the backups."
"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."
"One is the hypervisor. Right now, it’s all using Xen. What would be really helpful is to have some choice, and the underlying hypervisor technology use KVM which is very popular with certain workloads."
"I think more Command-Line options for the product, for deployments."
"This solution is not as stable as other solutions in the market. But, Oracle has made an effort to improve these issues with recent updates."
"The tool's price and stability could be better."
"The automatic start of the product to work as a background process has shortcomings and needs improvement."
"The solution needs more features and flexibility in terms of communicating with other platforms. If it had that, it would be the perfect product."
"Its database management features could be better."
Hyper-V is ranked 3rd in Server Virtualization Software with 134 reviews while Oracle VM is ranked 7th in Server Virtualization Software with 76 reviews. Hyper-V is rated 8.0, while Oracle VM is rated 7.8. 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 Oracle VM writes "A cheap option available for Linux environments which is useful for many workloads". Hyper-V is most compared with VMware vSphere, VMware Workstation, Proxmox VE, Oracle VM VirtualBox and RHEV, whereas Oracle VM is most compared with VMware vSphere, KVM, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Proxmox VE and RHEV. See our Hyper-V vs. Oracle VM 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.