Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) is a virtualization solution developed by small Israeli software company Qumranet and supported by Red Hat since that company's acquisition in 2008.
N/A
VMware vSphere
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
An enterprise workload platform, vSphere is used to improve the performance for a data center. It is used to boost operational efficiency, supercharge workload performance, and accelerate innovation.
$995
per year
Pricing
Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM)
VMware vSphere
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Standard
$995.00
per year
Enterprise
$3,995.00
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
KVM
VMware vSphere
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM)
VMware vSphere
Considered Both Products
KVM
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose KVM
We've found KVM to be less problematic, both from a stabilty standpoint, but also in a flexibility and licensing standpoint. We love being able to deploy the hardware we want, as we want it, without needing the blessing of a specific vendor.
The key points why I made my decision for KVM in comparison with VMWare are: Freeware software (I am using an Ubuntu server OS), Fewer resources usage, vSwitch using that provides the ability to configure dot1q trunks to/between VMs, Stability, and simplicity of …
Compared to VirtualBox, KVM has simpler licensing terms and is supported by the operating system vendor. KVM also has more mature integrations with other open-source projects. Automating provisioning is simple with KVM since it is available in the package repositories of …
KVM is free and provides environments where guests can run their own Kernel while still performing very well. It is also very native to work with KVM since it is integrated within the Linux Kernel.
It is a very reliable solution that can be used for x86 architecture virtualization with low overhead. It is a free and open source software. Easy to use withOpenStack.
VMware vSphere is leader in virtualization segment and ease of use and manageability is very easy and integrated with more vendors in ecosystem like Redhat openshift, VMware vSphere is directly integrated whereas for Nutanix you require third party tools. VMware vSphere is …
Hyperv is great for limited vm build out, low cost companies, and limited in size organizations. Microsoft has a great product but its just not a robust and scalable as vsphere is. Citrix's platform is great for simple virtualization needs and for special 3D graphics …
vSphere is superior to any other on-premises hypervisor that I've personally used or heard about. vSphere is the de facto industry standard, receives substantially more partner support and investment, and benefits from a significantly longer maturation period than other …
We could not migrate to AOS then due to limitation by SAP supportability. A few months after going live, there was a whitepaper saying that AHV will now support it. We continued to use vSphere. It has given us what we need to be agile and extremely efficient with our hardware …
vSphere simply is best-in-class for its features and functionality. It does guest OS management, thin provisioning, deployment, management, networking, vMotion, and automation better than all the rest. vSphere is always the first to implement new and advanced features and push …
We came from VirtualBox where every user had their own VMs and was responsible for managing them. Turns out that's not a great solution when people leave or when disaster strikes. Further, the performance was abysmal.
We have tried a few other virtualization platforms, and even though you do pay for the support, it's worth it for the extra you get. Datastore migration, host migration affinity rules are all tools we use that others don't seem to have. And if they do, they don't work as well.
There's no comparison, VMWare is the market leader. It's pricey, but its feature set is years ahead of the competition. In particular, the ability to manage a large fleet of servers across multiple sites through a single pane of glass is great!
We opted for vSphere because of our IaaS/PaaS provider. Being one of the pioneers in server virtualization, VMware have proven to be quite reliable and robust, and thus widely adopted by virtualization service providers including ours. Also, the price is noticeably lower using …
We started testing our virtual infrastructure back 9 years ago we test XenServer but it was too complicated for us. When we tested vSphere from Vmware, It just worked, all we had to do was click. At the time, we were looking to have a virtualized video security server and …
I have only used Hyper-V on a workstation. Not to the same standard as VMware. From what I have seen, VMware vSphere console has a whole lot more features but I cannot fully tell you that one is better than the other.
I researched on the web and upon stumbling on millions and millions of articles, found that vSphere is a technology that was leading in the magic quadrant at that time. The technology was able to cater to the business needs and requirements for its vision and goals. The …
In terms of security, VMware has made important security enhancements, which now provides the same security features and level as Hyper-V. In terms of scalability, VMware improved scalability, which supports up to 64 hosts in the cluster now and it can now accommodate more than …
vSphere is much easier to use for a larger enterprise and also is easier to set up than Hyper-V. XenServer is simply not popular so while not a bad choice it is not the best because so little will be available for it. I cannot speak to the latest versions of Citrix since I …
vSphere is superior to Hyper-V. I have had several issues in Hyper-V that I have not experienced in vSphere. vSphere just works. It costs more money, but it works. I am curious to see the outcome of the Microsoft licensing model as they try to take on VMWare with Hyper-V. …
vSphere has a lot more feature sets than Hyper-V but at a much higher cost of entry versus MS Hyper-V. I have not been able to play with Hyper-V as much as I would have liked, but the setup and ongoing maintenance seems to be easier in vSphere than with Hyper-V
vSphere has more functionality than workstation pro and Hyper-v from Microsoft. It is expensive but for a good reason, the amount of control you have with vSphere is amazing. VMware is constantly adding new features and keeps their software up to date. Hyper-V is great but with …
Kernel-based Virtual Machine is very well suited when one needs a single-node virtualization host or needs to build a complex demo setting on their own notebook (e.g. when demonstrating solutions to a customer).
vSphere is well suited for multiple VMWare hosts and can be very useful in larger enterprises where vMotion is used to load balance and failover running virtual machines. In smaller businesses with one or two hosts then the features can be overkill. The addition of virtual TPM support is a very nice addition to provide vm security in a more Microsoft supported methodology.
More detail in recent tasks. Instead of just showing a task called "Reconfigure virtual machine" also have a link to more detailed information as to what was reconfigured, changed or removed.
We are constantly looking for change that will benefit our company. We are not ones to stick with a product simply because it is what we know, but rather looking for what fits us best. We can't imagine another product on the market today doing a better job of handling our infrastructure than vSphere.
It does the job and stays out of the way. The specifics of usability relies on the implementation, but with things like Icarus and libvirt, things are standardizing nicely.
Very useful for environments where space and energy consumption are issues and management is not very keen on upfront spending on hardware every time whenever requirement comes from any dept for provisioning a machine for their occasional use, easily can be done in case of VMware vSphere in few clicks. Backup, security, monitoring and management everything is covered but at additional cost.
I rarely ever have to contact support and when I do need to resolve an issue, there is always an abundance of kb articles and research information available that can help quickly resolve the issue. Depending on the type of support contract you have, you may get support from some offshore group in another country and this could be a little challenging because of the language barrier.
Just make sure that when you implement, that the person implementing truly knows what they are doing and has a plan of action coming in. Since our initial implementation using a consulting service, I have implemented a few vSphere just from what I learned at the initial implementation and use over time, and the person implementing really needs to know what they are doing or you will miss out on features that may help you down the line
The key points why I made my decision for KVM in comparison with VMWare are: Freeware software (I am using an Ubuntu server OS), Fewer resources usage, vSwitch using that provides the ability to configure dot1q trunks to/between VMs, Stability, and simplicity of using/troubleshooting, Well-known interface (for Linux geeks).
Having vSphere helped my business quickly recover from a ransomware attack which would have crippled us for weeks if we were not virtualized. I think the ROI on something like that is immeasurable.
vSphere has allowed my company to purchase bigger server hardware to host 3 or 4 virtual servers, which was at a cost much lower than buying 3 or 4 server hardware boxes, saving us thousands each time we need to upgrade hardware.