Nutanix AHV Virtualization Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution is utilizing it as a unified software. It's unified, easy to use and simplified. It has a lot of functionalities, such as replication and failovers, and we deploy it on-premises.

We have found the replication, analysis, and analytics tools valuable. It usually prompts when there is an impending issue that might occur. For example, if the failover is failing, or the remote site is down, it will alert you. The solution is very proactive and can even anticipate an issue that might occur. You can know in advance and be able to fix it.

The price of the solution can be improved.

We have been using this solution for one year.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable and there are currently 60 end users utilizing the solution. You can easily add resources. For example, when a server uses more resources, you can continuously optimize and reduce the server's resources, which uses less and the other, which employs more. It's very flexible and scalable, so you can take the flexibility you want. They are based on the usability and the resources of the infrastructure.

I rate customer service and support an eight out of ten. We had an issue and raised it with the Nutanix AHV Virtualization team, and they were able to resolve it. In addition, they have resolved any problems we request when we cannot manage them.

Positive

We previously used VMware and Hyper-V. However, we switched to this solution because of its flexibility, usability, and responsiveness. So, when you interact and have VMs running, or there's downtime or an issue, it usually transfers VMs from one node to another when there's an issue on one part of the node.

I didn't install this product, so I cannot comment on the setup. However, based on the research I've done with others, it's usually the same. It's efficient. The setup is efficient.

The licensing costs are a little bit expensive.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten, the solution is very good, but it could be cheaper. Nutanix AHV Virtualization is a very good solution, and I recommend it to anyone.

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. 

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.

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 are a system integration company and we sell hyper-converged infrastructure as the new model data center technology.

This is one of the solutions that we provide to our customers.

This solution can be deployed on-premises or in a cloud-based environment, but the majority of deployments are on-premises.

This solution has very good feedback from our customers in terms of the benefits that it provides. They have lots of automation and orchestration policies and procedures in place so that they can create virtual machines within a few minutes. Overall, it improves productivity. In fact, you can do a lot of R&D for your most critical kind of applications without having to procure a proper dedicated infrastructure for that. It helps a lot.

The interface is very good, and quite user-friendly. You can learn how to use this solution in three to five days.

They have lots of easy ways to provision VMs with just two clicks, which is something you cannot easily do with VMware. It is possible but quite lengthy and complex.

The automation functionality is strong.

At the application level, if you wanted to change your hypervisor from VMware or another to AHV then there is a limitation in that you need to redeploy the whole application. For example, let's say that you are running Oracle ERP or Oracle Financial Business Suite, and it is on VMware. Then you switch to AHV and you migrate the virtual machine, it will be there, but all of the links that were created in the previous hypervisor will be broken. So, what Nutanix recommends is that you redeploy the application. This is quite a bit of work. For example, the ERP requires a lot of time to implement and get into synch and get running smoothly.

The technical support for this solution needs to be improved in terms of response time.

This solution should offer more orchestration and automation as we see in VMware. They can do more.

I would like to see more use cases from Nutanix on future trend technologies such as IoT, data analytics, big data, smart cities, and more. They need to do more R&D with respect to these new technologies. This would make it easy for us to understand whether they are capable of such functionality, or not.

This is the only true hyper-converged infrastructure in the market.

This solution is very scalable.

I have not dealt with technical support for this solution personally, but the people in my organization, as well as from other places, have told me that it needs to improve a lot.

From what I have been told, they are quite capable of resolving the issues, but the response time is simply too long.

In addition to this solution, I am using EMC VxRail, Hitachi HCP, and occasionally NetApp. I would rate the Nutanix solution as the top one. My second choice is the Dell EMC solution.

The customer's requirements, as well as the budget, are what decide the suitability of a particular solution.

The initial setup of this solution is pretty much straightforward. From unboxing to rack and mounting and cabling, I think that it requires no more than three to four hours to get it up and running, maximum.

Obviously, it will depend on the size of the implementation. If it is huge then you will have to increase the number of hours. I am talking about an SMB environment. You will be able to create virtual machines within four to five hours of unboxing.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that there is no licensing fee. This means that if you don't have any virtual environment in your organization and wanted to go virtualized, and on top of that you want to go more than the data center, you don't have to worry about the licensing for the virtual infrastructure. It comes free of cost. If you want to choose another hypervisor then you need to pay a lot of licensing fees upfront, and then a recurring cost over the years for support and upgrades. That's the big difference between AHV and the others.

Nutanix is the only player in the market who is actually providing you with the hyper-converged infrastructure. You can either choose their own AHV hypervisor, or you can have VMware on top of it as a hypervisor to base the operating system. This gives a benefit over others who don't offer the same kind of infrastructure for both hypervisors.

You cannot mix it, that's one thing that is true across the board. However, you do have a choice of hypervisor. For some customers, they have already invested in VMware and they want to move to hyper-converged infrastructure. So, Nutanix would be comparatively a better choice, which can impact your previous investment and you can build your virtual hyper-converged infrastructure on Nutanix.

This is the number one hyper-converged solution in the market. No doubt about it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.