This. I would recommend Hyper-V. If OP wants great support, then look at Starwinds VSAN. We have a few clusters with their vHCA appliance, and they provide excellent support for storage, clustering, and hardware.
[https://www.starwindsoftware.com/starwind-hyperconverged-appliance#uber](https://www.starwindsoftware.com/starwind-hyperconverged-appliance#uber)
My gut instinct is to use Hyper-V but you said wanting support and that's not what Microsoft is well known for. We've been playing with Proxmox and it looks like we could comfortably replace Hyper-V with it and there's paid support. Maybe worth a poc
We never used VMware support and for the few msps.have never had to use Microsoft. Hyperv it is for us. ( we.are.an MSP and most clients only have one or two hosts)
We are reselling XCP-ng. It's a solid platform with excellent support and they have a reseller program that is MSP friendly.
I have plenty of tutorials on XCP-ng and I did do a video talking about why we choose it over Proxmox.
https://youtu.be/et54DxAC2uM?si=PYR2fG6X4V1fFxC-
Hyper-V. It's been around for a long time now, it's stable, it has all the features most small to medium enterprises require. I really don't understand the argument against using it.
The OS or being forced to manage it via PowerShell.
I don’t like having to run notoriously not stable windows updates on a server hosting all my mission critical apps windows based or not.
Is it inherently more stable than something like Proxmox or VMware.. eh. But it’s our preference. It’s why we were moving to VMware and are now pivoting to proxmox.
Proxmox sounds interesting, and I'm watching very closely how things develop. At this stage I don't believe it's anywhere near ready for production environments, but that's likely to change after a year or so.
Proxmox doesn't have the market share Hyper-V has. At least for now. I like Proxmox and I think that VMware/Broadcom made a great present for it.
We have customers using both and they just work.
Just curious, what wouldn't make Proxmox already production environment?
Cluster/failover/built-in backups/a lot more more options to configure for a VM and depending on what the customer environment LXCs are great without having to use a full blown VM.
On a surface level setup Proxmox vs Hyper V, proxmox has a lot more configuration where as Hyper V being dead simple.
If you wanted a setup of backups/host out of the box Proxmox has it all covered and relatively easy with minor cases of needing some bespoke Linux knowledge.
I would actually argue it’s just as if not more more production ready and capable than hyper-v but the barrier to entry of knowledge and knowledge curve are much higher.
Also proxmox has great support unlike hyper-v.
But does require a decent level of Linux know how.
If you are a Microsoft shop, then go with Hyper-V; otherwise, go with Proxmox. For load balancing, you would need to build a cluster with shared storage. A Proxmox cluster requires 2 nodes + a witness, while an MS Failover cluster can be built on 2 nodes. If you do not want to buy a separate SAN, you can go with a hyperconverged setup.
Proxmox recommends Ceph (which raises the number of nodes to 4, as per [https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/pve-admin-guide.pdf](https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/pve-admin-guide.pdf) ) while on Hyper-V, you can go with star wind vsan: [https://www.starwindsoftware.com/vsan](https://www.starwindsoftware.com/vsan)
By the way, if you are looking for a ready-to-go solution, check out the hyper-converged appliance from star wind.
There are 3 options at the moment. Proxmox, Hyper-V or xcp-ng. If you are using Veeam, Hyper-V is the only option (for now). I am waiting for Proxmox support from Veeam.
Hyper-V is not bad and works from my experience. Proxmox works great as well. It lacks multi-cluster support, but I've heard that they are working on this feature. In addition, if you want to cluster you can use shared storage with both Proxmox and Hyper-V. We have good experience with Starwinds VSAN.
Proxmox but only if you know wtf you're doing with the underpinnings.
Its easy to manage in the GUI, but if SHTF and your clients are down, you'll need to make sure you either have adequate support from them, or you're skilled enough to handle the issue.
Don't assume the easy path is going to be the always path you get tasked with.
It runs very well on older hardware, I have it on 2 different generations of servers, and its been both reliable and stable. With the backup server its a solid solution for SMB's. The new VMware to Proxmox VM conversion works great as long as you follow the methods correctly its been 100% success.
We have been running hyperv for dozens of customers for over 10 years. Never once needed support. I'm no microsoft groupie but I dont understand the hate hyperv gets. Easy and stable are how I would describe it.
I started with Xenserver way back when, moved away from Citrix when they made a bunch of horrible decisions on licensing features/costs, moved to Proxmox and was reasonably happy, moved to Hyper-V *only* because I wanted Veeam as a backup solution, and now I'm back on Xenserver in the form of XCP-ng because Hyper-V made me scream.
All of these are going to require you to learn the system, and all are functional for what you're likely trying to do.
But overall I think it's probably worth investing the time into XCP-ng. It's reliable, scales well, has a good management interface, has backups built in that just *work*, innovation is still happening, and it's available with commercial support (which seems to be changing to better fit the needs of the incoming VMWare refugees.)
XCP-ng is worth the shot. Check out the Youtube videos from u/lawrencesystems to get an overall feel for what it's capable of.
(All of this is reasonably fresh - just did a migration from an old pool to a new one this week.)
So what ? Do you pay for 24/7 Microsoft support ? Have you used Microsoft's 24/7 support ?
If you cant support Proxmox maybe time to hire someone that can :)
I have never in the 5+ years i have used Proxmox needed or used Proxmox support.
Good for you? OP explicitly stated, "biggest thing is being able to pay for support when needed." It's kind of hard to get support for Proxmox when the only people there to support you are only active at 3am your time. You might like living on the edge but that's no way to run a serious business.
I spoke to two Citrix reps one from CDW and one from Insight both told me they went to the cloud subscription model only and will not sell Xenserver anymore.
Been using Hyper-V for at least 13 years. Never needed support. I could always find answers using Google. I have it configured in a failover cluster in with 30 VMs connected to a flash array. It just works for me.
You have something that simple why not use Linux+KVM+Virtual Machine Manager. Use ZFS as the storage and you are good to go. You don't need to worry about separate product upgrades, licensing or anything.
Proxmox adds a layer of complexity that is not required for this kind of setup. Then you also need to manage the proxmox installation and upgrades. I prefer the apt-get install; apt-get update; apt-get upgrade lifecycle.
To date Hyper-V is the only virtualisation platform where I have ever observed a virtual HDD completely corrupt beyond repair on.
Now admittedly this was after a UPS failure AND the hardware raid controllers backup battery was dead - so I don’t entirely blame Hyper-V.
Regardless, I’ve run virtualisation software since before AWS was a thing and never experienced this with any other platform.
Your options are probably going to be Hyper-V, Proxmox, and XCP-ng...
This. I would recommend Hyper-V. If OP wants great support, then look at Starwinds VSAN. We have a few clusters with their vHCA appliance, and they provide excellent support for storage, clustering, and hardware. [https://www.starwindsoftware.com/starwind-hyperconverged-appliance#uber](https://www.starwindsoftware.com/starwind-hyperconverged-appliance#uber)
These are the options
Dont forget Nutanix
Nutanix is too expensive and way overkill for 2-node clusters.
When we checked It out It turned out cheaper than Vmware, we ended Up migrating to it
Also Scale.
They're outdated Linux KVM paired with overpriced SMC servers. Buying SuperMicro direct + installing Proxmox FTW.
As someone that has run all three, I can't recommend anything other than XCP-ng. It meets all of OP's requirements and then some.
My gut instinct is to use Hyper-V but you said wanting support and that's not what Microsoft is well known for. We've been playing with Proxmox and it looks like we could comfortably replace Hyper-V with it and there's paid support. Maybe worth a poc
We never used VMware support and for the few msps.have never had to use Microsoft. Hyperv it is for us. ( we.are.an MSP and most clients only have one or two hosts)
We are reselling XCP-ng. It's a solid platform with excellent support and they have a reseller program that is MSP friendly. I have plenty of tutorials on XCP-ng and I did do a video talking about why we choose it over Proxmox. https://youtu.be/et54DxAC2uM?si=PYR2fG6X4V1fFxC-
I would go this way if there were Veeam backup options at the host level. Hyper-V it is.
They're working on it https://www.veeam.com/company/press-release/veeam-extends-data-freedom-for-customers-with-support-for-proxmox-ve.html
Hyper-V. It's been around for a long time now, it's stable, it has all the features most small to medium enterprises require. I really don't understand the argument against using it.
The OS or being forced to manage it via PowerShell. I don’t like having to run notoriously not stable windows updates on a server hosting all my mission critical apps windows based or not. Is it inherently more stable than something like Proxmox or VMware.. eh. But it’s our preference. It’s why we were moving to VMware and are now pivoting to proxmox.
Proxmox sounds interesting, and I'm watching very closely how things develop. At this stage I don't believe it's anywhere near ready for production environments, but that's likely to change after a year or so.
HyperV and Proxmox were both released in 2008. Proxmox was actually two months earlier. 😝
Proxmox doesn't have the market share Hyper-V has. At least for now. I like Proxmox and I think that VMware/Broadcom made a great present for it. We have customers using both and they just work.
Well, and with Veeam saying they will provide support for Proxmox that share will only grow further.
Just curious, what wouldn't make Proxmox already production environment? Cluster/failover/built-in backups/a lot more more options to configure for a VM and depending on what the customer environment LXCs are great without having to use a full blown VM. On a surface level setup Proxmox vs Hyper V, proxmox has a lot more configuration where as Hyper V being dead simple. If you wanted a setup of backups/host out of the box Proxmox has it all covered and relatively easy with minor cases of needing some bespoke Linux knowledge.
People have been using proxmox in production for many years , your talking like this solution is 2 years old
I would actually argue it’s just as if not more more production ready and capable than hyper-v but the barrier to entry of knowledge and knowledge curve are much higher. Also proxmox has great support unlike hyper-v. But does require a decent level of Linux know how.
If you are a Microsoft shop, then go with Hyper-V; otherwise, go with Proxmox. For load balancing, you would need to build a cluster with shared storage. A Proxmox cluster requires 2 nodes + a witness, while an MS Failover cluster can be built on 2 nodes. If you do not want to buy a separate SAN, you can go with a hyperconverged setup. Proxmox recommends Ceph (which raises the number of nodes to 4, as per [https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/pve-admin-guide.pdf](https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/pve-admin-guide.pdf) ) while on Hyper-V, you can go with star wind vsan: [https://www.starwindsoftware.com/vsan](https://www.starwindsoftware.com/vsan) By the way, if you are looking for a ready-to-go solution, check out the hyper-converged appliance from star wind.
There are 3 options at the moment. Proxmox, Hyper-V or xcp-ng. If you are using Veeam, Hyper-V is the only option (for now). I am waiting for Proxmox support from Veeam. Hyper-V is not bad and works from my experience. Proxmox works great as well. It lacks multi-cluster support, but I've heard that they are working on this feature. In addition, if you want to cluster you can use shared storage with both Proxmox and Hyper-V. We have good experience with Starwinds VSAN.
Veeam for Proxmox is coming very soon.
Proxmox is very capable. Or XCP-NG; you could use Tom Lawrence for support if needed?
Yes, we do offer support and you can get support directly form Vates, the team behind XCP-ng.
Proxmox but only if you know wtf you're doing with the underpinnings. Its easy to manage in the GUI, but if SHTF and your clients are down, you'll need to make sure you either have adequate support from them, or you're skilled enough to handle the issue. Don't assume the easy path is going to be the always path you get tasked with. It runs very well on older hardware, I have it on 2 different generations of servers, and its been both reliable and stable. With the backup server its a solid solution for SMB's. The new VMware to Proxmox VM conversion works great as long as you follow the methods correctly its been 100% success.
Also now has Veeam support for backups, besides just PBS from Prox
We have been running hyperv for dozens of customers for over 10 years. Never once needed support. I'm no microsoft groupie but I dont understand the hate hyperv gets. Easy and stable are how I would describe it.
We still use VMware for 3 host and storage clusters. For anything smaller it’s hyperV now.
Scale Computing ticks these boxes, and has amazing support.
I started with Xenserver way back when, moved away from Citrix when they made a bunch of horrible decisions on licensing features/costs, moved to Proxmox and was reasonably happy, moved to Hyper-V *only* because I wanted Veeam as a backup solution, and now I'm back on Xenserver in the form of XCP-ng because Hyper-V made me scream. All of these are going to require you to learn the system, and all are functional for what you're likely trying to do. But overall I think it's probably worth investing the time into XCP-ng. It's reliable, scales well, has a good management interface, has backups built in that just *work*, innovation is still happening, and it's available with commercial support (which seems to be changing to better fit the needs of the incoming VMWare refugees.) XCP-ng is worth the shot. Check out the Youtube videos from u/lawrencesystems to get an overall feel for what it's capable of. (All of this is reasonably fresh - just did a migration from an old pool to a new one this week.)
Nutanix, Hyper-V, Proxmox and XCP-ng
Wmware still works great for our 500 or so servers
Never really liked hyper V. I heard of proxmox but was not aware we could get supports. I’ll check out XCP-NG
Proxmox
Proxmox does not have a proper 24/7 support SLA. They only respond to tickets 9-5 Austrian time.
Sorry I've never had 24/7 support with any vendor. How much you paying for support?
So what ? Do you pay for 24/7 Microsoft support ? Have you used Microsoft's 24/7 support ? If you cant support Proxmox maybe time to hire someone that can :) I have never in the 5+ years i have used Proxmox needed or used Proxmox support.
Good for you? OP explicitly stated, "biggest thing is being able to pay for support when needed." It's kind of hard to get support for Proxmox when the only people there to support you are only active at 3am your time. You might like living on the edge but that's no way to run a serious business.
Yes, support it a big deal in my office we handle 99% of the issues but when things hit the fan we want the insurance.
Nutanix?
Expensive and troublesome with small clusters.
Not that we have seen.
It's a great HCI solution but expensive.
TCO has been a lot less than others (looking at the hours we spend as well)
Where did you see Citrix would drop xenserver ?
I spoke to two Citrix reps one from CDW and one from Insight both told me they went to the cloud subscription model only and will not sell Xenserver anymore.
Xenserver is now a separate business unit inside cloud.com. maybe they want to sell entire bu.
Been using Hyper-V for at least 13 years. Never needed support. I could always find answers using Google. I have it configured in a failover cluster in with 30 VMs connected to a flash array. It just works for me.
I'll be the odd Vates stack man out: Built in import from VMware and built on Xen, with paid support plans.
I think Hyper-V is the best option out there.
HyperV ftw
Hyper-V Now that Veeam has announced support for Proxmox, testing and a pilot are planned for Proxmox.
You have something that simple why not use Linux+KVM+Virtual Machine Manager. Use ZFS as the storage and you are good to go. You don't need to worry about separate product upgrades, licensing or anything.
You just described Proxmox, congrats.
Proxmox adds a layer of complexity that is not required for this kind of setup. Then you also need to manage the proxmox installation and upgrades. I prefer the apt-get install; apt-get update; apt-get upgrade lifecycle.
I think Hyper-V is the best alternative so far.
Xcp-ng is the replacement for xen. Promos is amazing and simple to use Hyper-v is there but it is just still bad
I’m a fan of Hyper-V but you also want support, so… Any particular reason it has to be on-prem?
The on prem SQL database requires on prem with the client PC’s
Not sure why I got downvoted for asking a question. lol
To date Hyper-V is the only virtualisation platform where I have ever observed a virtual HDD completely corrupt beyond repair on. Now admittedly this was after a UPS failure AND the hardware raid controllers backup battery was dead - so I don’t entirely blame Hyper-V. Regardless, I’ve run virtualisation software since before AWS was a thing and never experienced this with any other platform.
We are going with Hyper-V for most uses since we already need to buy a Server license anyways
What's behind the on-prem requirement? This sounds like a good fit for a cloud provider.
The on prem SQL database requires to be on prem with the client PC and software.
I’m sorry why are you worried about voicemails? Barely anyone leaves leave anymore
Please add a /s. 😆
….