I would rate Hyper-V around 8.5 compared to VMware. The ease of use is there, but VMware has more options and scalability. However, VMware has a lot more upfront and yearly costs. Hyper-V is a great solution and an excellent way to virtualize your servers and everything. It's a good fit for a small business.

If you're converting from Hyper-V or vice versa, make sure you run a couple of tests of your conversion strategy. I did run into one little snag the first time. The server wouldn't boot properly, but that came down to a permissions issue. Make sure you thoroughly test any server or VM's you're converting over. Test to see that everything boots back up. Also, make sure all your virtual switches are set up correctly because you sometimes run into some networking issues within the VM if you don't configure those 100 percent correctly.

View full review »

The product is mandatory. It's required for any organization that needs to deploy more than two servers. If any organization uses Windows Server, it is critical to use Hyper-V. I would highly recommend it. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

View full review »

VMware virtualization is our main solution, but we use Hyper-V because of the licensing and the cost-effective solution, and on the remote offices we only have fewer than 10 servers.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Hyper-V a nine out of ten.

View full review »

I would not recommend others to use the product.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

View full review »

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I would definitely recommend using this solution. My advice depends on their specific needs. But for many customers, Hyper-V is already included in their Windows server environment. They don't need to purchase anything extra. They can simply start using it.

It's very easy to get started.

View full review »

I recommend it for small to medium businesses whose users rely on Microsoft virtualization. You can save costs by leveraging your data center infrastructure. Even larger enterprises have options like licensing up to three VMs per server, which can be extended with data center licensing for scalability. The solution offers flexibility and scalability depending on your infrastructure needs.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

View full review »

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

It is not so easy for a person to learn to use the product for the first time.

In terms of handling workloads, the product is able to handle all of my work in the company. The performance of the product is good.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

View full review »

The solution is easily manageable, and the setup process isn't too bad. Therefore, I would recommend the solution to others. I'd rate the product ten out of ten overall. 

View full review »

Before committing to one solution, a new user needs to consider what they might do if, at some point, they need to migrate. Users need to consider sizing also before deployment, as well as disk format types. They should use Thin provisioning before the deployment of a VM, and not use Thick provisioning.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

View full review »

I'd rate Hyper-V a five out of ten. I'm not a user of it, so I'm not sure I'm qualified to rate it, however, the part of it that I was most interested in was the pricing notion. Microsoft does all sorts of interesting pricing things. I'm sure they have a good reason for doing it, however, to say, "We'll give you 80% of what you need for almost nothing and if you want the last 20%, you got to give us your left kidney" seems a little unusual.

View full review »

I definitely recommend it. It's easy to use and very reliable.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

View full review »

My suggestion to those planning to use the solution is that they use it in a smaller or simpler environment, and it'll easily do the job for them while being cost-effective at the same time. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

View full review »

We are very satisfied with Hyper-V. I would rate Hyper-V as 7 out of 10.

View full review »

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

View full review »

Whether I would recommend this product for enterprise companies is a good question. The simplicity is a point in favor of the solution. But the performance could be better to compete with solutions like VMware. I'm working with technical partners now, and I tend to accept what they suggest to me and forward it to the final customer. I'm a professional freelance consultant, so I don't have much power for the final customer. But if it was up to me, I would keep Hyper-V.

Hyper-V's advantages over its competitors are its simplicity and fast implementation. I rate Hyper-V a nine out of ten.

View full review »

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

View full review »

I would like to see deduplication and compression in a future roll-out of the product.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V an eight out of ten. I advise others to go for it if they have an interactive environment.

View full review »

I'm not sure if I'm the best person to suggest to you whether to use Hyper-V or not since I think it really depends on your situation. However, let's say we've known each other for ten years as colleagues and talking as friends, if cost is your main concern, then I would definitely recommend using Hyper-V. But if you're looking for high performance, I would recommend against it because it's not as good as other options like VMware.

Considering the performance-related issues of the solution, I rate this solution a six out of ten.

View full review »

I would rate Hyper-V an 8 out of 10.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V a five out of ten.

View full review »

I would recommend Hyper-V to others because it has good capacity and requires little maintenance. I would give Hyper-V a rating of eight out of ten.

View full review »

We are service integrators.

We are working with the latest update.

I'd advise that a potential new user should look into their requirements. It's difficult to change a product once it has been issued. You need to know what you want. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

View full review »

I rate it eight out of 10. I recommend Hyper-V because it's easy to install and supports most hardware. It runs on almost everything. I'm also recommending my company go for Azure Stack because it also uses Hyper-V, so we will not have to convert our VMs. But the top management in our organization is considering Nutanix or VMware solutions. I don't know why they're doing this. 

View full review »

I'm a reseller.

If the client is new to the solution, they likely will find the product to be complex. You need one or two engineers to handle the implementation, which is easy to manage. With some training, a company can handle it. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

View full review »

I would advise making sure that you have the hardware that is up to the job. You should also have a clear plan of what you want to virtualize. Make sure that there is room for growth in terms of the physical hardware for the host, which is the server hosting Hyper-V. 

It is very robust. It doesn't consume as many resources as VMware, for instance. It is fairly slick. It is very functional and doesn't really present great challenges.

I would definitely rate Hyper-V a ten out of ten. 

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V an eight out of ten. 

View full review »

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten. 

View full review »

We're just Microsoft customers. We aren't partners and don't have a special relationship with the company and we don't sell Microsoft products. I focus on server virtualization. I work with both VMware and Hyper-V.

We're working with the 2019 and 2017 versions on Windows.

I'd recommend the solution. It's very good. I'd rate it eight out of ten overall.

View full review »

Hyper-V is affordable, but if you have the budget, I recommend going with VMware. I'd rate Hyper-V as five out of ten.

View full review »

I would recommend the solution to someone who is fully Microsoft, one who is looking to implement Microsoft environment in its entirety. I recommend the solution to someone who plans to go with a hybrid environment through Azure. 

I rate Hyper-V as a ten out of ten. 

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V an eight out of ten. 

View full review »

If someone plans to implement Hyper-V, they should seek an agreement with Microsoft to get a better value for the product. I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

View full review »

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

In order to obtain the products, we must go through a third-party vendor. We can't go directly to Microsoft.

I would rate Hyper-V an eight out of ten.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V six out of 10. Hyper-V is okay if customers are comfortable with it and don't require high availability. 

View full review »

If you are looking for virtual technology, Hyper-V continues to grow and improve. Being a Microsoft product, it’s the most-compatible solution to implement into your environment. It’s also the most cost-effective solution and you really can’t beat Microsoft support.

View full review »

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I'm using the 2012 and 2016 versions of the product.

I'm more familiar with Hyper-V and with Microsoft products. I've got certification in that as well. There are some management solutions out from Microsoft, which are not just for Hyper-V, but for a lot of things. With these, it's almost like an all-in-one product, which you don't really get when you look at your Linux-based virtualizers. For example, with Proxmox, there is not really management. You have these notes that you couple up and then you have a backup server, however, you don't really have something that you can orchestrate those things with. Citrix, I can't speak to as I didn't really work with Citrix that much.

If you run any kind of network solution, I would rather recommend Hyper-V over any other hypervisor at this moment - unless you are looking at it from a cost of ownership perspective.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. There's no such thing as a perfect product, however, I'm pretty happy with this.

View full review »

We are just a customer or end-user.

We're using the version that is on Windows Server 2012 R2.

I'd advise other companies that this solution is to be considered, compared to other solutions. That said, there are solutions that are better and it depends on the scenario. It depends on the scenario, the scale you have, the implementation, et cetera. Companies should compare it to other solutions. Maybe the cost is high and performance isn't as good for them. I would suggest companies go with the VMware solution. That said, again, it depends on the scenario. In some scenarios, where a company is heavily dependent on Microsoft and Windows, it would be a better solution for them.

If most of your workloads are Windows Server, then buying a server host would give you free licensing for those workloads. The licensing would be included. Otherwise, if you buy another solution then you have to pay separately for each Windows license. The cost would be again, very high. For us, I can say maybe 70% or 80% of our workloads are Linux and other OS's, not Windows. It wouldn't make sense for us to go with Hyper-V. The cost would be too high. If you are implementing heavily into Windows Server, go for Hyper-V. If you have a different application or different type of application, then you'd be better off going with another solution. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

View full review »

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

View full review »

I recommend this solution to others if they have a cluster of around four or less than 10 servers. However, if they want to have higher-level clusters and integrated service solutions, they will have to look at other options.

I rateHyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V eight out of 10. The first time you deploy Hyper-V, you need to do a test scenario before moving into a production environment. 

View full review »

Definitely, I would recommend this solution.

I would rate Hyper-V a nine out of ten.

View full review »

I would advise customers that are Microsoft users to use Hyper-V if they want to have more cost-efficiency. Additionally, if the customer uses a lot of Windows Server for the guest OS, I will recommend Hyper-V.

I rate Hyper-V an eight out of ten.

View full review »

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I have used the Hyper-V for Dynamics AX for a while, however, recently I moved to a virtual machine, VM.

I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten. It's not the worst, however, it certainly is not the best either. 

I would recommend Hyper-V to users, especially if they are dealing with a Microsoft OS.

View full review »

It is good for small installations. If you are looking to do anything fancy, this is is not a good choice.

View full review »

If you want to use a solution that does the job that is required, to the best of its ability, then Hyper-V is a great solution.

View full review »

For the cost, it has almost the same features as VMware. If you are a Microsoft shop, then get Hyper-V with System Center to connect to Windows Azure and you are all set.

View full review »

I'm not sure which version I'm using. It was the basic setup on the 2016 servers.

I use the solution for my personal projects. 

View full review »

I would recommend Hyper-V for small-scale users with one or two VMs. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Hyper-V a seven.

View full review »

If I was going to a demo, and somebody had given me an iPhone and I had to quickly gut it, my first choice would not be Hyper-V. It is not a user-friendly solution. 

I would say the ability to assign more dynamically, like VM-ware does. And the SRM feature to be brought back into Hyper-V so that you're not looking at virtual box which is a cheap version, but that you're looking at enterprise, you're looking at VM-ware. But if there was one button to move everything over to the new system, if that could be put in as a feature
then it would be very attractive.

View full review »

We would recommend that any organization considering this solution looks at the range of software they are currently running, to ensure complete compatibility and allow for easy migration to this product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

View full review »

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Hyper-V a six.

View full review »

1. Do not be afraid to work $$$ into the budget in case you need assistance from a 3rd-party.
2. Test in parallel and do not be a hero and try to do it whole-hog at once.
3. Do not postpone the DR/BCP part of the project. If you are building out a new infrastructure DO THIS FIRST. We were forced to push this to the back of the project and it bit us for a few days; in the end you do what the executives say but having file/application/server/site disaster recovery is an absolute must before you migrate production data.
4. If you haven’t gone too far with it do a review of R2; it provides many improvements in the VM & Replica features.

View full review »

Hyper-V is very popular in the market for data centers and most of my clients are using Microsoft in some form or another but it might not be their core ERP.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

Anyone considering implementing Hyper-V into their organization should do so in a way that allows for upgrades at a later stage. 

Overall, I would rate Hyper-V an eight out of 10.

View full review »

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

View full review »

If you are on a budget and can't invest too much into IT infrastructure, I recommend Hyper-V. If budget isn't a problem and you're looking for the best solution, I would go for VMware. I have about 85 customers that are using Hyper-V clusters at the moment. Hyper-V is okay for utilizing the file server, clusters, or active directory, but you won't get advanced features. 

I would rate Hyper-V a six out of ten because it is missing a lot of features. 

View full review »

I have been using VMware and Hyper-V. Comparing the two, I love to use VMware more than Hyper-V. However, I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Hyper-V an eight.

View full review »

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven. If it were a little more flexible and stable, I'd give it a higher rating.

View full review »

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

View full review »

Unfortunately, due to cost, we have begun to look at other products in the market.

View full review »

All in all, Microsoft Hyper-V is an excellent platform and a great competitor for VMWare. View full review »

I rate Hyper-V seven out of 10. It's good for what it does. If you have a small or medium-scale acclimatization, it's an excellent solution. But in terms of scaling larger, you might want to consider something else.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

It is definitely the toughest competitor for VMware. There is room for improvement for automation. If that was implemented, it would place Hyper-V on the same realm as VMware.

View full review »

My advice to other thinking about implementing Hyper-V be aware of the use case that you're going to need Hyper-V for. If you're going to use it on an operational scale, for example, hundreds of Hyper-V hosts, I would recommend rather going with vSphere instead of Hyper-V because the management capabilities of vSphere are better. When you are managing several hundred hosts, it's better to manage within the vSphere environment instead of the system center.

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

I don't recommend Hyper-V and would rate it at six on a scale from one to ten.

View full review »

In summary, this product is not perfect but it works. At this point, we have not yet decided how long we will continue using it. This is something that we'll decide, moving forward.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

View full review »

For what we use this product for, it is pretty basic and it is good enough for our purposes.

Our main complaint is about the administration interface.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

View full review »

You should evaluate this product as it’s very easy to manage.

View full review »

The hypervisor based server visualization product, launched from Microsoft along with Microsoft Server 2008 R2, greatly helps in managing high availability, load balancing, resource sharing, and fail over clustering. It is a reliable solution, from enterprises to small scale industries, to make the best use of server resources and reducing costs. It enables multiple instances of machines to run together on the same server, which maintains redundancy. View full review »

We are currently looking to move to an HCI solution.

I rate this product five out of 10. 

View full review »

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

View full review »

We are service providers. We don't provide products. We are implementors. 

In this company, we work mostly with on-premise solutions, such as hypervisors. For example, the Microsoft Hypervisors, Citrix Hypervisors, et cetera. Here in the company, we don't use exactly cloud solutions, or not entirely cloud. We use many hybrid solutions. 

We didn't exactly choose this product. It was more a question of legacy. We've just kept using it over time. When I came to the company, they were using it, and we've continued to do so.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

View full review »

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft an eight.

View full review »

Hyper-V is a must have if you have a subscription with Microsoft’s MSDN program View full review »

Hyper-V is a product that I recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

View full review »

My advice to someone considering this solution is to back up the whole configuration. Also, you have to have things well documented and to take into consideration the maintenance times. Furthermore, updating the operating systems, host operating systems and guest operating systems is extremely important, otherwise, it could lead to unnecessary downtime.

View full review »

Don't knock Hyper-V until you actually try it.

I get a lot of people from the tech community, saying things like, "Hahaha, you're on Hyper-V?" And I reply, "Yeah. At first, I opposed it, but it's grown on me and I love it." I still run VMware at home, just because I already have it running on in my lab, but if I were to rebuild, I'd do it under Hyper-V. Why not?

You get more features for free.

You've got to actually really try it for a good six months to a year, and then it grows on you. It's like, "Wow! You can do all that?" Yeah. And more.

Hyper-V's gotten a lot better since 2012 and 2012 R2, and now the 2016 is light years again.

View full review »

My advice to others implementing this solution is there are no implementation management tools available, they will have to do it all themselves.

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

I do not highly recommend Hyper-V.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Hyper-V a six.

In terms of advice to people looking to implement Hyper-V, I would tell them not to rely much on the Hyper-V solution in terms of flexibility and scalability. It is a stable solution, but overall, considering the backup, the replication, and the whole range of features that VMR offers, I think that it's better if they look at VMR or other contenders, in this technology.

View full review »

It's still too early to know if I would recommend it or not.

I am still in the processing phase, so depending on how it goes, we may continue to use this solution. At this point, we intend to use it.

With what I know so far, I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

View full review »

I would advise other people that this is a good solution.

View full review »

Visualization technology brought succor to IT enterprises users. The cost of acquiring multiple servers and its general maintenance has been drastically reduced. One physical or hardware machine can host multiple visual servers Windows Server Hyper-V is one of the best visualization servers in the market today. The new Hyper-V’s dynamic memory feature is a big plus. It can automatically expand the memory allocation to accommodate more workload from different virtual machines. Other attractive features, that the new Hyper-V includes are, Live storage migration, utilization of up to 4TB memory per host RAM, Virtual Machine converter, replica services, RemoteFX, etc. I added the Hyper-V role in Windows Server 2008 R2 without any issue. Installation of the guest server was also smooth. Guest VM backup in Hyper-V is quite simple with great features such as, multiple destinations selection and Backup drive mirroring. View full review »

If your infrastructure is based on MS products then this is a hypervisor to go for. Virtualization of some of the components such as domain controllers are supported by Microsoft only on Hyper- V. View full review »

Microsoft with its better reach and excellent customer support is always a preferable choice. Although VMware may still be leading the enterprise market, there is neck to neck competition between Hyper-V and VMware. Moreover, in its latest version, Hyper-V has enhanced some excellent features, like additional capability of Memory for VM, running up to 1TB. It has also increased the single VM RAM capacity up to 64GB. There is also an enhancement of 160 logical processors per Hyper-V host, 1024 virtual machines per host, 64 nodes per cluster, 4000 virtual machines per cluster, and 32 virtual processors. View full review »

Make sure to do your research before you choose a solution. Be sure it fits your needs. 

View full review »

Don’t use it for mission critical clouds.

View full review »

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

View full review »

In my opinion, read the documentation carefully. If you do not, you will have problems.

View full review »