Hyper-V Reviews

- One-window management of servers

- Less down time in case of a disaster

- Easy to use and manage

After deploying this, we have saved hardware and electricity costs.

Not yet rectified.

I've used this technology since 2010. It is a really amazing product. By shifting almost my all physical servers into one Box "Host Machine", I am relaxed now. 

Not yet

I have also deployed VMware.

• The ROI on Hyper-V is enormous. It is cheaper than any other enterprises visualization tool. • Hyper-V Replica can replace SAN, especially where SAN might be overloaded. • It is dynamic and scalable.

It lacks a built-in cloning function, you have to use the traditional export/import.

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.

Scalability Improvements: Support for up to 4TB physical memory, up to 320 Logical Processors, up to 64 nodes cluster which can support 8000 VM's Migrations: Supports many types of migration scenarios such as live migration, live storage migration limited by only hardware capability. Management and Integration: Lots of management tools, integration with system center makes it a backbone of Microsoft's cloud infrastructure.

Apart from windows and some flavors of Linux, it does not support any other virtual guests.

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.

The features I find most valuable are utilizing the hardware so there is multiple applications running on one hypervisor. This actually saves money for the user. 

I think there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud solutions. 

One to three years.

The stability of the product is fine. There is no problem. The only issues we have is with stability of the operating system. 

It is scalable. 

The setup was initially not easy, but Microsoft has made a lot of improvements and upgrades, and the integration is supposedly more simple. 

I think it is expensive. I think if they want it to be more competitive, they should lower the price. 

It is a great advantage for any company that is using a Microsoft Windows server.

I think the console could use some improvement for the backups. The features should be improved. I know a lot of people who are considering moving to Hyper-V, but are skittish to do so because you need a system center virtual manager or a specialist to integrate the solution.

More than five years.

I recommend this product due to its high stability. 

It is highly scalable. It is really easy to scale and implement. 

The setup was easy.

The pricing is competitive, and a bit less than other options on the market.

This is the primary hypervisor in my organization. It runs our most critical workloads and supports all our branch offices.

It comes with all the features and goodies inside the box, so you do not have to purchase anything else. 

The Failover Clustering feature allows us to be able to make our most critical workload highly available. We did not have to pay extra money for it.

In Windows Servers 2016, there is Storage Spaces Direct. Although, it seems as if many of the local organizations where I live prefer to go for traditional SAN setups, I find Storage Spaces Direct to be very attractive, neat, and stable. We did not need to hire a separate storage expert to manage our storage as it was easy to manage and setup (many articles online). We did not have to invest a dollar more than what we paid for the server software. 

I think Microsoft has answered most of the concerns of users with the release of Server 2016. 

Now, they can hot add NICs to the VMs. However, there is still not the ability to hot add virtual processors to running VMs. 

One to three years.

It has helped to keep the cost of IT spending low when compared to the cost of VMware.

Once we bought the datacenter version of the server, we did away with worrying about the cost of licensing our VMs separately.

Great Hypervisor with snapshot capability, and fail over clustering integration. Also possible to manage with Virtual Machine Manager.

P2V are not live, and there's some limitation on max hard drive space for VMs and the ability to recover VHD file space after files within the VM have been deleted.

The proven technological prowess of Microsoft has produced yet another wonder for virtual machines - Hyper-V. The Windows Server 2008 R2 Hypervisor, is indeed a step towards the virtual world. Gone are those days where you start to scratch your head for low disk space and complicated hardware and networking solutions. The excellent features included in Hyper-V are dynamic memory management, better end user virtual performance, 3D Graphics enhancements, and good quality of media streaming. There is a significant change in Hyper-V for Live migration. This is a step taken by Microsoft to give tough competition to VMWare. Hyper-V with its 64 logical processors has got a new edge in its VM performances. There is a quantum change in previous releases of Hyper-V that is better in SP1 than in SP2.

To optimize the performance of your desktops and servers, you need to install extra RAM and multiprocessors to use Hyper-V. Hyper-V is useful for X64 platforms. VMware has got the edge over Hyper-V in the case of X86 platforms. The latest release of Hyper-V has got better scalability than its previous one. Hyper-V lags in the case of Maximum VM RAM (64GB), where VMware provides 255GB VM RAM. In its earlier version it has got also a smaller number of nodes that can be added in a single cluster which is 16. The number is 32 in the case of VMware.

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.