[-]

Duck_Diddler@reddit

I’ll get shot for this but I still enjoy working with VMWare. There’s a lot to unpack with their new shit but it’s been a neat ride.

[-]

LMAO ive just been too lazy and didnt need to migrate to proxmox in my homelab…found out this week that Vsphere Integrated Containers is still a thing….im kinda stoked…I just always assumed it wasnt around since kubernetes is….we still have our whole company on vmware. hosting our EMR for healthcare. we have a datacenter that around 200 sites access…god i dont ever wanna know how much it costs.

[-]

lue3099@reddit

$$$

[-]

Chico0008@reddit

Xcp here, more convient and fell more like Vsphere

[-]

hihcadore@reddit

Hyper-V

Comes with windows. Works with windows. No extra licensing.

[-]

D1TAC@reddit

This. The value of datacenter beats having proxmox in my eyes.

[-]

dustojnikhummer@reddit

But you are licensing the host, not the hypervisor. If you have a Windows Datacenter license for a given node you can run any hypervisor you want, that license still applies to VMs, regardless if they are hyperv, vmware or qemu... or did I understand it incorrectly?

[-]

d00ber@reddit

Proxmox is definitely catching up! The datacenter manager is in beta, but so far so good. I was looking at hyper-v at a NFP, but it was way too cost prohibitive. The cost was more than their yearly IT budget.

[-]

Cooleb09@reddit

HyperV is free* if you're running windows VMs.

[-]

Klynn7@reddit

Are they already running Windows Server? If so, Hyper-V is free. If not I wouldn’t even consider it.

[-]

WendoNZ@reddit

As someone who's doing this right now. It's a bumpy ride. No tagging support in Veeam unless you have SCVMM (because HV doesn't have tags), which if you don't have system center licenses you won't be saving much over just continuing with VMware. You do have VM Groups, but while they have been available for years, they still feel like a beta product with no GUI integration and entirely PS managed, and on a cluster require additional setup before they can be used.

It's development also seems to be almost non existent. Sure it's still being updated, but the only new features are because it underpins Azure, nothing for normal users.

At the current rate, I'm fully expecting Proxmox to be better supported by third parties, and be a better solution than Hyper-V in less than 5 years.

[-]

hihcadore@reddit

Same. And if you love Linux you can even use server core for the same masochistic CLI feel. Hyper-v doesn’t need a GUI.

[-]

nwmcsween@reddit

None of those are hypervisors, between the three of them is Xen and KVM. Xen is what would be considered a true type 1 hypervisor like Vmware after the whole interesting GPL violation lawsuit for shimming the Linux kernel as a driver. KVM more of an OS level integrated type 1 hypervisor.

[-]

gsmitheidw1@reddit

Proxmox is gradually moving to Rust. For example the new multi cluster management is entirely rust.

[-]

planedrop@reddit

I've been using XCP-ng in production for about 5 years and it's been nothing but phenomenal. Absolutely amazing platform and I'd highly recommend it. I've got experience with basically ever hypervisor out there except Nutanix and I've been happiest with this.

[-]

PNW_Techs@reddit

There's two things I think you are missing here that will have a huge impact on your hypervisor choice. Storage and HA should be defined and paired with your hypervisor solution for both enterprise and cloud. What are your HA requirements, does that mean 2 physical data centers, redundant storage, instant migration to a new host if it fails? What types of storage are you planning on using, for example do you want the enterprise environment to use the same storage as your cloud environment. All the cloud workload stacks mentioned have different storage compatibilities.

[-]

kissmyash933@reddit

VMware, but alas, it is not to be for much longer. :(

[-]

topher358@reddit

Hyper-V. Has the best integrations available from partners such as Veeam, etc

[-]

d00ber@reddit

Even proxmox has a veeam integration these days!

[-]

Nonaveragemonkey@reddit

They said high availability...not high downtime

[-]

TightBed8201@reddit

What do you mean? We run hyper v clusters in 24/7 environment with random blade hw failure every few years. Hyper-v is stable enough. It works, it is stable, drivers are good, and only issue i found is with virtual tpm (everything crypto in virtualization is abomination if you ask me).

So, are you just incompetent system engineer who like to bash on product you dont have any knowledge off?

Ill bash microsoft products so everyone will think i am cool and highly skillful in it ways. What are you, a manchild?

[-]

Nonaveragemonkey@reddit

When we pay hyperv specialists to do the environments and they still suck in comparison to something that generally not considered enterprise ready like proxmox.. its hyperv. Second tier garbage

[-]

Sobeman@reddit

"hyperv specialists" so you are not doing the work and when it goes to shit you are blaming the platform?

[-]

Nonaveragemonkey@reddit

Lol yes, the platform is complete shit.

[-]

degantyll@reddit

My hyper-v hosts have been very reliable. I would like to know your experience please.

[-]

Nonaveragemonkey@reddit

Across a few hundred hyperv hosts, with engineers who claim its their specialty, its always been a nightmare. Like 4-5 times the downtime of estimate, or proxmox, on good days, clustering issues, fail over, obscene overhead issues. Not as just one company, several. Hosted as msps and in house... its never on par with even proxmox in performance.

Frankly you could not pay me enough to work with hyperv ever again. Bezos income wouldn't even be enough..too many nightmares.

[-]

thatfrostyguy@reddit

That sounds more like the staff didn't know how to use it lol

[-]

Nonaveragemonkey@reddit

Hyper v is already a second rate product, microswont even use it as the backbone for Azure it sounds like. So I woudlnt even waste time trying to make it sound decent

[-]

topher358@reddit

You’ve had a wildly different experience then me. Which is fine. It works for a lot of people

[-]

degantyll@reddit

Interesting, I don’t have such a big setup, maybe thats why I haven’t run into those issues. Thank you for the info

[-]

Nonaveragemonkey@reddit

You'd see it even on small environments. 3-4 hosts. Just gets exponentially worse.

[-]

teqqyde@reddit

Besides of Veeam the support ist quite limited. If you look into enterprise backup software like Veritas NetBackup, Rubik, Cohesity and so one, just a fraction of the vmware featrues are available.
But yes, much more then the OP mention ones.

[-]

topher358@reddit

I think the OP is trying to avoid VMware like most of the world which is why I didn’t bring it up. The traditional options on this list would all be ones I don’t consider business class. VMware is still a good product, it’s a shame that Broadcom is ruining it.

[-]

Roland_Bodel_the_2nd@reddit

I don't really do windows, so then it's Linux and KVM underneath anyway, so then you decide whether you like the proxmox UI or the XCP-NG UI better

[-]

nav13eh@reddit

I'm kinda surprised by the amount of support for Hyper-V. It works I guess but it's very underwhelming and stability is questionable. It feels like it came from the past.

I wonder if it comes from familiarity with Windows as a platform?

But honestly, if you embrace Linux based solutions, the potential upsides are greater.

[-]

walkalongtheriver@reddit

That and I guess people just assume windows is in use?

OP didn't put enough info in really to know.

[-]

Horsemeatburger@reddit

I'm kinda surprised by the amount of support for Hyper-V. It works I guess but it's very underwhelming and stability is questionable.

So pretty much like the guest OS on top of it.

If you're a Windows shop then I doubt the reliability of Hyper-V is really an issue. It's based on Windows, so it's a known entity. And having the same patch cycle and management tools is an advantage.

It feels like it came from the past.

Not sure that's true. Even Hyper-V 2019 (the last version I have used in anger) was pretty good, even stability wise. Performance was worse than ESXi of course, and the lack for hardware passthrough was a pain (also since MS EOL'd RemoteFX, which worked pretty well). But the problems I experienced were all somewhere in the management stack, not the hypervisor itself.

If you want to see a blast from the past, try XCP-ng.

[-]

ConversationNice3225@reddit

The entire multi-billion dollar Azure backend is HyperV based...

[-]

Horsemeatburger@reddit

Well, it's the cloud platform with the most outages, so maybe that's why.

[-]

tin-naga@reddit

I miss DRS but Proxmox has been more stable than the VMware environment I inherited.

[-]

Barrerayy@reddit

if your virt needs are windows servers, just run hyper v

If you are linux based, and cant afford nutanix, use proxmox. There also other options like scale computing etc

[-]

KillingTime1212@reddit

I go with whoever Veeam supports. Just Proxmox?

[-]

ConstructionSafe2814@reddit

I'm not overly happy with the Proxmxox integration of Veeam. No live restores possible and AFAIK, you have to manually add/delete every VM that you create.

So IMHO, the integration seems immature.

I actually like PBS much better than Veaam (against my own expectation)

[-]

tlrman74@reddit

For VEEAM to pull new VM's into a job seamlessly use Resource Pools on Proxmox and in your VEEAM jobs. Any new VM that gets created will then be detected the next time the VEEAM job runs against your configured Resource Pool names.

[-]

ConstructionSafe2814@reddit

Thanks for the tip. I didn't know that!

[-]

gonenutsbrb@reddit

Hyper-V is better supported than Proxmox is, by a decent margin. Proxmox support is improving though.

[-]

bawragory@reddit

XCP-ng is also supported

[-]

Arudinne@reddit

Veeam also supports Hyper-V.

[-]

Horsemeatburger@reddit

Personally, neither.

First of all, oVirt is a management pane for KVM on RHEL and clones, not a standalone hypervisor. I wouldn't use it outside a homelab as las we tried it it was still buggy, and there are better solutions for KVM, such as OpenNebula (which we use for our large clusters).

Proxmox is fine if you need an all-in-one virtualization platform and the deployment is smaller. That's not us so I wouldn't use that.

XCP-ng is essentially what XenServer was 10 years ago, based on a dead-end hypervisor (XEN) which has lost all its main supporters around the same time. Development for XEN is very limited (the current major release came out in 2010!), and XCP-ng's development has been truly glacial. In my view it would be reckless to put it into production today.

For anything serious outside the big vendors (Broadcom, Nutanix), OpenShift/OpenStack and OpenNebula on RHEL, Oracle Linux or Alma Linux are the best options.

Careful with Harvester, aside from still being a resource hog there are now strong signs that SUSE, now owned by Private Equity, is on a path of stronger monetarization for Harvester and Rancher, so it's probably become a vendor locked platform.

[-]

NightOfTheLivingHam@reddit

didnt know SUSE got bought out, I was looking at harvester.. no longer.

[-]

Horsemeatburger@reddit

Yes, sadly. They already went PE on openSUSE and asked them to stop the SUSE name.

[-]

NightOfTheLivingHam@reddit

cool, I hope opensuse forks everything just before the buyout.

PE can eat a dick.

[-]

Horsemeatburger@reddit

OpenSUSE itself won't go away (it's community based), they will just be called something else (and very likely won't have access to SUSE's SEL sources for much longer).

But yeah, you're right about PE.

[-]

bunnythistle@reddit

Hyper-V

[-]

MashPotatoQuant@reddit

When you pronounce it high perv it makes me want to use it more but nah

[-]

bunnythistle@reddit

I don't think anyone pronounces it like that

[-]

Antoine-UY@reddit

With a pause and slight rising intonation, you could easily turn it into "Hi, pervy!"

[-]

flakpyro@reddit

XCP-NG just had a big release today after 18 months of through testing: (Don't want to mess up storage!) they have been very consistent with a slow but steady trickle of updates and improvments to 8.3.

https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2026/05/05/qcow2-is-now-ga-in-xcp-ng/

The 9 Alpha release seems promising so far too.

[-]

RedGobboRebel@reddit

Hyper-V for general use HA hypervisor cluster. Too many systems / vendors still require Windows only and the licensing works well as do the enterprise support tools.

Whenever I've worked with production Kubernetes and Docker elements, they sit in their own clusters. The requirements have been determined by Dev / DevOps to mesh with their workflows. They don't sit on the general IT Infrastructure hypervisors. If Dev asks, I prefer Proxmox due to their backup tools and I get more IT team applicants in the Midwest with Proxmox/KVM experience than XCP.

[-]

theoriginalharbinger@reddit

"traditional enterprise environment"

What, pray tell, might that be, in numerical terms? And when you say HA, that can be interpreted as requiring the likes of VMware's vLockstep, or availability across stretched clusters like Zerto, or just HA within more localized fault domains (IE, "Server dies, server below it takes load").

The reason competition exists in this space is because the needs of an enterprise with a highly monolithic solution with vertical scaling will vary quite broadly from an enterprise with elastic requirements that scales horizontally. Nobody is going to care if, say, Gap has a three-second blip in its retail commerce site, but all the unholy hells of regulation will rain down upon Visa if the transaction journals are not kept neatly.

So - what exactly are your requirements?

[-]

sderby@reddit

nobody is going to care if Gap has a three-second blip in its retail commerce site

Let me introduce you to Karen from Accounting

[-]

RansomStark78@reddit

Always a karen from the burbs drives a white minivan and bakes awful cookies

[-]

Shington501@reddit

Check out Karios

[-]

kanisae@reddit

I've done large scale clusters of Ovirt for misson critical database and application servers. I liked the "everything is linux with a few front ends for web management and HA" design of Ovirt. It normally has an equivilant for VMware's hypervisor level features and has a deep level of RBAC controls I have used extensively.

I have small Proxmox environments and while they are lighter and more flexible hardware-wise than Ovirt, I miss some of the Ovirt features in different storage backends and RBAC etc.

[-]

JohnnyricoMC@reddit

I've done a few oVirt & RHV setups. Now I'm doing Proxmox setups. We've stopped doing oVirt because Red Hat essentially gave it the kiss of death when they pulled the plug on Red Hat Virtualization in favor of Openshift Virtualization. And even before that we saw recurring issues with the platform that made it a tough sell before Broadcom decided to steer VMWare into the ground.

Now for our clients looking to migrate away from VMWare we're doing Proxmox if they're not interested in Kubernetes (with Kubevirt) or Openshift (with Openshift Virtualisation).

[-]

The_Everchanging@reddit

Hyper-V. I think people are still feeling disenchantment after working with VMware for so long, but it works just fine.

[-]

mrbiggbrain@reddit

There is no one size fits all, it comes down to a ton of compromises on features, support, and a few other key differences. Any of them can be fine, but you need to accept the pro's and cons based on your needs.

[-]

HexLayer3@reddit

We are running both XCP-ng and Proxmox. XCP-ng has better "clusters" and terraform support (as in - create a VM in a cluster, I do not care which node - as it should be) and in Proxmox it is (here are all my nodes, please initially create it on node 2, but then I do not care. HA is much better with Proxmox 9 but still is not as painless as XCP-ng). We are moving to proxmox simply because of the backup speed. YMMV but both could be solid options. For k8s we do run Talos linux under the hood, but if you need to squeeze every bit of performance you are better off with bare metal talos. Also think about your storage and requirements first - will make it easier to disqualify some of the candidates.

[-]

hops_on_hops@reddit

Enterprise = whoever is selling the best-fit support and pricing. The actual functionality is way down the list of priorities.

Home = proxmox

[-]

MaliciousMango1@reddit

Proxmox

[-]

thatfrostyguy@reddit

Hyper-v

[-]

tc982@reddit

I would go for the KVM option, as this is the clear winner in the Hypervisor wars. All solutions that are in the market are based on KVM (HPE Morpheus, Nutanix, Proxmox, etc). This will have the most option for the feature and better 3rd party integrations.

For now, if you are coming from VMware, you will almost always have less features then before...

[-]

Proxmox is the way

[-]

rejectionhotlin3@reddit

freebsd bhyve

[-]

BCIT_Richard@reddit

I have multiple proxmox nodes, Love love love it.

I never heard of oVirt, just ESXI, Proxmox, & XCP will look into it.

[-]

GallowWho@reddit

OpenStack or just use a KVM depending on your needs.