Hyper-V Reviews

Our primary use case of this solution is for implementing the private cloud over the system center.

Hyper-V 2016 is very impressive. The virtualized applications and real-time addition of the VMA is quite a good feature, which is competitive to VMware. It's not VMware but it's close to it and is a competitor.

The networking portion of Hyper-V needs improvement.

More than five years.

It is a stable product.

It is a scalable product. We have over 100 users and we are growing towards a more virtualized solution.

I have previous experience with Citrix and VMware products.

The initial setup was complex. It was nearly six years ago but I remember it was complicated.

The price of this solution makes it a worthwhile purchase for our organization. We have all of the features we need within a cost-effective solution.

This product costs less than other competitor products on the market.

The best hypervisor in the market! From Server 2008 to Server 2012 Hyper-v technology has evolved rapidly.As more organisations are using virtualisation, key features like VM replication, Virtual SAN Manager and Live migrations - enable organisations to design fail over and backup solutions, without the need to purchase other products.We have been evaluating Hyper-2012 server core for 3 months, up to now - we have had no issues with any virtual machines or the underlining operating system.

To manage Windows Hyper-V Server 2012, you need an additional server 2012 server. Not very cost effective - I think Microsoft should consider pushing a Hyper-V Management console update to Server 2008 R2 to be able to manage Hyper-V 2012.Hyper-V is definitely our preferred Hypervisor. With its simple configuration console, setting up a Virtual Server is very simple. Multiple Hyper-V servers are easier to manage when integrated into a domain network, when you have a standalone server (especially server core) it can be difficult to manage.

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

I'd like to see better predictive diagnostics, so I know what's going on with the machines. 

I've been using Hyper-V since about 2012.

Hyper-V has been pretty good. I have no complaints about the stability. 

It scales well so far, but I think we're nearing the edge of that. We have somewhere in the region of about 200 users.

The support could be better.

I can't say setting up Hyper-V was particularly complicated. The deployment was about two months with the help of some integrators.

I think I'm okay with the cost. There are no monthly or yearly costs or additional costs.

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.

On-premises

We use Hyper-V for virtualization.

I have found the GUI user-friendly and having the solution be a Windows application makes it familiar to users.

VMware has antivirus protection that covers the entire VM. If Microsoft could have something similar to this in Hyper-V, that would be great. Currently, in Hyper-V, we have to have a separate antivirus for each VM. If there could be umbrella coverage to the entire setup, then that would be beneficial.

I have been using Hyper-V for approximately 10 years.

The solution could be more stable as it is vulnerable to viruses, ransomware, and malware.

We have approximately 100 customers using this solution.

The support from Microsoft is good.

The installation is very easy, it takes approximately 30 minutes.

We have three supporting engineers that do the implementation of the solution.

There is a perpetual license to use the solution and there are additional fees for support.

I rate Hyper-V a seven out of ten.

On-premises

We use Hyper-V for managing our virtual infrastructure.

The most valuable feature is that it is user-friendly and easy to use. All you have to do is mount the VM and start it.

There is a problem with high-availability if the load is too high.

I have been working with Hyper-V for eight years.

The stability is generally good, although it depends on the size of your workload.

Scalability really depends on how much you want to expand.

The technical support from Microsoft is good and they're able to easily assist you.

The licensing is good for a data center environment.

Hyper-V is a product that I recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have installed a domain controller in Hyper-V, also managing arbitrator for SimpliVity.  We are using it for HPE SimpliVity.           

We have a higher capacity server (specification wise) so there is no need to buy another additional hardware.       

Memory size is increased and reduced as per requirement. It's the same disk size we also use.                

It should be deployed with OS so there is no need to install OS separately, only select the OS and get it ready.                   

I've been using Hyper-V for two years. 

The most valuable feature is the high availability of the solution. 

The corrupted volume is a problem.

Less than one year.

It is pretty stable.

We used to use VMware.

The initial setup was very complex. It needs to be simplified. It took us about a day to deploy.

The licensing is pretty straightforward. 

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.

We had deployed multiple Hyper-V clusters for various projects and even have the confidence to run it for highly critical production loads.

Hyper-V has become a real matured virtualization platform with Windows Server 2012 R2. The organization that I work for was having a virtualization environment on Windows Server 2008 R2. Since it was not optimally used due to the limitations with Hyper-V with Windows Server 2008 R2, we evaluated the possibility to get an environment on Windows Server 2012 R2. We had more than 30 racks with the majority of them running on physical machines. By the end of 2014, the number of server racks came down to 10 and we could confidently run majority of the workloads on Hyper-V. The organization has realized the benefits on smaller data center space, power, cooling, etc. apart from the benefit that the virtualization layer brings in. 

• Live migration
• P2V
• VM replica
• Snapshots
• VM export and import
• Dynamic memory, etc.

The advanced features, like Network Virtualization, have yet to be tested out, but I feel that they will be a game changer.

SCVMM needs to be more user-friendly. Without SCVMM, automating is not easy to use and we look forward to the upcoming versions of SCVMM becoming simpler and more admin friendly.

One to three years.