Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Hypervisor quick comparison


Published on

VMware vs Citrix vs Hyper-V

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Hypervisor quick comparison

  1. 1. VMWARE - Easier to setup, established product, works with most OSs - Is owned by EMC (1 storage vendor) and has plenty of development resources - Constantly improves, has an established upgrade process - Just works, seems to be very flexible and is ready for production environment - Has relationships with many organizations where they continue to improve (features and benefits) especially when it comes to networking (virtual networking - able to control the packets ability to traverse the network using an application) - Storage virtualization has improved along with giving vendors the ability to develop API's to work with their solution - Has integrated with Powershell to allow for automated VM management - Does not work with Nvidia GPUs, but they are in the works - Faster ESXi server setup, integrated LDAP (AD) tools, VC management interface, very easy to install
  2. 2. CITRIX - Easy to setup, continues to establish capabilities, works with most OSs - Found that it is easy to setup an ISO file from a CIFS share, no need to upload into datastore (like that of Vmware) - Has an established upgrade policy - Complex powershell automation configuration - Faster VDI implementation, but for large organizations, costs seem to be the an issue because of the much needed hardware - Works with Nvidia GPUs - Easier Network bonding and implementation - Status view of the XenServer gives real-time stats, none really found on Vmware ESXi server (they have the capability found on VMware Operations Manager but not on the ESXi server itself)
  3. 3. HYPER-V - Easy to install and configure - Not really an established technology, found some glitches with Windows 2008 but they have worked out a lot of the problems with 2012 - Does not work with all OS, had problems with Linux and Unix (Mint, Solaris, Xubuntu, etc) - Cluster configuration, complex - Network configuration needs more development work, they need to work at bonding the NICs - Cluster configuration only works with ISCSI protocols