Why Hyper-V
October 09, 2015
Why Hyper-V
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Software Version
Server 2012R2
Modules Used
- Hyper-V, Nic teaming
Overall Satisfaction with Hyper-V
I designed, built out and currently manage several Active, Passive Win2012R2 (migrated from a 2008R2 cluster I build originally) Hyper-V clusters using an EqualLogic SAN storage group as the shared storage array (this reduced total server install base from 98 at two locations to 18 at four locations).
- Extremely easy to manage and cluster.
- Exceptionally robust and able to recover from disaster very well.
- The product makes good use of available system resources.
- It has a way to go in VDI. While the functionality is fully there it is more difficult to deploy than Citrix or VMware.
- It needs a better way to upgrade the virtualization framework drivers between revisions and when it is updated for the host system.
- Hyper-V cut licensing, power, and hardware maintenance costs by 2.2 million dollars over 5 years.
- VMWare
In the beginning (Server 2008) Hyper-V was missing some of the functionality of VMWare and at first it was selected because of the Datacenter VM licensing policy Microsoft came out with. However, today there is no functionality in VMware that Hyper-V does not have and it is much easier to configure clusters across geographically diverse locations with Hyper-V.