Oracle Linux, which is application binary compatible with Red Hat Enterprise Linux, is free to download, use, and share. There is no license cost, no need for a contract, and no usage audits. 24/7 enterprise-grade support is available for business critical environments. A single support offering includes virtualization, management, HA, and cloud native computing tools such as Kubernetes and Kata Containers, along with the Linux operating system. The vendor states that as the only Linux…
N/A
VMware ESXi
Score 7.2 out of 10
N/A
A bare-metal hypervisor that installs directly onto a physical server. With direct access to and control of underlying resources, VMware ESXi partitions hardware to consolidate applications and cut costs.
Oracle Linux works very well with Oracle Database and makes it very easy to install, not to mention how good the performance is. It's also very easy to maintain and get support from vendors when needed.
Both of the alternatives provided a strong competition but Oracle Linux emerged as the absolute winner as the feature to update the kernel without downtime is a game-changer and the level of support provided is at par the market standards. Also, stability was a key decisive …
Oracle Linux became the obvious choice amongst its competitors due to its speed, agility, flexibility, and support from Oracle engineers. The ease of use was one of the major reasons for choosing Oracle Linux over the above-operating systems. Also, the cost of operations, …
The best thing about Oracle is that it is free. Support is also at a reasonable cost. It works well for all Oracle products. Our company product is based on Oracle database. It provides an edge there. It works well in a cloud environment that is compatible with other standard …
As DBA I manage Oracle databases, Oracle Linux is the easiest to manage to compare other vendors. Support from the same OS and DB vendor saves a lot of time.
RedHat is going to discontinue CentOS, so Oracle is the best alternative that we have reviewed so far. We run Oracle databases and so far we have not had any major complications, but in the coming months, it will be the definitive replacement for CentOS on our part. since it is …
The Oracle Linux definitely comes on the top when it comes down to being easily available as its platform-independent. This is where the masses lie as we have moved to a hybrid work environment where keeping everyone on the same devices is no more required. Linux stands out as …
Easy to install and maintain the database and also the high availability, as DBA we prefer to use Oracle Linux because its performance together with the DB, with RHEL we could face many issues installing and maintaining the database things that definitely doesn't happen with …
Absolutely awesome. Oracle Linux is robust and faster for multiple users connections. There are many improvements in terms of security to the operating system.
It's a friendly operating system which has many actually provide space for thousands of other products even those of our competitors as Oracle. The best need is excellence in service to our members of staff who are more accustomed to products like libre office, Microsoft office …
Although most of the features of both the operating system i.e Fedora Linux and Oracle Linux are similar it is a more stable operating system. It offers powerful performance because of the stability and we are able to migrate our database servers very easily. With less amount …
Neither of these two products have really been a 100% replacement for VMware ESXi but they are getting closer and closer and with the new licensing agreements that VMware is trying to push out, could start eating at the lower hanging fruit. VMware ESXi still has some nicer …
VMware stacks really well compared to competitors as it has a good reputation in the markets, and clients trust the virtual machines in regard to their data. It also provides better reliability and performance as compared to the competitors, which makes it a clear choice for …
I think it is better than Hyper-V. The gap has possibly narrowed, but it is a more robust product. Time will tell if that stays the same after being acquired.
While running through a proof of concept with Hyper-V and VMware ESXi, I found VMware ESXi to be much easier to deploy, administer, and work with overall. Both products are good but I personally found ESXi to be more intuitive to use and the deployment options were also more …
VMware ESXI is straight forward dependable hypervisor, with some users experience consistent server uptime even during hardware failure and other setbacks. It requires few hardware resources, making a minimal impact on its host machine. Deploying new servers with VMware ESXI is …
At the time we did our comparison we found that VMware scaled much better than Hyper-V, lighter weight, and much more reliable. My recommendation if Hyper-V is needed for anything such as Windows containers, is to use nested virtualization and installing Windows Hyper-V within …
VMware ESXi excels in comparison to Microsoft's offering due to integration with Linux, its bare metal approach and its ability to function off of a thinner hypervisor. It allows for better integration with application appliances in my opinion due to its non-Microsoft nature. …
While Hyper-V also can work very well and can have licensing benefits, it does rely on Windows in order to run. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can add another layer of potential failure and might not be running on as low of a level as ESXi does. The footprint for …
It's hard to beat Hyper-V when it comes to ESXi. Although Hyper-V costs nothing to use, it does require a Windows license that permits you to operate at least two virtual machines (VMs) on the Hyper-V server. I found that VMware ESXi consumes fewer resources than any other …
VMware ESXi is a lot more robust and resilient than MS Hyper-V. However, Hyper-V is more convenient and economical because it comes with Windows Server.
The vSphere management interface is going to be web-based and you access that through a web browser by browsing to the IO address of the VMware ESXi host itself and then from there you'll be prompted for a login screen.
As long as you're using Nutanix AOS on Nutanix hardware and are paying their software support fees, AOS is a valid competitor to VMware and can save money due to not needing a license and having their server management system built into the base host management system. If you …
Compared to VirtualBox, VMware ESXi feels a lot more enterprise-grade when comparing the two. As ESXi is a VMware product we knew the level of quality and support we would receive from the vendor. VirtualBox is an open-source platform for virtualization and we liked the fact …
VMware ESXi stacks up nicely against Hyper-v. VMware ESXi is a smaller footprint, the one thing Hyper-v has is cost it is free with the purchase of a windows license that allows you to run at least two windows VM's within the Hyper-v server. But VMware ESXi is still the leader …
Hyper-V utilizes more resources compared to ESXi and it gets affected when it is used to scale up and installation on Microsoft windows is easy however it does not stand to the ease of access of ESXi, a user of ESXi would find it difficult to migrate to another application.
VMware has been the #1 vendor for virtualization for 10 years, is used in top incorporations, supports almost every software around there, and runs smoothly with every hardware vendor. The con is the price, it's the most expensive solution.
Easy to manage, standard licenses and bundle licenses are customizable, provides a much more stable infrastructure. Cost-effective, Comes with special features like HA, DRS, FT.
Much more reliable and well-integrated than competitors, with a solid central management console. Citrix is having good performance but requires a specific kernel to leverage, HyperV is good only for windows OS.
We moved to VMWare ESXi from an all-physical environment. I know that VMWare VSphere is an even more advanced solution for managing numerous VMHosts under a single GUI - but we have not invested any time into VShere as of yet. We have too few employees at the moment to …
As a result of the migration from Red Hat Enterprise Linux to Oracle Linux, overall application performance was improved significantly. Oracle Enterprise Linux is pretty much based on the Red Hat Linux code, although it receives faster and more regular updates from Oracle. They have better security configurations. However, it is also missing a lot of packages that are usually available in other distributions.
If you're looking for the industry standard in server virtualization, I would recommend ESXi. After decades of expertise in the field, VMware continues to provide a strong product, production-ready, with an easy-to-learn interface that allows for quick management along with less costly upfront onboarding and training. Grab the free personal-use license and install in your homelab to start!
There are some odd issues with VMware's virtualized network drive (VMXNET3). On occasion, after a reboot of a Windows-based VM the NIC will fail to bind properly and network access is unavailable until an admin intervenes by disabling/re-enabling the adapter. While it's possible that our environment is a contributing factor, this never happens on VMs using Intel E1000 emulation, only the paravirtual NICs.
Logging is extensive but difficult to work with. VMware's solution is a product called Log Insight, which comes at additional cost. Fortunately this is somewhat mitigated by the extensive support documentation and robust user community, but in the heat of the moment obtaining the required detail can be a trying experience.
It is critical to our business, what started out as a way to do certain functions, it has now become core to ensuring our product is available to our customers and reducing our costs to operate and reduce our recovery time and provisioning servers. Their support is great and the costs to renew is reasonable.
The interface is fairly intuitive for most things, and the areas that are a little less obvious usually have fantastic documentation in the online knowledgebase. In 3-4 years of managing our ESXi hosts, I think that I have only opened 4-5 support cases for things that I could not figure out myself or find answers to on the website.
Without the need to patch the servers with bug fixes and enhancements we whave not experienced any downtime with VMware issues. Even the bug fixes and updates do not cause of downtime as we just migrate the servers to the opposite node and update the one and then move servers back. Very simple and painless.
We do not notice any difference between a physical and virtual server running the same workload. In fact we can scale quicker with the virtual server than we can with the physical.
Quick & [on-point] response is what I would say for the support team. There hasn’t been trouble ever since we get in touch with them and ask for help for any major or minor trouble we have been facing. Moreover, the team is very accurate with their solutions and detailed orientated. With such [a] high-performance application and agile environment, a team as such is great at hand.
I rarely ever need support for anything VMWare makes, but when I do, the documentation available just in the free community is generally enough. It's extensive and the community is truly robust and active. And if you have a myvmware account, you can get support for your owned products from VMWare support by the conventional case/ticket method
Jsut read and follow anything your storage provider may require to allow the integration of VMware with storage operations, outside of that VMware jsut works.
Oracle Linux became the obvious choice amongst its competitors due to its speed, agility, flexibility, and support from Oracle engineers. The ease of use was one of the major reasons for choosing Oracle Linux over the above-operating systems. Also, the cost of operations, management, and retention were significantly quite low. This made Oracle Linux a very easy and quick choice for our organisation.
While Hyper-V also can work very well and can have licensing benefits, it does rely on Windows in order to run. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can add another layer of potential failure and might not be running on as low of a level as ESXi does. The footprint for Hyper-V can be smaller if the Desktop Experience isn't used for the hosts, but this is the default fashion that ESXi has been running for many years. VMware's support has always been stellar, and its documentation is phenomenal. Hyper-V can work as a virtual environment option, but ESXi has never let me down in any environment I have managed. I will continue standing by this product and prefer it over other options. It has proven itself time and time again over time as the defacto virtual environment hosting platform.
We started out with a two-server cluster and adding a third or fourth is very straightforward and simple with no issues. You just need to be aware of the size of your Vcenter Server to handle the workload, but still the resources needed is very minimal
Positively, it has saved us time in spinning up new servers for the different departments in our company. It is easy for us to spin up virtual machines with VMware ESXi and deploy applications at the drop of a hat.
Positively we are able to save space in our data closets as we no longer need to keep room for physical servers and workstations, allowing us to expand in other areas like networking equipment and physical backup solutions.
It has moved our business forward as we are able to migrate old servers and static workstations in the virtual environment allowing us to easily keep an eye on older applications and update/backup easily through VMware ESXi management console.