Nutanix AHV Virtualization Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution is for different Omni Calculator applications and other applications of certification.

The redundancy factor features are valuable. Additionally, the storage features and volume system are great.

The price could be lower.

We have been using the solution for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. It allows us to manage and scale out a square and have nodes. Additionally, we shepherd nodes between different clusters as well. Currently, six people are using the solution in our organization.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. They are very supportive.

The initial setup was not complex because we had received training.

The solution is very expensive and is one of our concerns as we intend to upgrade.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the price could be lower.

Customers often choose Nutanix AHV Virtualization for its leading position in the hyperconverged segment. The primary use case is virtualizing workloads, whether migrating from a physical environment or transitioning from other virtualization platforms like VMware or Hyper-V.

Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a private cloud platform offering integration with various public cloud providers. This integration allows for a multi-cloud approach. In my opinion, Nutanix AHV Virtualization's strength is its storage. It innovates and excels in the hyper-converged storage segment, making it the number one choice in this area. 

Honestly, there's a lot to work on the product, especially for someone like me who has worked on VMware. VMware offers a significant level of customization when configuring virtual machines, and that level of detail is not as pronounced on Nutanix AHV Virtualization. 

I have been working with the product for six years. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I have not contacted the tech support team yet. 

The tool is pretty easy to set up. While I haven't deployed it for a customer, I have set it up in my home lab. It may require some resources, but the process is straightforward overall if you have the correct equipment and follow the deployment steps. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

Depending on the customer's environment and other details, people can set up Nutanix AHV Virtualization clusters in a week or two. Assuming all prerequisites are in place, one week should be sufficient to deploy it. 

The tool is not as expensive as VMware. It is essentially KVM, a Linux-based virtualization with a rebranded version and a web interface. While it does the job, it may not offer the same level of detail as VMware.

The solution's pricing is cheap for a new customer but becomes expensive during renewal. Especially when a customer plans to expand their environment, feedback in the market from end customers and partners becomes crucial. There have been instances where customers who chose between Nutanix AHV Virtualization and VMware opted for Nutanix AHV Virtualization due to cost considerations. Yet, as they aimed to scale, the pricing factor became a more significant consideration and changed their mind. 

The product stands out in the hyper-converged market due to its user-friendly nature. Automation minimizes manual configuration tasks, reducing the operational burden and making it less headache-prone for administrators.

In light of recent developments, especially with Broadcom's acquisition of VMware, there's a sense of uncertainty and potential disruption in the market. Broadcom's history, as seen with the Symantec acquisition, raises concerns about the impact on licensing renewals. VMware no longer selling perpetual socket licenses adds to the uncertainty.

In such a scenario, Nutanix AHV Virtualization appears to be stable. Unlike VMware, it hasn't undergone frequent changes in ownership. We have small, medium, and enterprise businesses using it. 

When considering it, it's important to assess third-party integrations. While the product has a mature platform with an expanding ecosystem, it may not be as mature as VMware regarding integrations. Therefore, potential buyers should ensure their desired integrations have native support within the tool's ecosystem. Whether it's an existing backup solution or other third-party products, compatibility checks are crucial before adopting Nutanix AHV Virtualization to avoid any issues with integration.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

We implement the solution overall in an on-premise environment. We primarily use the solution for business continuity plans and disaster recovery plans. We use Nutanix for our infrastructure as a service.

Nutanix is well implemented for business continuity and disaster recovery plans as it's a technology with full tolerance and is good for these cases.

AHV is free. When you implement Nutanix, when you buy a Nutanix appliance, AHV is free. It is inside of the appliance. You can decide if use it or choose another hypervisor such as VMware.

The user interface is fine.

It integrates well with other Nutanix solutions. 

The initial setup is very fast.

It offers very good stability.

We find it to be highly scalable.  

It's user-friendly.

I don't have enough knowledge to answer this question. I'm not extremely technical. 

VMware does tend to have more features than AHV. It's more of the leader in this space.

It's a stable, resilient solution.

The solution scales well. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

The support is outstanding. You can choose the kind or the type of support you need and they are always available. 

I'm also familiar with Microsoft and VMware. VMware has many or more features than AHV. However, for example, the Microsoft Hypervisor is not in competition against Acropolis Hypervisor. It's not as robust. If I had to choose between AHV and Microsoft, I would choose AHV.

The product offers a very simple, very straightforward setup. It's very fast as well. I'd give it a four out of five rating in terms of the ease of the process.

We are an information technology company. We are an integrator, we are a service provider and we have consultants. We can handle any installation for ourselves or clients.

The solution is free to use with other Nutanix appliances. There is no licensing cost, no managing cost, and no maintenance cost.

We are partners of Nutanix. I work as an IT project manager. We are resellers of the infrastructure as a service and we internally have a Nutanix environment to handle reseller infrastructure as a service to our customers. My skill set does not include a technical skillset with Nutanix.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

In terms of features, Acropolis is a good virtualization manager and that it is on-premise. I use almost every technology they provide.

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.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for more than three years.

In terms of stability, Nutanix is actually very stable.

These days I don't worry about anything working or not.

Nutanix AHV is much easier than other systems. We can focus on the infrastructure and not the product so it gives us the flexibility to not worry about the scalability of the systems - we just need more modes to scale up. That makes it easier for system and engineers support.

I don't actually need any technical support. But I do hear feedback about it. For example, if a customer has an issue, such as some discs are broken, the support fixes it immediately. They don't even have to call the support center because they are monitoring the system. I don't do it directly, but I hear from and talk to customers.

I worked with VMware for more than ten years. The first versions of VMware to come out worked on Red Hat 6.3 servers and they were almost unusable sometimes.

Nutanix, in its first version, worked as it should.

The initial setup is nice, actually straightforward. The other systems are not easy. For VMware, for example, if you want to use full spec hyper-converged systems, including storage and the other options, it's very complex. Only the hypervisor option is easy with them. But the other options, including storage, are complicated. Nutanix and its products are very easy and pretty useful. And even migration is easy compared to all the other systems.

Some other firms were working with HP on their systems, but in the end, they migrated to Nutanix because of support issues.

On a scale from 1 to 10 I would rate it a 9 - I believe there is always room for improvement.

The solution is being used for our internal purposes. 

The performance is the most valuable feature. 

The pricing must be made cheaper.

I have experience with Nutanix AHV Virtualization.

It is a highly stable solution. I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is highly scalable. Ten people are using the solution. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

The initial setup is easy. One staff is required for deployment and maintenance.I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. 

The deployment is done in-house. 

The solution is expensive. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. 

We used to have a traditional data center. When we changed to hyper-converged, it was simplified, more robust, and faster.

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.

I have been using this solution for three months. We acquired it three months ago.

This solution is very stable and it has been running for the last three months, with no issues.

From everything that I have read, this solution is scalable. It is one of the best on the market. It can be scaled up, even with earlier or newer versions of the software, but there are some limitations with VMware solutions.

We run a school and have 4500 students and 700 faculty members who are all end users. It is accessed and the information is used daily.

We have not contacted technical support, as it's been running with no issues.

The initial setup was straightforward. We didn't encounter any complexities.

We had a partner help us with the initial setup and implementation. It didn't take him very long.

We evaluated Dell VxRail and VMware solutions, but for us, this was the better solution.

We are comparing to the traditional system that had many problems. I think that all of these problems have been resolved with Nutanix AHV. At this time, as I have only been using it for three months, I am not able to say that there is room for improvement, especially since I am judging and basing it on a comparison with the old system. It has addressed all of the issues we were facing.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

No one in our organization can ignore the value of Nutanix because of the cost reduction that it has afforded us compared to converged products from Cisco or HP.

The most valuable feature is the integration between storage and compute services. You can use these two resources together as one unit.

The monitoring and reports for all activities are integrated on one dashboard.

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.

I have been using Nutanix AHV for three years.

This is a stable product.

This solution has endless scalability. You can scale up and scale out as much as you want. All you have to do to scale out is add nodes.

I have used several other solutions. With both Cisco and HP, there are limitations in terms of scalability. If you are using VMware then there is a limitation at the host-level.

Implementation and deployment is straightforward. Within half an hour it can be set up and running.

There are solutions by HP and NetApp, but you cannot compare them to Nutanix because it supports HP, Hyper-V, and VMware as well.

There are rumors around the globe that suggest Nutanix cannot be used for heavy software. However, I have tested it on all levels and it performs well. I have used it for big data and it works great.

The biggest lesson that I have learned when using this solution is related to the sizing of the system. If you define your requirements accurately then you will not see any issues in terms of performance. This means that it is very important to know what you want and what kind of applications will be hosted on Nutanix. You should also understand the use case for Nutanix, itself. When you understand all of this, it prepares you very well for calculating the resources that will be needed.

For me, this is the number one hyper-converged solution. I am a fan of VMware, but I can see that in Nutanix, the internal components combine very harmoniously. There is a huge development team behind Nutanix and they are working daily to develop the product and come out with new technologies.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use AHV to manage our virtual environment. The AHV is the hypervisor that we use to create virtual machines. AHV has another layer called AOS, which means the Acropolis Operating System from Nutanix.

AHV is based on a well-known hypervisor called the KVM hypervisor. KVM hypervisor is an open source hypervisor from Red Hat. Nutanix took KVM and added many features on top of it that weren't available. For example, moving virtual machines from KVM to another KVM wasn't possible without many configurations.

We're using the most updated version of AHV. It's deployed on-premises.

There are some issues with the interface and integration. The AHV management console is a web-based console. Sometimes the interface doesn't capture the mouse or keyboard strokes from the managing console to integrate with the virtual machines. Sometimes the type strokes aren't captured from the interface. To fix the problem, we have to close the interface and rerun it.

There's another problem with the scaling. If the main operating system is low scale, we can't see some parts of the virtual environment. For example, the screen won't be displayed because the window isn't big enough, so it's outside the scope of the screen.

The solution is stable. When we have a number of nodes and run the AHV hypervisor, we create a cluster and can create a virtual machine anywhere. If we want to move the virtual machine from one host to another, it's simple, straightforward, and stable. There's no interruption of the virtual machine. For example, we can run a ping to the virtual machine continuously, move the virtual machine from one node to another, and the ping won't drop.

There's no interruption of services when we move from one host to another. I think it's because the environment doesn't have many virtual machines.

It's scalable.

Technical support is good.

Deployment took less than two days. 

We have three years of guaranteed support. When we need troubleshooting or help with maintenance, we call the company or the resellers will send the engineer that deployed the environment to solve the problem.

We purchased the solution with three years of support. It's a one-time purchase. After that, we will need to renew support. The licenses are perpetual, which means they don't expire. Even if we don't have support or don't renew the support service after three years, we will still be able to use the solution.

I have compared the solution with VMware and Hyper-V.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

For someone who is planning to implement this solution, my advice is that if you're interested in it, buy everything that's Nutanix. Don't try to mix up different solutions from different manufacturers because you'll lose many features. If you want an all-in-one solution, go for the Nutanix all-in-one environment. Don't try to buy from other manufacturers.