Hyper-V

If budgets are stretched, Hyper-V is a very cost effective solution. Any veteran MS Windows administrators will have little issue in getting to grips with this. If you are familiar with VMware solutions, then you may find Hyper-V a little frustrating as it does lack some of the functionality of those products, however nothing that will prevent you from managing your virtual workloads and estate. Since rolling out Hyper-V 2019 we have had no real issues with it; ESXi seemed to have more issues and was less forgiving with hardware compatibility.

If you are using Windows Servers, Hyper-V is the best choice for cost-effectiveness and ease of system management.If you can buy hi-peformance host servers, you should purchace Windows Server Datacenter edition lisence.

Nice software which offers excellent Cloud functionalities and secure channels to effectively move important business data and management of various services without risking any information to various cyber threats. Hyper-V also allows the migration of huge volumes of multiple data with different formats and creating reports is easy for any user.

Because Hyper-V is a Microsoft product and based on Windows OS, creating virtual Windows servers and clients are easy. When we want to test our group policies it it best to do it on hyper-v environment then implement to production clients. The same goes with operating system quality and features updates as well as operating system upgrades.

At first, I only used Microsoft Hyper-V on my own computer. This virtualization software, Hyper-V, is very good to use for creating local labs with one or more virtual machines to do reproductions. Or to perform tests without affecting any production environment. Since this is only used on a local computer, I can't tell how it performs or how manageable it is when used in production environments.

I'm a Microsoft Windows 10 Pro user and it provides me a Hyper-V which is HyperVisor which allows you to use An OS on top of your current OS Running on Your Laptop/Desktop, with the Hyper-V one can allocate separate ram/rom from our machine Virtually on the VM to the task more efficiently.

Hyper-V is well suited for virtualization of Windows Server workloads as well as virtual desktop infrastructure. It also works well for building of development and test environments at a lower cost. Hyper-V is less appropriate for environments running multiple operating systems including linux and Apple OSx.

Hyper-V is well suited for shops that are not completely sold into using VMWare for its virtualization needs. There is some limitation on using some hardware with Hyper-V but when it comes to every day server user, the Hyper-V technology is so mature that almost any in house scenario can benefit from its use. Whether it is for space, power or DR reasons.

The only time I can think it would be less appropriate is the case where someone wants a server to have full, un limited access to a hardware based disc system and does not want any competition for the use of the system.

Hyper-V is well suited for a business that does not want to worry about upgrading their server hardware every few years. With virtualization, money can be spent on backups or other key areas of IT like end-user hardware. I really do not see any downsides to using Hyper-V in today's IT world.

Better use of the company's existing infrastructure: when executing various services on a server or set of machines, for example, one can take advantage of the processing capacity of this equipment as close as possible to its totality;
The number of machines is smaller: with the best use of existing resources, the need to acquire new equipment has greatly decreased in the company, as well as the consequent expenses with installation, physical space, refrigeration, maintenance, energy consumption, among others.

With Hyper-V, you have the ability to virtualize and manage virtually every aspect of a service. It allows you to create screenshots of the state of the machine, in order to save the state of the machine up to a certain point and continue with a copy, leaving the previous version intact.

A specific scenario where Hyper-V is well suited would be for environment testing purposes. Let's say you want to learn or test a new OS for a product or just for learning purposes. You are able to boot up this OS in just a few mins on Hyper-V and then begin working, testing and learning with no money out of your pocket. You don't have to go out and build or buy a new PC (assuming your current PC has enough memory and CPU usage for a single VM.).

I do not think there is a scenario where this would not be appropriate. This is not really a piece of software that you need to install to do other things. If you are enabling Hyper-V you are using it to create a virtual environment. The only time you really wouldn't use this is if your application would be better off running in a docker/container setup.

It's great if you already have a Windows server and need to create some more servers (using the 2 VM licensing allowance with server standard). It does pose an issue for backups though, as you have to be careful what and how you back them up. We've opted for Veeam and this seems to work well.

ROBO server builds make Hyper-V a great candidate. Microsoft has spent decades perfecting driver integration. As such, Windows Server will run on almost any hardware without much trouble. It is easy to allocate older hardware or cheaper hardware to Hyper-V and run workloads quickly and cheaply.

HyperV is well suited for most environments. Most system engineers or business owners can take advantage of the quick learning cycle with the product. There are a lot of online resources available. It is a great functional, low cost and viable solution. Small Business or Enterprise can adopt this technology without much concern. If your Virtual Machines have a requirement to be hosted on a Linux based host then perhaps you should use a competitor software versus HyperV, but I have not seen this as an issue very frequently.

Hyper-V is well suited for some larger scale networks and projects. It shouldn't be used in any case as a Virtual player for one single virtual machine. So the downside of Hyper-V would be its lack of awareness for a single Virtual machine but better usage overall for a great number of machines.

Hyper-V is good for maintaining real networks and connecting to the servers.

If you need a cheap hypervisor for development purposes or production which does not require 24/7 operation and are running mostly Windows VMs, Hyper-V is hard to beat but if you need reliability and performance, Hyper-V is not the right choice for you.

Hyper-V is great for having low overhead as far as physical systems go. You can spin up or get rid of VMs as needed for various IT needs. Testing environments that can be spun up quickly at various application levels is great to reduce the time to get testing going or to be able to respond to client issues in a timely manner. It is less appropriate for a company who does data processing and needs people at desktops to just process applications or some form of data.

It's much better to use Hyper-V in the big clustered environment, were you do not need to deploy or remove big amounts of VMs everyday. It's also good to use it for personal use on a workstation.

I would highly recommend having fast drives, such as SAS or SSD drives. It seems to lag a bit on an array of SATA drives, especially with speeds of 7200 or less. I have also found that dynamic memory does not work as well, and would recommend having enough memory in the server to have static ram for all your virtual server. Beyond this, I use Hyper-V for small businesses with only 2 VMs to large business clusters with 8 or more nodes hosting over 100 VMs.