What advice do you have for others considering KVM?

I would rate KVM nine out of ten points due to the variety of management tooling, which makes configuration and operation somewhat more challenging compared to VMware.

For basic functions, it should be okay. It helps save operational costs. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I recommend KVM to others and rate it a ten.

I would recommend KVM for virtualization needs, especially for Linux environments. However, it may not work as well with certain software licenses like Oracle or IBM that control the entire server instead of by VM. I rate it an eight out of ten.

KVM has been a reliable solution for our on-premises virtualization needs, but as we transition to the cloud with Azure or AWS, its role becomes less significant. We are focused on migrating our workloads to the cloud platforms for scalability and flexibility. The performance and scalability of KVM have impacted our operations positively, allowing us to efficiently manage workloads and accommodate growth. However, when onboarding new clients or managing dynamic workloads, it can sometimes pose challenges in workload management. KVM can integrate with our existing infrastructure with some configuration adjustments. However, managing existing workloads on bare metal with KVM can be challenging and requires careful optimization of specific parameters during integration. I wouldn't recommend KVM to new customers or clients. While it serves as the foundation of virtualization, there are other Linux flavors and applications like OpenShift that offer easier workload management, optimization, and scalability. Overall, I would rate KVM as a five out of ten. While I have experience with it and have worked on various environments like KVM, HVM, PVM, and LVM, it hasn't consistently met all my expectations over time.

I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I would recommend KVM to other users. Overall, I rate KVM a nine out of ten.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

I would rate the overall solution 9 out of 10 as it is really a good solution for people working in China.

KVM is not easy to configure and has some minor issues. I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. Apart from being difficult at its installation and initial setup, the rest is wonderful!

KVM is a common license tool, which can be utilized on any other tool, like Red Hat, Oracle, or Linux platform. Until I'm not familiar with the solution, I cannot recommend the solution to others because we have taken a risk by switching over to KVM, and we are still in the process of configuring it. Probably, after we can take advantage, I can recommend it to others. KVM is a little better than Oracle VM since it has been made with some better thoughts behind it to bring it out in the market. One can get good performance because of kernel-based virtualization. So it should be able to provide a performance-oriented template. The product is really good, but the only thing is that we are not able to get the things we need in the product. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I am an end-user. I'm not sure which version number of the solution we're using. I'd warn users that if they do not have experience with systems, then it may not be suitable. You need a bit of knowledge. Most companies use system integrators, and it is hard to sell free software. You can sell your services, yet not the solution. It's easier to sell VMware. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to customers who don't have technical skills. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I have experience with many virtualization technologies, including KVM. Virtualization is simple for me. My company has many labs—one in Texas, then Chandler, then Folsom in California. There's a lab in Germany and Poland, so I can't give you the number of KVM users in the company, but that would be a significant number. I'm giving KVM a ten out of ten because it's the best.

I would give KVM a rating of eight out of ten.

On the whole, I would certainly recommend KVM to new users. Going further, I would give the following advice: although it's true that deep administration can be a bit difficult for newcomers who are not used to Linux, if you just follow the tutorial on KVM deployment and plan your deployment properly, you will be able to set up a stable virtualization system with ease. That's one of the perks of KVM — it's natively very stable once it has been set up correctly. I would rate KVM an eight out of ten.

I rate KVM an eight out of ten.

We have had a lot of problems with the solution but it is not the fault of KVM. It was our fault for not doing a full suite deployment. I rate KVM a seven out of ten.

Before deployment, it's worth checking whether the solution fits your use case and how it would be used across various large deployments. Test it before implementing. I rate the solution seven out of 10.

I rate this solution a seven out of 10.

KVM is good and I recommend it. In the future, containers will be substituted by virtual machines and KVM need to adapt to be able to support that. I rate this product an eight out of 10.

I would recommend this solution to others. If they were using Linux, this is a requirement. I would rate KVM an eight out of ten. If KVM uses less resources, it might improve my score.

I'm just a customer and an end-user. I don't have a business relationship with KVM at this time. I'm using what should be the latest version of the solution right now. I would advise other organizations that this solution is definitely a good choice. It's definitely something that's easy to use, however, you can have it on a fully functioning operating system that you're familiar with. Or, if you have a little less experience, it's something that you can get up and going really quickly. That said, it is still a type 2. That is a great thing. It functions, and it's under two pounds. It's basically like being on bare metal, which is really nice. Overall, I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

The most important thing for people to do when they are researching this kind of solution is to try and understand the main reason and concerns behind virtualization. They should learn the strong points and weakness of this technology, and try to have a base knowledge to understand the concept and how it can be used and managed on a daily basis. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I have been using this solution since before it was owned by Red Hat, when it was community-based. It is easier to manage than ever before because you used to have to use the command-line interface, instead of the GUI. I do not recommend this product for those looking for a stable and scalable virtualization solution because they will ultimately have problems in their data center. Just two weeks ago, I helped a friend of mine to migrate from KVM to VMware. I think that if Red Hat worked on some business continuity features and add them to KVM then it would receive a better grade and be a more competitive solution. I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

You can virtualize anything now, but in my experience, they are good for Linux and Unix systems. I have also used Windows. Even if you are using another platform hypervisor, as I do with VMware, you may get yourself in a situation where you want to install the KVM or at least the key tools. You can access RAM drives, or broken virtual hard drives, or migrate them to another type of hard drive. KVM is very complete, it is very powerful, but people are used to graphical QEMU and that is an issue. The solution performs well and has many tools. It offers everything that all other paid versions have. Everything is in your hands, all you need is the internet to access all of the information on KVM. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We're using the on-premises deployment model. We're using the community version of the solution. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.