RHEV Reviews

We have been using RHEV in both on-premises and cloud deployments for testing.

In my team, we don't have access to a paid version of Red Hat. Instead, we mostly use CentOS and Ubuntu.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal.

Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved. I find this to be the biggest problem. In Ubunto they have the idea of the Netplan, which is much better than the facility in Red Hat.

I have been using RHEV for about five months.

I have seen some bugs that I fixed on my own.

We have not had to scale this solution because it is not for everyday use. Rather, we use it for testing purposes.

Technical support for RHEV is very fast and good. 

We use different versions of Linux including CentOS and Ubuntu. CentOS is very comparable to Red Hat because it is almost the same, internally.

In the beginning, the initial setup was quite complex. However, once you get used to it, I would say that the setup is of normal difficulty and not a problem.

I implemented this solution with the assistance of my colleague.

We are using the free version of Red Hat.

RHEV is a good solution and I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Technically, the main reason why I'm using Red Hat is because of its stability.

I heard that there are big differences between Red Hat 8 and 7, but it's still quite difficult for me to judge it. I found it a bit more difficult to manage than version seven, which was much easier. In terms of features, though, it is still not yet clear which is better. I have no clear idea of which features need to be changed at the moment.

Scalability is also available. At our company, we have three people managing Red Hat, but about 600 users that use service and hosting of Red Hat.

We are in touch with technical support and whenever we have an issue we get good support from the Red Hat team. I am satisfied with their technical support. I am an Open Source fan so this is one of my favorites.

We use Windows, of course, and we also use Ubuntu for some other applications. For our core applications, however, we use Red Hat.

I would say the price is acceptable.

If someone asked me, I would strongly recommend using Red Hat. I have spoken to many other Red Hat users. The main issue is the lack of knowledge with most engineers and system admins. They don't know how to use Red Hat. They found that Windows, for example, is easier to manage. I would recommend Red Hat, though, and I would like to do something to raise the awareness of how to use Red Hat. I would strongly recommend they work hard to introduce people to Red Hat and how to manage Red Hat. I know there are courses, workshops, and seminars. Red Hat is doing all of that. The main issue which I think Red Hat has to focus on, however, is that colleges, universities, and most institutions focus on Windows-based solutions. Red Hat has to be there in the education sector, so engineer or system admin graduates will at least have a small knowledge of what Red Hat is.

I would rate Red Hat as seven out of ten. I think it's really hard to get a ten because this is technology and technology is always improving. We'll never stop. Ten means perfect, no improvement required. So I would never rate any tech solution as ten or even nine of ten. I can say, however, that this solution is fine for me.

The primary use case of this solution is for making DNS, website work, DHCP, and other security functions like ID tables and other tools.

The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement.

In the next release. I would like to see some additional features to make it easier, such as improvements to the GUI and the maintenance. The maintenance of Red Hat is difficult.

Red Hat is the most stable system. It's better than other OS solutions.

At first, this solution was deployed on-premises, then I converted it to cloud using VMware tools to make our private cloud on our data center.

This is an open-source solution.

I have always recommended using other platforms versus Windows. I didn't like using any Windows system, Microsoft system or any system with heavy traffic like ERP and Websites.

I recommend Linux.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good. 

The GUI interface needs improvement. Not 90%, but 50% or 60% of the work is done from the command line and so on, so the GUI needs work because people are looking for an easier way to manage the environment. Right now, if someone is not very familiar with Red Hat and actually is looking to add Red Hat to the environment, they have to take some training. It needs to be easier to use.

The solution could use network virtualization.

The stability is very good. We've had very good feedback on it.

The solution is very scalable.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup can be a bit complex, but it depends on the deployment itself.

We are resellers of Red Hat. We deal with various deployment models, however, we generally deal with on-premises.

I would recommend the solution. Of course, it depends on what an organization is looking for in terms of virtualization.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have several applications that are pillars of the business, such as ERP and SAP, which were previously in a Windows environment. Our system architects have been working on moving these applications to a Linux environment. This is why we are using this solution.

At the point, all of our work with Red Hat is on-premises.

One of the most valuable features of this solution is the popularity of the OS.

The support for this solution is very good. This is the major thing that we are considering with respect to moving platforms.

There has to be more effort into closing the security vulnerabilities in this solution because we are facing daily attacks. We would like to have this done faster.

We would like to see live-patching on the systems, without having to require a reboot. It would be better to have more patches, especially kernel-level updates, live and online so that we can keep the business up and running during this period.

Improvements can be made to managing this solution, such as enhancements to the GUI.

There should be better integration with third-party tools.

Tools for scanning the hardware, such as the CPU and memory, would make life easier.

I have found that the stability is related to the upgrade cycle. I find the cycle a little bit annoying.  If the system is constantly upgrading then it is very painful in terms of the operation.

In terms of scalability, it is handling the load that we have. I don't see any major problems.

In addition to using this solution, we are trying to move our CRP solutions to our other platform, SUSE Linux. All of our business applications are moving to Red Hat, although we are getting better support with SUSE.

We are not using the most current release of this solution because from our perspective, it is not mature enough yet.

Another example is that we are moving our Enterprise Content Management (ECM) solution, which is similar to Microsoft SharePoint, to Red Hat.

We have already moved all of our big data systems, as well as all of the digitalization systems to Red Hat. Our Splunk is also on Red Hat. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The Ovirt component has flexibility, and is easy to perform integration within a  heterogenous data centre manager with OpenStack or ManageIQ.

It has the possibility to OEM and create a great product with Ovirt as the main component.

It needs a better administrator KB, similar to what Citrix XenDesktop has. Also, they don't know how to sell their great products and don’t really seems to be interested in taking care of their partners who trust and really know their products.

If you have a heterogenous data centre that is specially focused on Linux platforms, this is safe money, and good if you are looking for automation. 

It also offers great integration with DevOps tools.