Likelihood to Recommend RHEV is well suited for organizations that need a cost-effective and flexible solution for their environment. As its vendor-independent software, easily install on any type of hardware. RHEV provides a GUI interface to manage the software, which makes the management of the software easier for the end-user. RHEV is best for non-production or less critical applications. RHEV can be easily integrated with other REDHAT software.
Read full review If you have one user or 1000's of users (especially using Windows), Windows Server is a no-brainer! The only reason I would suggest going with a Linux server is if you have old hardware (Windows Server is more process intensive than Linux). But, Linux is open-source, so anyone can publish updates/security updates, but on the flip side, malicious people also have full access to Linux's codebase allowing for much easier writing of exploitations/viruses/malware/ransomware.
Read full review Pros RHV issues/bugs can be reported via Bugzilla to RH support. The service is great and typically responds soon. Red Hat distribution integration is seamless as it is integrated into the kernel. OpenStack support enables more customized VM templates and network configuration control. Read full review Easy to use due to its intuitive graphical user interface. Very popular and makes integration easier. Lots of software drivers available. Has many functionalities such as Active Directory, DNS, DHCP, VPN, RDP, VDI server, etc. Many patches and updates available. Maybe abit too much too often. Cost effective and with budget. Remote desktop feature simplifies remote access to this server. It has a built in VPN and ssl certificate feature. Event viewer is available for alerts, although it seems too cumbersome to go through the logs. If you got too many Windows systems to manage, then SCCM is an option. Read full review Cons 1- RHVM API is pretty slow, especially after creating a VM it is not possible to retrieve the VM details (i.e VM's MAC Address) fast enough, where we need to place a pause in our Ansible Playbook, make the automation process slow. 2- RHV is still using collected to monitor the hypervisors which is deviating from Red Hat policy for other RHEL based applications to use PCP to monitor, which is richer in features. 3- It will be great if it is possible to patch the hypervisors using other tools such as satellite and not only via RHVM. 4- In the past Red Hat used to present patches in the z release (i.e. 4.3.z), and features in the y release (i.e 4. y), but starting from 4.4 that is mixed together wherein the Z release you get both patches and features, that is not good because that requires a lot of time to test when we patch as it includes features as well. 5- Engineering team has to be more reactive when new feature is requested. Read full review DHCP Server could be better - we use the router for DHCP Routing Print Server - not a fan of using the server as a print server since you have to license it. Direct access to printers via IP addresses is a much more efficient way to go Better backup program - we utilize a third-party program that gives us more flexibility when restoring individual files. Read full review Likelihood to Renew I've carefully reviewed the servers and services currently running on Windows Server 2012, and given the opportunity would renew them as is going forward. There are two systems I currently have in place, one is a very large Linux implementation for a large ecommerce site, and one is a very large backup solution front ended by FTP servers running Linux. Neither are well suited for Windows, but the overall network infrastructure is and will be Windows Server for the foreseeable future.
Read full review Usability There are simply too many different parts of Windows Server to make it a cohesive piece of software. While some of the newer features found in Windows Server 2012 and 2016 have nice UIs that are logically laid out, there are enough parts of the system that is still based on old code with clunky UIs and confusing options to make Windows Server a particularly user-friendly experience.
Read full review Reliability and Availability some times server hungs and user sessions were busy to connect
Read full review Performance need to improve the performance more
Read full review Support Rating Microsoft's support is hugely wide-ranging from articles online to having to contact them directly for the more serious issues. In recent years when I have contacted them directly, I have found the support o be excellent as I have found myself connected to very knowledgeable people in the field in which I needed the support. The online support available is vast and I tend to find most of the time that there is always someone out there who has had the same issue as me in the past and knows something about how to resolve it! This is the advantage of using industry standard and long-established systems such as Windows Server.
Read full review In-Person Training it was my senior who trained Windows Server features and i was satisfied
Read full review Online Training it was recorded session and useful
Read full review Implementation Rating Make sure that you have detailed processes in place for every server instance you plan to install/upgrade, if possible get the base OS loaded and Windows Updates applied ahead of time, and if using a VM take a snapshot prior to installing each role, as well as along the way.
Read full review Alternatives Considered RHEV is an excellent product, includes more features, is less expensive, and has rock solid reliability and is backed with the best Red Hat Support in the industry. RHEV uses KVM under the hood which is used by all the big players in the industry (AWS, Rackspace, etc) to lower their overall costs and improve efficiency and profits and that's why RHEV is an excellent solution!
Read full review I didn't use any other system which gives the same functionality and I am not aware of any. The full integration between all components and especially the ability to integrate mail via Exchange or even via a hybrid setup with the Ofice365 cloud, including the ability to directly manage the cloud from the server, using Power Shell, is something I didn't see anywhere else.
Read full review Contract Terms and Pricing Model need to reduce a lot
Read full review Scalability yes i completely agree multi deployment
Read full review Professional Services i like the professional service but need to improve
Read full review Return on Investment RHEV has provided a positive ROI as our customers are not experiencing as many outages during maintenances. We have not experienced any catastrophic failures as a result of vsphere losing connection to the ntp. There has been a level of stability in our environment that was not previously experienced with our previous vendor. Read full review Because of our Microsoft Campus Agreement, Windows products are fairly affordable for us and that has been a huge blessing. We are considering some Azure cloud options and some of that is covered under our Campus Agreement, making it a nice incentive to start migrating certain apps and functionality to the cloud I don't have access to our budgets so I cannot give a good answer as far as the impact of ROI on our institution, but if your company can afford it, you cannot go wrong with Windows server. Not having to send your sys admins to Linux or Unix school alone is a big savings as well as not having to train your staff on using a Linux desktop instead of a Windows-based one. The compatibility with end users of all varieties and platforms will definitely impact your ROI in a positive way. We have Apple users, Android, Windows, and even a few Linux end users on our campus and Windows server works quite well with all of them. Read full review ScreenShots