Nutanix AHV Room for Improvement
Since it is tightly integrated, you want to have it as a single installable thing. But that is against its nature. The tight integration with AOS makes it what it is. AHV is mostly on par with ESXi. Since it comes together with AOS you must compare it to ESXI with VSAN to get the complete picture. It can do vGPU just like ESXi, can move VMs just like ESXi, and snapshots won't make it "stun" the VM as it does on ESXi.
If you ever have a problem, hit up Nutanix Support. I've never had better support. Just do a Proof-of-Concept and have them wow you.
Just to be clear: 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. That said, you could still present NFS from the Nutanix Cluster to VMware or use an iSCSI-Connection in-guest or in-host from the Nutanix Cluster.View full review »
Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
It's difficult to find something that needs improvement, for me, it's a perfect solution. I have not had any issues in the three years that I have been using it.
I was faced with one small problem, but I had the resolution immediately.
I don't see any issues with Hypervisor AHV.
No one is the best in the industry, and there is something in which they are neutral.
Currently, they have storage that is RS2 by default, and when I create one VM with the RA2 environment it will automatically create a second copy. 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.
I need a second policy for that. For Dev and for Testing.
I don't need the backups. I am only doing R&D.
I need one feature, in that I can create one storage policy without any redundancy factor where when I create my 100 GB virtual machine or 100 GB workload, that only uses storage of 100 GB. I would prefer this because unnecessarily, my space is being utilized for creating a backup copy.
This feature I've got in ESXi, where I can define different policies for my storage and containers, is useful, but in Nutanix, there are only two policies, RS2 and RS3.
Last month, I completed a session with the Nutanix UI team where I provided feedback for the UI upgrades. This would be useful.View full review »
Technical Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Nutanix AHV, like every hypervisor, still has room for integration with the cloud. Nutanix is a very, very good product in regards to integration with the Amazon services, but it can be improved, especially in my country, Turkey. In this area, both Amazon Web Services and other solutions have different prices and different currencies. Nutanix actually promised to build clouds once they made the new generation moving the clients or the servers on-premises, and that's not working as advertised right now. So I believe that it can still be improved. Every service depends on this because the flexibility is what makes this product good in the first place.
I use Vaults with three hypervisors in my projects. One is the Acropolis from Nutanix, SCC from VMware, and of course Microsoft Hyper-V. This user interface is easy to understand. The dashboard is mostly okay and gives relevant information for the users. It has a good user interface but it's not flexible. It's more flexible than VMware and Hyper-V which don't even compare. The mechanics and the user interface are good. I like how it looks, but it can be improved. For example, if they had a comment line option directly from the Web UI, I could use PowerShell add ons. That would make the UI more flexible for me. Overall, it is the best of the three options right out there right now. ,
Again, I would also like to see a comment line option for integration with other products. Nutanix already has a comment line integration with the publisher. I also run some mini-systems and I don't have the same kind of comment line options for Unix systems. If I'm working on another shell, for example, Bash or SSH, we need a solution for that aspect. Console command is many times a faster way to do it because with UI you have to wait, but with your comment line, you can script it and can automate it more easily. So I believe they need a Linux version of the comment line.View full review »
Sr. Lead Consultant - Infrastructure | Virtualization & Cloud Computing | SDN |NFV at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Support for more Red Hat solutions would be an improvement. As of now, Nutanix only officially supports three hypervisors. These are VMware, Microsoft Hyper-V, and Nutanix AHV. There is minimal support for Red Hat.
It is very important that in the future, Nutanix supports bare-metal implementation. This means that you can install the hypervisor directly to the hardware.
In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for containerization.View full review »
IT Infrastracture Manager at International College
Nutanix AHV is based on KVM, which is the open-source version. In terms of improvement, I think that they could have more partnerships with providers. We had an issue with a software called ClearPath from Aruba. Aruba has a ready image that works for VMware, as an example, but they don't have a ready image that works directly with AHV. We have to use the KVM version and customize it to work for AHV.
It would be beneficial to have more partners to improve the service. Not just any providers, but well-known providers in the market. Also, more integration with ready systems would be helpful.View full review »
Vice President of Information Technology at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Some of our applications do not support Nutanix. There are some compatibility issues and some of our software cannot run on it. It worked well in the beginning but after using it for some time, we found some limitations in terms of compatibility with other software. It has been okay because it does run our main applications.View full review »
They need to work on the deployment of virtual machines. They need to streamline the process of templates and deploying virtual machines.View full review »
i-Security Engineer at M.Tech
There are some activities that need to be done by the GUI, but can't. The users should not be aware of this, only the engineers who are involved with the move of the system, sharing or reconfiguration.
When we need to share, publish, or encrypt something, we still need to perform it using the command line. We need to exit from the COI for the GUI to fix some of the features.
If we compare with VMware NSX the implementation is not quite as interesting.View full review »
Data Center and Cloud Manager at MTDS
The management console needs to improve to make it easier for administrators. For example, to be able to reorganize our VMs, folders, and subfolders, similarly as it is provided in VMware. We can sort, manage, and organize VMs, folders, or subfolders in VMware.View full review »
Senior IT Consultant
VMware has a vSphere client GUI and currently, AHV is command line only.
AHV is easy for people who are administrators of Linux and Unix, but it's not easy for a normal user who connects using a web interface.
There is no web interface with AHV. It would be great if they could provide a web interface.
There is no dashboard, it works only with Nutanix Prism.
I come from the world of Unix and the only thing that customer is asking for is the web interface.View full review »
Senior IT Consultant
As for any improvements, the only thing the customer has been asking for is that it should be like VMware where they have the Vsphere Client, whereas in AHV there is only Command-line. It's like AHV Client Web. AHV is easy for people who are administrators of Linux Unix but it's not easy for normal users who like to connect using a web interface because there is no web interface for AHV. It would be great if they could provide an actual web interface. The dashboard works only in Prism.View full review »
The solution could improve the call logging system to HPE, it is a bit tedious.View full review »