Broadcom’s acquisition of VMware has altered VMware’s licensing, product portfolio and partner ecosystem, prompting managed service providers (MSPs) to reassess the cost and long‑term fit of VMware environments. For MSPs considering a migration in 2026, five leading VMware alternatives are Azure Virtual Machines, Google Compute Engine, Nutanix AHV, Scale Computing and Red Hat OpenShift Virtualization. The best option depends on each customer environment and the MSP’s service model; Azure Virtual Machines is identified as the best overall choice, especially for Microsoft‑centric customers.
VMware alternatives comparison
The five platforms are compared on the criteria most relevant to MSPs: pricing, management and automation, compatibility, migration support, ease of use and suitability for managing client environments. In summary: Azure Virtual Machines offers extensive automation and public‑cloud support with Azure Migrate and pay‑as‑you‑go, reservations and Spot VMs; Google Compute Engine provides widespread cloud infrastructure with migrate‑to‑VM options and pay‑as‑you‑go plus discounts; Nutanix AHV emphasizes built‑in automations and hybrid cloud portability via Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2) with BYOL and pay‑as‑you‑go licensing options; Scale Computing targets plug‑and‑play, edge and on‑premises deployments with per‑core subscription terms (1, 3 and 5 years); and Red Hat OpenShift Virtualization unifies VM and container management with the Migration Toolkit for Virtualization and subscription pricing.
Azure Virtual Machines: Best overall VMware alternative
Azure Virtual Machines extends Microsoft’s ecosystem and is particularly well suited to customers already using Microsoft products such as Microsoft 365 and Dynamics. Azure supports a wide range of VM sizes and types, including GPU and high‑performance compute options, and provides advanced security management, rapid backup and restore, and global infrastructure for scale and availability. Pricing options include pay‑as‑you‑go, reservations and Spot Virtual Machines; new Azure customers can receive $200 in credit for their first 30 days. Reported advantages include extensive Microsoft integration, flexible pricing and high compatibility and availability; drawbacks noted include a wide array of options that can be overwhelming, additional configuration for non‑Microsoft integrations and mixed feedback on customer service quality.
Google Compute Engine: Best for widespread cloud infrastructure
Google Compute Engine delivers scalable VMs and deep integration with Google Cloud services, including analytics and machine learning capabilities. It supports custom machine types and sustained use discounts; new customers receive $300 in free trial credits to use within 90 days. Pricing follows a pay‑as‑you‑go model with sustained‑use and committed‑use discounts. Pros cited are highly scalable infrastructure, deep Google Cloud integration and an extensive global network; cons include a potentially steep learning curve for teams unfamiliar with Google Cloud, complex pricing options and customer support that has room for improvement.
Nutanix AHV: Best for built‑in automations
Nutanix AHV is the native hypervisor in the Nutanix Cloud Platform, consolidating compute, storage, networking and security under a single Prism control plane. It offers a consumer‑grade UI, one‑click upgrades, built‑in live migration, high‑availability clustering and metro‑scale failover. Hybrid‑cloud portability is supported through Nutanix Cloud Clusters (NC2), which enable workload movement to Azure or AWS without redesigning applications. Licensing and pricing options for Nutanix include Bring‑Your‑Own‑License (BYOL) and pay‑as‑you‑go; listed pricing estimates cover Nutanix software only and exclude cloud infrastructure costs. Strengths include a unified control plane and no separate hypervisor licensing cost; limitations include the need to run on Nutanix‑certified hardware, a smaller ecosystem than VMware and limited support for external SANs.
Scale Computing: Best for plug‑and‑play deployments
Scale Computing packages virtualization, storage and networking into a single appliance aimed at edge and distributed environments. Its platform offers zero‑touch cluster deployment via Fleet Manager, built‑in self‑healing, one‑click full‑stack rolling upgrades and a unified browser‑based interface. Scale’s HyperCore OS delivers compute, storage, networking and backup in one stack. Licensing uses a per‑core annual subscription with one‑, three‑ and five‑year terms; pricing varies by edition and deployment and should be requested from the vendor. Advantages include rapid deployment, automated updates and transparent per‑core pricing over multi‑year terms; trade‑offs are limited native support for external SANs, a smaller ecosystem and basic snapshot/cloning features.
Red Hat OpenShift Virtualization: Best for unified VM and container management
Red Hat OpenShift Virtualization allows organizations to run and manage virtual machines alongside container workloads within the OpenShift platform. It supports VMware vSphere migrations through the Migration Toolkit for Virtualization and provides centralized management via OpenShift. Red Hat also offers an OpenShift Virtualization Engine for organizations primarily focused on VMs. Pricing is subscription‑based and varies by environment; prospective customers should contact Red Hat or a partner for current pricing. Strengths include stability, security and wide enterprise compatibility; limitations include subscription costs at scale, a requirement for specialized knowledge and more limited third‑party application support.
What MSPs should consider before migrating VMware customers
MSPs should evaluate licensing and total cost of ownership by comparing pricing models, subscription terms, support costs, migration incentives and potential infrastructure expenses, and prioritize platforms with transparent licensing. Assess migration complexity, including available tools for VM conversion, data mobility and network reconfiguration, and whether workloads require downtime or replatforming. Map feature parity and gaps—live migration, high availability and snapshots—against customer SLAs and note which capabilities are native or require add‑ons. Evaluate operational readiness: deployment, management and automation capabilities, staff training needs, and fit with monitoring, backup and disaster recovery workflows. Finally, review the vendor’s partner program, technical resources, documentation and support options, since a strong ecosystem can simplify migration and ongoing management.
Key virtualization features to evaluate
Critical features for replacing VMware include effective virtual machine management (provisioning, cloning, snapshot management), networking capabilities (virtual switches, routers, firewalls), storage management (disk provisioning, storage pools, deduplication), security (VM isolation, secure boot, encryption and compliance tools) and robust backup and recovery (automated backups, point‑in‑time snapshots and disaster recovery plans).
Bottom line: as MSPs navigate VMware’s evolving licensing, product and partner landscape, the five alternatives reviewed offer distinct strengths for different client profiles. From Azure and Google Cloud’s scalability and ecosystem integration to Nutanix’s automation, Scale Computing’s appliance simplicity and OpenShift’s unified VM/container approach, MSPs should match platform capabilities to customer needs and request customized pricing and migration assessments.
Methodology
The evaluation focused on core virtualization features, pricing, management and automation, compatibility, customer support, ease of use and suitability for managing multiple client environments. Product information was gathered from vendor product pages, documentation, pricing pages and other publicly available materials; because costs vary by deployment, MSPs should assess client requirements and request customized pricing where necessary.
Originally published by Collins Ayuya in 2025 and updated by Luis Millares in August 2026.
