Life After VMware - A summary and comparison of hypervisors!
Summary
TLDRIn this comprehensive video, the host dives into the world of hypervisor alternatives to VMware ESXi, focusing on four key platforms: XCP-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix. Each platform is evaluated based on features, limitations, storage capabilities, backup solutions, live migration, workload balancing, high availability, user interface, minimum hardware requirements, and cost. The host emphasizes the rapid changes in the virtualization space and the growing support for open-source hypervisors from third-party vendors. While no definitive recommendation is made, insights are provided into the strengths of each platform, suggesting XCP-ng for its similarity to VMware, Proxmox for those with older hardware or needing container support, Hyper-V for Windows-centric environments, and Nutanix for those already invested in hyperconverged infrastructure.
Takeaways
- 📚 **VMware Alternatives**: The video series evaluates xcp-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix as alternatives to VMware ESXi and vCenter for home labs and businesses.
- 🆓 **Free Options**: xcp-ng and Proxmox are free, offering vCenter equivalent features, with Hyper-V being mostly free with some limitations on Linux OS compatibility.
- 🖥️ **User Interface (UI) and Experience**: Zen Orchestra for xcp-ng is basic but being updated, Proxmox's UI is cluttered, Hyper-V has a dull experience, and Nutanix's Prism Element is clean and user-friendly.
- 💻 **Minimum Hardware Requirements**: xcp-ng and Proxmox require a 64-bit CPU with varying RAM and storage needs, Hyper-V requires a Windows Server setup, and Nutanix has the most stringent requirements.
- 💾 **Storage Support**: All hypervisors support most storage types, with Nutanix being the outlier, only supporting hyperconverged storage within the cluster.
- 🔄 **Live Migration**: All platforms support live migration of VMs, except for Proxmox's LXC containers which require a shutdown before migration.
- 🤖 **Workload Balancing**: xcp-ng and Hyper-V offer automated workload balancing, Proxmox does not but has community scripts to help, and Nutanix supports workload bouncing.
- 🔒 **High Availability**: All hypervisors support high availability, restarting VMs on different hosts in case of host failure.
- 💰 **Cost and Support**: Support options and costs vary widely, with xcp-ng and Proxmox offering community to premium support tiers, Hyper-V being part of Windows Server costs, and Nutanix details not publicly disclosed.
- ⚙️ **Deployment and Management**: xcp-ng is most analogous to vCenter, making it familiar for VMware users, Proxmox offers advanced features for those comfortable with manual setup, and Nutanix is best for those invested in HCI.
- 🚀 **Rapid Market Changes**: The hypervisor and virtualization space is evolving quickly, with third-party backup solutions now supporting open-source hypervisors, indicating a responsive market to customer demands.
Q & A
What is the purpose of the final video in the series?
-The purpose of the final video is to aggregate and summarize the information from the last four videos, providing a roundup and a comprehensive overview of the alternatives to VMware ESXi and vCenter in a home lab or business environment.
Which hypervisors were discussed as alternatives to VMware ESXi?
-The hypervisors discussed as alternatives to VMware ESXi are XCP-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix.
What are the key differences between XCP-ng and VMware vCenter?
-XCP-ng is the most analogous to ESXi and vCenter, and it is free. It is based on Linux, entirely open source, and can be managed using the Zen Orchestra Appliance or a deployment of Zen Orchestra.
What is unique about Proxmox's deployment and features?
-Proxmox is entirely open source, based on Debian with a customized Linux kernel, and uses KVM for running VMs and LXC for running Linux containers. It supports a wide range of storage formats and deployment types and is known for its robust feature set, including SEF and ZFS.
How does Hyper-V differ from the other hypervisors mentioned?
-Hyper-V is a component of Windows Server and is closed source. It is deployed after setting up the Windows Server OS and can have different footprints based on the version of Windows Server used. Hyper-V is particularly well-suited for Windows shops.
What are the storage deployment limitations of Nutanix?
-Nutanix is an outlier as it only supports hyperconverged storage within the cluster itself, meaning there is no support for external storage access such as SAN or NAS.
What backup solutions are available for these hypervisors?
-XCP-ng has built-in backup and restore functionality and supports Veeam as a third-party backup solution. Proxmox features native backup and restore functionality through Proxmox Backup Server, with upcoming Veeam integration. Hyper-V is natively supported by major backup vendors, and Nutanix has native support for Veeam, Rubrik, and others.
How do the hypervisors compare in terms of live migration and workload balancing?
-All hypervisors support live migration of virtual machine workloads between hosts. XCP-ng automatically migrates VMs based on CPU load, Proxmox does not have built-in automated workload balancing but has community scripts for it, Hyper-V supports workload balancing for both RAM and CPU, and Nutanix supports workload bouncing across the cluster.
Which hypervisor has the most user-friendly interface?
-Nutanix's Prism Element is noted for its clean, simple, and elegant interface, which is considered by many to be superior to VMware's offerings. It provides great graphing, alerting, and VM management out of the box.
What are the minimum hardware requirements for running XCP-ng?
-XCP-ng requires a 64-bit x86 CPU running at a minimum of 1.5 GHz, with a 2 GHz and greater multi-core CPU recommended. It also requires a minimum of 2 GB of RAM, with 4 GB or more recommended, and a minimum of 46 GB of disk space, with 70 GB recommended.
How does the cost and support structure for these hypervisors differ?
-XCP-ng offers two tiers of support with different features and response times. Proxmox has four support tiers, from community support to premium. Hyper-V is essentially free with Windows Server, with pricing based on the version chosen. Nutanix does not publish retail costs publicly and is only available through channel partners.
What is the recommended approach for someone deciding between these hypervisors?
-The choice depends on the user's specific needs, priorities, and existing infrastructure. XCP-ng is most analogous to VMware, making it a good choice for those looking for a familiar environment. Proxmox is suitable for those with older hardware or needing LXC container support. Hyper-V is a good fit for Windows-centric environments. Nutanix is ideal for those already using hyperconverged infrastructure.
Outlines
😀 Evaluating Hypervisor Alternatives to VMware
The first paragraph introduces the video series focused on assessing options for transitioning from VMware and ESXi. The host, Rich, acknowledges the necessity of summarizing the previous four videos, which covered xcp-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix as alternatives. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of comparing features and limitations of each platform to aid viewers in making informed decisions. It also touches on the operating systems underlying these hypervisors, their deployment methods, and the flexibility they offer in terms of storage solutions.
🛡️ Backup Solutions and Live Migration Features
The second paragraph delves into the critical aspects of backup solutions and live migration capabilities of the discussed hypervisors. It highlights the native backup functionalities of xcp-ng and Proxmox, the support for major backup vendors for Hyper-V, and the native support for backup solutions in Nutanix. The paragraph also discusses live migration, automated workload balancing, and high availability features across all four platforms, providing insights into how each hypervisor performs these tasks.
🖥️ User Interface and Experience Comparison
The third paragraph compares the user interfaces and experiences of the four hypervisor platforms. It critiques the dated interface of xcp-ng's Zen Orchestra, the cluttered UI of Proxmox, the less-than-ideal experience of Hyper-V for non-System Center users, and the clean and modern UI of Nutanix's Prism Element. The paragraph also covers the minimum hardware requirements for each hypervisor, emphasizing the varying demands they place on system resources. It concludes with a discussion on cost and support options available for each platform, noting the rapid changes in the market and the importance of choosing a hypervisor that aligns with one's specific needs and priorities.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡VMware ESXi
💡Hyper-V
💡Proxmox
💡HCI (Hyper-Converged Infrastructure)
💡Live Migration
💡Zen Orchestra
💡Backup Solutions
💡DRS (Distributed Resource Scheduler)
💡High Availability (HA)
💡User Interface (UI) and User Experience (UX)
💡Minimum Hardware Requirements
Highlights
The series on life after VM War concludes with a roundup summarizing the last four videos.
All hypervisors discussed can replace VMware ESXi and even vCenter, with details varying.
XCP-ng is the most analogous to ESXi and vCenter, and is free.
Proxmox supports vCenter equivalent features, LXC container support, and is also free.
Hyper-V is suitable for Windows shops with some Linux OS compatibility exceptions.
Nutanix is best for VMware users and businesses invested in HCI or hyper-converged infrastructure.
XCP-ng and Proxmox are open-source with Linux roots, while Hyper-V is closed-source.
XCP-ng and Proxmox support various storage deployment methods, including HCI.
Nutanix supports only hyper-converged storage within the cluster.
XCP-ng and Proxmox have built-in backup and restore functionality, with third-party solutions emerging.
Hyper-V is natively supported by major backup vendors, and Nutanix has native support for various backup solutions.
All hypervisors support live migration of workloads, except for LXC containers in Proxmox which require shutdown.
XCP-ng offers automated workload balancing based on CPU load.
Hyper-V supports workload balancing for both RAM and CPU utilization.
Nutanix supports workload bouncing across the cluster, similar to VMware.
All four hypervisors support high availability as a core feature.
XCP-ng's Zen Orchestra interface is basic but undergoing a refresh for a modernized UI/UX.
Proxmox's UI/UX is cluttered and in need of improvement, though it offers extensive Linux functionality.
Hyper-V's user experience is considered the worst among the four, especially without System Center.
Nutanix's Prism Element offers a clean, simple, and elegant UI, superior to VMware in many ways.
Minimum hardware requirements vary among the hypervisors, with Nutanix having the most stringent requirements.
Support and cost structures differ; XCP-ng and Proxmox offer tiered support options, while Hyper-V is included with Windows Server.
Nutanix's pricing and support details are not publicly disclosed, but it offers both hardware and software solutions.
The choice of hypervisor depends on individual priorities and use cases, with each platform having its strengths and weaknesses.
Transcripts
I really thought I was done after the
last video but as many of you pointed
out and rightfully so my series on life
after VM War wasn't complete without a
Roundup summarizing the last four videos
so let's get to
it hey there H lobers self hosters it
pros and Engineers Rich here welcome to
the final final video on evaluating your
options if you're coming from the world
of VMware and esxi with this video being
my Opus my kudagra the finale of the
series that has taken up practically
four solid months of my time in this
video I'm going to attempt to Aggregate
and summarize as much of the information
as I can from the last four videos put a
nice little bow on it and hand it over
to you in the last four videos I looked
at xcp proxmox hyperv and finally new
tanx as alternatives to VMware esxi and
Venter in your home lab and for your
business all four platforms have pros
and cons so I'm going to attempt to
compare them based on their featur and
limitations in the hopes that this
summary gives you some ideas on which
direction you want to take with your
gear or business if you haven't watched
those videos I encourage you to do so
one so you know what I'm talking about
in the amount of research that went into
the summary and two to feed that YouTube
algorithm baby I'm kidding of course
what I do think though is watching those
videos will help you understand how I
came to my conclusions so with that it's
time to commit Death by PowerPoint the
first stop in our summary here is to
answer the most obvious question can
product X replace vmore in your business
or home lab for the most part all of
these hypervisors will replace vmor esxi
and even V Center but the devil friends
is always in the details let's dig in X
cpng yes hands down it is the most
analogous to esxi EnV Center and is free
proxmox yes absolutely with vcenter
equivalent features and added lxt
container support and as a friend in our
Discord is fond of saying we'll run on a
potato and is also free hyperv mostly
yes with the exception of some Linux OS
compatibility it will serve Windows
shops well and has Venter equivalent
features new tanic yes best suited for
VMware users and businesses already
invested in HCI or hyperon converged
infrastructure all of these hypervisors
will run VMS without issue and with the
exception of hyperv are either free or
have a free version that you can run in
your home lab or use to personally
evaluate it for your business before we
go deeper down the rabbit hole here
let's talk a bit about their underlying
operating systems and how they're
deployed xcp and's Roots come from the
hypervisor is based on Linux and is
entirely open source a standard
deployment of xcp consists of one or
more xcp hosts for running virtual
workloads and either the Zen Orchestra
Appliance also known as xoa or a
deployment of Zen Orchestra to manage X
cpng from a singular xoa or EXO
deployment you can manage VMS build
clusters and so on proxmox is also
entirely open source is based on Debian
with a customized Linux kernel uses KVM
for running VMS and lxc for running
Linux containers deployment of proxmox
consists of one or more independent
proxmox hosts each having their own
respective management web-based consoles
and from there you can manage vm's build
clusters and so on Microsoft hyperv is a
component of Windows server and as such
is deployed after a complete setup of
the Windows Server OS because Microsoft
offers both core and the full desktop
experience version of the Windows Server
Footprints of a hyperv deployment can be
dramatically different and management
can be done through a variety of
different consoles hyperv is entirely
closed Source lastly new tanic new tank
is comprised of a few different
deployment components ah or the
Acropolis hypervisor is the native
hypervisor that runs virtual machines
ahp is based on C OS at the time of this
video and uses KVM for virtualization in
a typical nanic deployment the
hypervisor is deployed first followed by
the CVM or controller virtual machine
there is one dedicated CVM running on
each ahv host the CVM is responsible for
all management aspects of new tanic from
configuration management storage
management cluster management and
virtual machine man management to the
guey all of those aspects run within the
CVM and while the native operating
system is open source all components of
nanic are closed Source now let's get
more specific starting with storage and
supported storage types and deployments
xcp andg supports a variety of different
storage deployment methods from local
storage to NFS and icui to HCI storage
using exos San X cpng is capable of
supporting most All Storage deployment
types proxmox like xcp is an equal
opportunity storage consumer proxmox
will will support local storage NFS SE
for HCI storage and many many more
storage formats and deployment types
hyperv is Windows and as such supports
all the same storage types that the
windows OS will from local to shared
storage via is scuzzi and so on new
tanks is the outlier among the group
it's only hypercon converged and as such
supports hypercon converged storage from
within the cluster itself this means no
external storage access with nanic
period no Sands nothing with the
exception of nanic how you present your
storage to your hypervisor won't be a
limitation if you have a sand bring your
sand if you want to build a hyper
converage cluster all of them basically
have the feature set to accommodate HCI
next stop is to compare backup solutions
for these platforms After All Storage is
great but without backup and restore
you're just waiting for failure xcp has
built-in backup and restore
functionality and most recently supports
convolt as a thirdparty backup solution
with TOS of V ongoing proxmox also
features native backup and restore
functionality through proxmox backup
server and there are public
announcements of VH integration on the
horizon hyperv is natively supported by
all major backup vendors including vhm
comall rubric and many others new tanks
has native support for vhm rubric
convolt Haiku and others when we started
this video series the landscape looked
so much different than it does right now
months back the open source hypervisors
had absolutely no third-party backup
support and now thankfully the market
has responded and xcp and proxmox are
seeing the Enterprise backup vendors
stepping up and offering support for
their platforms this is huge for those
platforms because having those options
make those platforms more appealing to
businesses that have already invested a
ton of time and money into those
thirdparty backup Solutions all right
let's dig into live migration workload
balancing and high availability features
first on the list is live migration of
workloads all hypervisors are able to
migrate live virtual machine workloads
between different hosts in a cluster
with the exception of proxmox and LXE
containers you can migrate an lxc
container from one host to another but
the lxc contain must be shut down before
migrating to another host in proxmox
next is automated workload balancing in
the world of VMware we call this DRS or
distributed resource scheduling let's
see how the Alternatives Stack Up xcp
will automatically migrate virtual
machine workloads between hosts to
balance load in the cluster workload
balancing is based on CPU load only
proxmox does not have an automated
workload balancing functionality built
in however there are ways of automating
workload balancing via community scripts
to automate moving workloads and
automated workload balancing is on their
road map hyperv supports work low
balancing for both Ram utilization and
CPU utilization of VMS in a cluster and
can be managed by using the hyperv
failover cluster manager and lastly new
tanks natively supports worklow bouncing
across the cluster similar to VMware all
four hypervisors also support High
availability as a core feature of their
clustering and will restart VMS on
different hosts in a cluster if a host
fails or goes offline so let's talk
about one of my favorite subjects the
user interface and the user experience
of these four more hypervisors X cpg's
Zen Orchestra guy in its current state
is pretty basic and feels dated with a
fair bit of wasted space but entirely
functional that being said however Vates
is working hard on an entirely refreshed
uiux for Zen orchestra that will
modernize the user experience proxmox is
a hot mess of menus and submenus at the
risk of catching heat from devoted
proxmox users the uiux is ugly cluttered
missing coherency throughout and needs
some serious TLC that being said it has
great graphing and you can do basically
every Linux function you'd want through
the GUI out of all four hypervisor uis I
think that hyperv has to be the worst
experience for those of us who don't use
system center using hyperv manager is a
painful visually dull experience thanks
to the Microsoft Management console
framework and requires you to go to
different MMC consoles to manage
different aspects of the hypervisor then
there's nanic and prism element prism
element is really nice it's clean simple
and elegant and in many ways better than
VMware by broadcom's offerings prism
element and the greater Central
Management console have fantastic
graphing alerting and VM management out
of the box now let's talk about minimum
Hardware requirements after all if you
only have a potato to run your
hypervisor on then you need to make sure
that your hypervisor will run on a
potato X cpng requires a 64-bit x86 CPU
running at a minimum of 1.5 GHz with a 2
GHz and greater multi-core CPU
recommended xcp requires a minimum of 2
GB of RAM with 4 gigs and more being
recommended minimum of 46 GB of disc
space is required with 70 GB being
recommended proxmox also requires a
64-bit xa6 CPU but does not list a
minimum clock speed requirement proxmox
requires a minimum of 1 GB of RAM but
recommends 2 GB for the host and more
for virtual machines proxmox does not
have a minimum storage requirement
hyperv requires Windows server to
function So based on the current Windows
Server 2022 minimum requirements you
need at least a 64-bit xa6 CPU with a
clock speed of 1.4 GHz a minimum of 2 GB
of RAM and at least 32 GB of storage
space for the OS install new tanks
requirements are the most stringent
among the group if you're going to use
Intel your Intel CPU needs to be at
least a Sandy Bridge generation and for
AMD CPUs must be Zen or newer you'll
need at least 32 GB of RAM for the host
you'll need at least three different
storage targets for installation your
cold storage tier needs to be at least
500 GB in size your hot storage tier
will need to be at least 200 GB or
greater and the ahv hypervisor will
require at least 32 GB of storage for
the installation and for the
business-minded of you watching this
let's talk about cost and support
starting off with xcp Vates the company
behind xcp currently offers two
different tiers of support the first
tier known as Vates VMS Pro cost $1,000
per host per year includes technical
support Zen Orchestra Enterprise
unlimited support tickets and a one
business day response time for $1,800
per host per year you can sign up for
Vates VMS Enterprise which gives you
access to Greater support experts more
Enterprise features in Zen Orchestra
initial setups support and more and
comes with a 1-hour response time for
critical issues proxmox has four
different tiers of support starting with
the lowest community community support
costs €100 per socket per year and gives
you access to their Enterprise repos all
of the features and community support
for €340 a year per socket you can
purchase basic that gives you all the
community features plus access to the
customer portal and three support
tickets a year with a response time of
one business day next is their standard
offering for € 510 per year per socket
giving you access to all the lower tiers
features but with 10 tickets per year
4-Hour response time during business
hours remote SSH support and offline
subscription key activation and lastly
their premium offering for € 1,020 per
year per socket again you get all the
lower tiers offerings but with unlimited
tickets and 2hour response time during
business hours Microsoft being Microsoft
makes pricing complicated since hyperv
is essentially free with Windows Server
your cost is going to be based on what
version of Windows Server you choose to
deploy for Windows Server 2022 the data
center version clocks in at
$615 USD and licenses you to run
unlimited windows VMS in hyperv the
Standard Edition comes in at $1,069 USD
and allows you up to two licensed
Windows VMS there are no licensing
requirements for Linux VMS when it comes
to actual support well you're going to
have to pay for that in addition lastly
new tanx unfortunately here's where we
reach a problem new tanic does not sell
directly to people and only through
Channel vars and as I've been told by
people inside nanic they do not publish
their retail cost publicly because the
perceived undercutting of the channel
Partners all this means I don't have
real numbers for what new tanks actually
cost to purchase and the support that's
provided I can say that you can purchase
new tanks as an entire TurnKey
deployment with super micro based
Hardware or just software to run on your
own Hardware as long as your Hardware
meets the new tanx hardware
compatibility list where does this leave
us well here's the thing just in the
last 4 months we've seen an incredible
amount of change in the hypervisor and
on premise virtualization space all of
these companies and many many more are
aggressively taking advantage of the
whole that broadcom left with VMware a
perfect example of this is the
thirdparty backup Solutions both xcbg
and proxmox were happily running their
own backup and Recovery Solutions with
zero interest in third party Solutions
once that broadcom bomb dropped those
companies responded to customer demands
to support those Solutions and we're now
seeing changes happening in real time I
don't know about you but I don't think
I've ever seen such a change occur in a
technology space this quickly just
imagine what the space will look like in
a year from now in terms of what
hypervisor I recommend you switch to
well you're not going to get that answer
from me all these platforms have their
strengths and weaknesses and your
priorities are going to drive which
direction you decide to go I will say
the following though X cpng will be the
most analist to vmw and Venter in terms
of deployment management and familiarity
and I say this because Zen server and
esxi have a lot of competitive history
the deployment concept is very similar
and thus have a lower learning curve
xcbg is a fantastic solution solution
prox MOX will likely be more beneficial
for those of you running on older
Hardware need lxc container support and
are not afraid to get your hands dirty
maning features like SEF ZFS and a ton
more proxmox is also a fantastic
solution I personally dislike hyperv but
as many of you reminded me in the
comparison it has its place especially
in environments where people have
already purchased Microsoft server and
are predominantly Windows shops the
familiarity of Windows makes it a viable
solution for Windows people who just
want to run a few VMS and that leaves
new tanx I'm not going to lie the prism
element and prism Central user
experiences is what all goys should be
like and it's hard not to fall in love
with that UI that being said new tanx
currently only lives in a hypercon
converged world and for many of us who
use a sand new tanx has no plate and
that is a damn shame on the other hand
people coming from vmore HCI like a Dell
VX rail platform will be very happy with
new tanx as an
alternative and that friends will do it
for this video and the life after VMware
series if you liked it throw us a sub
and a like and if you have a beef with
anything I've said here let me know in
the comments below special thank you to
YouTube members you guys help keep the
lights on and we thank you for it if
you'd like to help support the channel
consider becoming a member or buy some
of our swag it all helps us keep making
these videos and now that you finished
watching this video how about checking
out our playlist over here of other
great homelab and self-hosting videos
we've done in the past if you're looking
for your next great homelab idea we can
help
[Music]
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
How to Install VMware vSphere Hypervisor ESXi 6.7 on VMware Workstation 15
Proxmox VE Setup Guide: Everything You Need to Know
HubSpot Review: As Good as They Say? All the Pros, Cons & Pricing Info you Need to Know
Creating a Proxmox cluster with 3 old laptops
Running Confidential Workloads with Podman - Container Plumbing Days 2023
Azure Service Fabric - Tutorial 1 - Introduction
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)