coming from your link in chatter

>https://voat.co/v/technology/comments/835741

Googling Microsoft Hyper-V Server license terms also have some weasel parts in them - better compared to the things I remember from Win X, but they link to documentation for server 2008(??), where "in some cases" a hardware ID will be included. Combined with the right to change services customer has no standing IMO with lawyers available to him...

Reading comparizons of other hypervisors I reached following temp map:

Hyper-V

• + best perf for all Windows guests with paravirtualization across versions, Linux support good enough (fits my profile...)
• + broad HW support
• - closed source
• - phones home (?)

Citrix XenServer

• + total stack OS, including managment tools
• + managment up to enterprize level, but only text based
• o Paravirtualization only since 2015, unclear for which windows versions
• - HW support lagging behind Hyper-V and VMWare
• - Windows guest support last to implement "new" features when compared across hypervisors, often playing catchup?
• - not even Web managment GUI ?

VmWare vSphere/ESXi

• + small footprint
• + dynamic physical memory allocation between guest VM's with very little overhead
• + Windows and Linux guest support well/best balanced
• - paravirtualized disc access only for new windows versions (>= Vista, XP worker VMs therefore slower? Unclear if/which driver is supported in XP in latest version [boot and/or data discs] and how it compares in speed to newer OS versions)
• - free managment utilities do not support newest and best options (virtual HW support?)
• (- VMs are not allowed very beefy CPU configs typical for server VMs, no problem for me, 1 - 2 cores typical for me)

RHEL KVM

• + fully OS
• + paravirtualized disc access up to XP (good in my case, as I want high perf WS not talking home)
• + good support for newer Windows OS (dev/test tasks)
• - Linux guests are best supported if compared across guests in KVM (which I need mostly for surfing only)
• - Windows guests need quite bit of txt-based config?
• - needs more Linux knowledge than currently available near this KB

pls add inline if you have knowledge of further points...