I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is very good, but the operation and management features could be improved to make it user-friendly.

PowerVM currently only supports AIX and IBM Power Linux, excluding normal Linux. This could be improved to prevent customers from migrating to other systems.

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

If you have enterprise requirements and seek a stable platform, IBM proves to be a suitable choice for overall enterprise solutions. Overall, I rate it a nine out of ten.

I would rate IBM PowerVM a ten out of ten.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I rate IBM Power servers a eight out of ten. 

IBM PowerVM offers options like dedicated hard partitioning (LPAR), capped partitioning and uncapped partitioning. Careful attention needs to paid while choosing the partitioning options available in Power servers. The hard partitioning (LPAR) option is critical to control Oracle database and middleware licensing costs. This is very important. 

IBM PowerHA is an automatic failover clustering software that helps to achieve high availability of mission critical software. However, since Oracle allows to use its database and middleware software free of cost on the secondary servers of Power HA cluster only for 10 days in a year, the no. of failovers in a year needs to be closely tracked if the automatic failover is configured. If smaller downtime is acceptable, it is advisable to configure manual failover instead of automatic failover of PowerHA cluster software.

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with IBM.

We are using the latest version of the solution, although I cannot speak to the exact version number.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten due to its very proactive support and robust hardware. They are excellent and we are very happy with them overall.

I'd likely recommend the solution, however, it depends. If I've been using IBM for a long time and needed to move to, for example, Linux, it would be a difficult task. There are certain skillsets needed. You'd need some sort of support model. IBM, however, supports SAP HANA very well. You just need to be clear on future plans. That said, I give full marks to IBM as it really is a great system. So long as you don't need the cloud just yet, it's great. 

I rate IBM PowerVM an eight out of ten.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Using this solution depends on the customer's requirements, and if they are looking for a stable and high-performance solution, then IBM PowerVM is a good choice.

We're IBM customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I'd recommend this solution. It's a great product and they offer great support.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

I think everybody is going to be migrating to cloud and I think that IBM can make things easier if they also did this. 

I would rate IBM PowerVM nine out of ten. 

In the next release, I hope to see an extension of both the end part with the GUI.

I rate IBM PowerVM ten out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others because of its stability.

I rate IBM PowerVM a seven out of ten.

This solution is by IBM and they are a vendor who does what they say they're going to do.

I recommend IBM and this solution any day. Without hesitation, I would suggest to anybody that they try it.

Overall, I am happy with this solution, although more research and any new additions are always welcome.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

PowerVM is the best option for managing direct licensing, and I would rate it seven out of ten.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

To make it a ten, I would like for them to add automation and configuration tools in order to help use the manager. 

Our model of IBM PowerVM is deployed on-premises.

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

My advice to anybody who is researching this type of solution is to choose PowerVM if they want something that is really stable. I think that it is the only answer because the other solutions have perhaps evolved too quickly. We have seen issues with VMware and especially with Hyper-V. Hyper-V is not a mature platform.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The program has very limited solutions for the virtualization of containers, so I the next version I would like to see that improved. I will still, however, give a nine out of ten rating.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. I would recommend IBM PowerVM to someone considering it. 

I wouldn't rate it a ten because it has things it can improve on.