TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Canonical OpenStack

    Score9 out of 10
    N/ACanonical OpenStack is the cloud openstack option from Canonical in the UK. Using private and public cloud infrastructure at the same time allows users to optimise CapEx and OpEx costs. Users can create cost-effective, enterprise-grade public cloud infrastructure on Ubuntu.

    $7,500

    one-time fee

    Hyper-V

    Score8.4 out of 10
    N/AN/A

    $24.95

    per month

    Pricing
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Editions & Modules
    Private Cloud Build
    $75,000
    fixed price
    Private Cloud Build Plus
    $150,000
    fixed price
    Developer
    $24.95
    per month
    Bronze
    $49.00
    per month
    Silver
    $89.00
    per month
    Gold
    $135.00
    per month
    Platinum
    $199.00
    per month
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional DetailsAdditional features, functionality, and integrations are available via add-ons—
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Considered Both Products
    Canonical Ltd
    No answer on this topic
    Microsoft
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Would buy again
    33 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    34 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Happy with the feature set
    33 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    96%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    27 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    97%
    Implementation went as expected
    32 Answers
    Features
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Server Virtualization
    Comparison of Server Virtualization features of Canonical OpenStack and Hyper-V
    Feature
    Canonical OpenStack
    -
    Ratings
    Hyper-V
    7.6
    73 Ratings
    6% below category average
    Virtual machine automated provisioning00 Ratings6.861 Ratings
    Management console00 Ratings7.873 Ratings
    Live virtual machine backup00 Ratings8.265 Ratings
    Live virtual machine migration00 Ratings7.367 Ratings
    Hypervisor-level security00 Ratings7.867 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    Proxmox VE
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    VMware vSOM (discontinued)
    Score10 out of 10
    Enterprises
    No answers on this topic
    IBM PowerVM
    Score9.6 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    8.4
    (74 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (7 ratings)
    Usability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (11 ratings)
    Availability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Performance
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.5
    (16 ratings)
    In-Person Training
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Online Training
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    5.0
    (3 ratings)
    Configurability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    Product Scalability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor post-sale
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor pre-sale
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Canonical OpenStackHyper-V
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Canonical Ltd
    Ubuntu OpenStack is well suited for startups where there are very tight financial constraints. As Ubuntu OpenStack is open source, the startup organizations will not have to spend a lot when compared to their commercial offerings in the market. Ubuntu OpenStack is less appropriate in organizations where they don't want to have private on-prem clouds. As deploying a private on-prem cloud is a very cumbersome and tedious task, the organizations must have a dedicated team to manage such on-prem deployments.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    Hyper-V makes a lot of sense in scenarios that will support several Windows Server-based OS virtual machines. The only limitation of those licensed VMs is the hardware that hosts the Hyper-V role. If you need to deploy many servers running Windows Server OS, it is worth the price. Hyper-V also does a great job of managing the server host's computational resources, including memory, CPU, network, and storage.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Canonical Ltd
    • Very easy to use, learning curve is very short. Don't need to invest months of training before using it
    • Well suited with Jenkins for automated tests
    • Works well on large sets of heterogeneous hardware
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • Easy to use GUI - very easy for someone with sufficient Windows experience - not necessarily a system administrator.
    • Provisioning VMs with different OSes - we mostly rely on different flavors of Windows Server, but having a few *nix distributions was not that difficult.
    • Managing virtual networks - we usually have 1 or 2 VLANs for our business purposes, but we are happy with the outcomes.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Canonical Ltd
    • More customizable options while choosing virtual machine configurations would be great.
    • To have regular online learning sessions directly from Ubuntu OpenStack experts [to] help users and for those who implement it.
    • Giving admin more control on what privileges they can grant to their users.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • We manage Hyper-V using both System Center Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM) and the in-build Hyper-V administration tool, the former being the main product we use as the built-in tool is very light on functionality, unlike VMware ESXi.
    • Management of storage is not great and quite a shift away from how VMware does it with ESXi; there is no separate panel/blade/window for LUNs/data stores, which means there is a lot of back and forth when trying to manage storage.
    • A dedicated client with all functionality in one place would be awesome.
    • Having the equivalent of ESXi's virtual console is something which is absolutely needed.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    Cheap and easy is the name of the game. It has great support, it doesn't require additional licenses, it works the same if it is a cluster or stand-alone, and all the servers can be centrally managed from a system center virtual machine manager server, even when located at remote sites.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    It is quite intuitive. Junior techs are able to provision and administrate Hyper-V virtual server infrastructure with little to no additional training. Documentation from Microsoft is easily avaliable and decently well written. Hyper-V is reliable and does what it is supposed to. Can be admin from an intuitive gui, or aoutmated with extensive powershell.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Reliability and Availability
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    In the past 2 years our Hyper-V servers have only had a handful of instances where the VM's on them were unreachable and the physical Hyper-V server had to be restarted. One time this was due to a RAM issue with the physical box and was resolved when we stopped using dynamic memory in Hyper-V. The other times were after updates were installed and the physical box was not restarted after the updates were installed.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Performance
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    Hyper-V itself works quickly and rarely gave performance issues but this can be more attributed to the physical server specifications that the actual Hyper-V software in my opinion as Hyper-V technically just utilizes config files such as xml, and a data drive file (VHD, VHDX, etc) to perform its' duties.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    I gave it a middle of the road rating - as far as getting direct help from Microsoft this never seems to happen. (Good luck getting ahold of them.) Getting help from online support forums is pretty much where I get all my help from. Hyper-V is used quite widely and anything you could need help with is out there and easily searched for on your favorite search engine.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    In-Person Training
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    We had in person training from a third party and while it was very in depth it was at a beginner's level and by the time we received the training we had advanced past this level so it was monotonous and redundant at that point. It was good training though and would have provided a solid foundation for learning the rest of Hyper-V had I had it from the beginning.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Online Training
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    The training was easy to read and find. There were good examples in the training and it is plentiful if you use third party resources also. It is not perfect as sometimes you may have a specific question and have to spend time learning or in the rare case you get an error you might have to research that error code which could have multiple causes.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    initial configuration of hyper-v is intuitive to anyone familiar with windows and roles for basic items like single server deployments, storage and basic networking. the majority of the problems were with implementing advanced features like high availability and more complex networking. There is a lot of documentation on how to do it but it is not seamless, even to experienced virtualization professionals.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Canonical Ltd
    Everybody knows VMWare which is the world's number one in data center infrastructure management. OpenStack is lot lot less expensive but doesn't offer all the functionalities you have with VMWare especially for High Availability and load balancing. You should go for OpenStack if you need an easy to use solution without the need for external consultants. If you don't have the capacity to manage your own infrastructure you had better go for VMWare.
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    VMware is the pioneer of virtualization but when you compare it with Hyper-V, VMware lacks the flexibility of hardware customization and configuration options Hyper-V has also GPU virtualization still not adequate for both platforms. VMware has better graphical interface and control options for virtual machines. Another advantage VMware has is it does not need a dedicated os GUI base installation only needs small resources and can easily install on any host.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Scalability
    Canonical Ltd
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    Nothing is perfect but Hyper-V does a great job of showing the necessary data to users to ensure that there is enough resources to perform essential functions. You can also select what fields show on the management console which is helpful for a quick glance. There are notifications that can be set up and if things go unnoticed and a Hyper-V server runs out of a resource it will safely and quickly shut down the VM's it needs to in order to ensure no Hardware failure or unnecessary data loss.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Canonical Ltd
    • Lighter on initial spending for the organization.
    • Deployments which have no vendor locking makes management decisions easier.
    • Support from great community saved lot of time for engineers managing it.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • Massively positive impact on expenses in my company by reducing our storage needs drastically. We were able to reallocate the budget to upgrading our primary Hyper-V server with pure enterprise SSD's as we reduced the storage needs by over 50% and by this we increased performance by over 400%.
    • We have deployed more than 8 servers with EXTREMELY minimal cost using Hyper-V and not requiring another hardware server to host it. We have leveraged our hardware resources in our 2 servers so well that we were able to add many new services, not in place prior, as we did not have the servers to host them. Now with Hyper-V, we deployed many more servers in VM's, purchased OS's & CAL's, but did not need any hardware, which is the greatest expense of all.
    • With Hyper-V, our ROI was reduced from 36-40 months on our primary server, down to only 13 months by reducing costs of storage and adding so many more servers, by calculating the "would-be" cost of those servers that was avoided by creating them in Hyper-V.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots