Every European virtualization tool reviewed
Vienna, Austria
Founded 2005
Free with no feature limits / support subscriptions from about €115 per CPU per year
Free, fully featured
Best for: Organisations replacing VMware vSphere without per-core licensing
Proxmox VE is where most VMware migrations land, and the reason is what it includes rather than what it costs. KVM for virtual machines and LXC for containers come with high-availability clustering, Ceph distributed storage, built-in backup, software-defined networking and a REST API — the three expensive components of a VMware estate, all present with no feature limits in the free version.
The ESXi import wizard is what turns intention into a project that completes. Combined with a large and active community and documentation deep enough that most problems are already answered publicly, it lowers the migration risk that stops these projects more often than technical limitations do.
Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH has operated from Vienna since 2005 under AGPLv3, with support subscriptions from about €115 per CPU per year — a different order of magnitude from VMware per-core pricing rather than a discount on the same model.
The honest gaps: the interface is less polished than vCenter and that is felt daily, Ceph needs careful sizing and network design to perform properly rather than merely work, and there is no NSX-equivalent networking layer, which has to be designed around.
What Proxmox VE does well
- Clustering, Ceph and backup included at no cost
- ESXi import wizard for VMware migration
- AGPLv3 open source from an Austrian vendor since 2005
- Support subscription far cheaper than VMware
- Large, active community and deep documentation
Where Proxmox VE falls short
- Interface less polished than vCenter
- Ceph needs careful sizing and design
- No direct NSX-equivalent networking
- You operate the platform yourself
Standout feature. Clustering, distributed storage and backup included — the three things that made the VMware bill, at no licence cost.
Grenoble, France
Founded 2018
Free / Vates support from about €950 per host per year
Free
Best for: Teams wanting a Xen platform with a separate management plane and EU support
XCP-ng is the closest thing here to how a vSphere team already works, because it keeps the split people are used to: a hypervisor on the hosts and Xen Orchestra as a separate management plane, rather than managing each node directly. For an operations team migrating rather than rebuilding, that familiarity is worth more than a feature list.
Its backup and replication are unusually strong: continuous replication alongside conventional backup, live migration, and a REST API for automation — the capabilities that in a VMware estate typically arrive as separately licensed products.
The commercial support matters as much as the software. Vates SAS in Grenoble supports it from about €950 per host per year, which means a French company under EU jurisdiction is accountable for the platform — the answer to the procurement question that blocks open-source adoption in larger organisations.
A documented V2V path from VMware covers the migration. The trade-offs: a smaller community than Proxmox, the Xen Orchestra appliance is a paid convenience rather than free, and the Xen hardware ecosystem is narrower than KVM's.
What XCP-ng does well
- Separate management plane, close to the vCenter model
- Strong built-in backup and continuous replication
- Commercial support from a French vendor
- Documented V2V path from VMware
- Fully open source
Where XCP-ng falls short
- Smaller community than Proxmox
- Xen Orchestra appliance is a paid convenience
- Narrower hardware ecosystem than KVM
- Support at about €950 per host per year
Standout feature. A separate management plane and a French vendor to call — the two things that make it feel like vSphere without the licence.
Madrid, Spain
Founded 2008
Free Community Edition / Enterprise subscription on request
Free Community Edition
Best for: Distributed and edge infrastructure, or private cloud with real multi-tenancy
OpenNebula solves a problem the hypervisor managers do not attempt: running infrastructure across many sites from one control plane. Multi-site and edge clusters are orchestrated centrally across KVM, LXC and Firecracker, which is the actual shape of infrastructure for a telecoms operator, a retailer with sites, or anyone pushing compute towards where data is produced.
Multi-tenancy is built in from the start rather than layered on, so separate groups get their own quotas, networks and isolation without workarounds — the requirement that makes generic virtualisation awkward for anyone serving internal customers as tenants. Kubernetes support and hybrid cloud bursting extend the same control plane outwards.
Its strongest practical argument is that it is much lighter to operate than OpenStack while covering a similar conceptual space, which is why teams that evaluated OpenStack and recoiled tend to end up here. OpenNebula Systems has been in Madrid since 2008, Apache 2.0, with a free Community Edition and Enterprise subscriptions on request. VMware import is supported. It is overkill for a small single-site estate, the community is smaller than Proxmox's, and enterprise pricing is not published.
What OpenNebula does well
- Genuine multi-site and edge orchestration
- Multi-tenancy built in from the start
- Much lighter to operate than OpenStack
- Supports KVM, LXC and Firecracker
- Apache 2.0 from a Spanish vendor since 2008
Where OpenNebula falls short
- Overkill for a small single-site estate
- Smaller community and ecosystem
- Enterprise pricing not published
- More conceptual overhead than a hypervisor manager
Standout feature. Many sites, one control plane — the private-cloud shape OpenStack promises without the operational weight.
Nuremberg, Germany
Founded 1992
Free (Harvester open source) / SUSE subscription pricing on request
Free Harvester
Best for: Enterprises already running Kubernetes that want VMs on the same platform
SUSE Virtualization asks a reasonable question: if your team already operates Kubernetes, why run a second platform for virtual machines? Built on Harvester with KubeVirt, it runs VMs as Kubernetes workloads, so containers and virtual machines share one control plane, one set of tools and one operational model.
It is hyperconverged by design, with Longhorn providing distributed storage across the nodes themselves, so there is no separate SAN to buy, operate and eventually replace. Rancher integration brings multi-cluster management, and live migration covers the operational basics you would expect from a VM platform.
SUSE S.A. has operated from Nuremberg since 1992 and brings enterprise support and a long track record to a young platform — which matters, because Harvester is the youngest thing in this category.
Free as open source under Apache 2.0 with SUSE subscription pricing on request. The honest limits: it requires real Kubernetes expertise rather than willingness to learn, the platform is young enough that its VM-centric features trail mature rivals, and if you are not already running Kubernetes this is the wrong reason to start.
What SUSE Virtualization does well
- VMs and containers on one Kubernetes control plane
- Hyperconverged with Longhorn — no separate SAN
- Rancher integration for multi-cluster management
- German vendor with enterprise support since 1992
- Open source under Apache 2.0
Where SUSE Virtualization falls short
- Requires real Kubernetes expertise
- Youngest platform in this category
- VM-centric features trail mature rivals
- Wrong reason to adopt Kubernetes if you have not
Standout feature. One control plane for VMs and containers — if you already run Kubernetes, the second platform disappears.
London, United Kingdom
Founded 2004
Free self-supported / Ubuntu Pro from about $75 per node per year / managed pricing on request
Free, self-supported
Best for: Large private clouds where the OpenStack API surface is genuinely needed
Canonical OpenStack is the right answer to a narrower question than it appears, and Canonical is refreshingly direct about which. If you need OpenStack's full API surface — tenants, quotas, networks, images, volumes, orchestration consumed programmatically by other teams — nothing simpler substitutes. For an AWS repatriation needing comparable primitives, that is the requirement.
What Canonical adds is operability. Sunbeam simplifies deployment considerably against OpenStack's reputation, a ten-year support commitment per release addresses the lifecycle problem that makes long-lived private clouds painful, and Ceph integration and live migration cover the infrastructure basics.
The managed option is the genuinely distinctive part: Canonical operates the cloud in your data centres, which converts the OpenStack operations team you would otherwise need to hire into a subscription.
Ubuntu Pro runs from about $75 per node per year with managed pricing on request, and the software is Apache 2.0 with no per-core licensing. Canonical Ltd is London-based, so UK adequacy rather than EU establishment. It remains genuinely complex compared with a hypervisor manager, and it is overkill for a small estate.
What Canonical OpenStack does well
- Full OpenStack API surface for programmatic consumption
- Managed operations option — Canonical runs it for you
- Ten-year support commitment per release
- Sunbeam simplifies deployment considerably
- Apache 2.0, no per-core licensing
Where Canonical OpenStack falls short
- Genuinely complex next to a hypervisor manager
- Overkill for small estates
- UK rather than EU jurisdiction
- Needs OpenStack skills unless managed
Standout feature. Canonical will run the cloud for you — the OpenStack team you would have had to hire, as a subscription instead.
Schaffhausen, Switzerland
Founded 1997
Subscription per node, quoted on request
Contact sales
Best for: Hosting companies and cloud service providers reselling infrastructure
Virtuozzo is built for people selling infrastructure rather than consuming it, and every design decision follows from that. Multi-tenancy and metering are engineered for reselling — accounts, quotas, usage measurement and billing hooks — alongside a self-service portal so customers provision without a support ticket, which is what makes the economics of a hosting business work.
High container density is a margin lever rather than a technical detail: fitting more paying workloads on the same hardware goes directly to gross margin, which is why container virtualisation alongside KVM matters more here than in an enterprise estate. Integrated distributed storage removes the separate SAN, a DevOps PaaS layer adds a product to resell above raw VMs, and backup and VMware migration cover the operational side.
Virtuozzo International GmbH has been doing this since 1997 from Schaffhausen — nearly three decades in virtualisation, with OpenVZ as its open-source lineage — under Swiss jurisdiction with an EU adequacy decision. Pricing is a per-node subscription quoted on request. The limits are clear: it is the wrong fit for internal enterprise IT where none of the reselling machinery applies, pricing is not published, and it is only partially open source.
What Virtuozzo does well
- Multi-tenancy and metering built for reselling
- High container density improves margins directly
- Integrated distributed storage, no separate SAN
- Self-service portal and DevOps PaaS layer
- Swiss jurisdiction, nearly three decades of experience
Where Virtuozzo falls short
- Wrong fit for internal enterprise IT
- Pricing not published
- Only partially open source
- Swiss adequacy rather than EEA jurisdiction
Standout feature. Metering, billing hooks and a self-service portal — the parts a hosting business needs and an enterprise never uses.
Sofia, Bulgaria
Founded 2011
Subscription per usable TB, quoted on request
Contact sales
Best for: Database, VDI and other latency-sensitive workloads on European platforms
StorPool is not a hypervisor and belongs in this category because of what it plugs into. It is distributed NVMe block storage with consistent sub-millisecond latency, and it exists for the workloads where Ceph is the constraint rather than the solution — databases where tail latency is what users feel, VDI where a slow disk is a slow desktop, anything where the ninety-ninth percentile matters more than the average.
Native drivers for Proxmox, OpenNebula, OpenStack and Kubernetes mean it slots under the European virtualisation stack rather than requiring a different platform above it, and it scales without disruption as capacity grows.
The unusual commercial element is that StorPool operates the storage for you — the vendor monitors, tunes and manages it on your hardware, which removes the specialist storage expertise that a high-performance distributed system otherwise demands.
StorPool Storage has run from Sofia since 2011 under EU jurisdiction, priced per usable TB on request. The trade-offs are real: it is commercial where Ceph is free, it requires NVMe drives and a well-specified network to deliver what it promises, and it is a proprietary single-vendor dependency.
What StorPool does well
- Consistent sub-millisecond latency
- The vendor operates the storage for you
- Native drivers for Proxmox, OpenNebula, OpenStack and Kubernetes
- Scales without disruption
- Bulgarian vendor, EU jurisdiction
Where StorPool falls short
- Commercial pricing against free Ceph
- Requires NVMe and a well-specified network
- Proprietary single-vendor dependency
- Pricing quoted rather than published
Standout feature. The vendor runs the storage on your hardware — sub-millisecond latency without hiring a storage specialist.
Vienna, Austria
Founded 2001
LINSTOR and DRBD are open source and free; LINBIT SDS, HA, DR and VSAN support subscriptions start at about $1,000 per 2 nodes per year (Starter, community-style support), with Basic, Plus and Enterprise tiers adding SLA-backed response times, quoted on request
Free and open source (DRBD, LINSTOR)
Best for: Teams needing DRBD-replicated storage under Proxmox or Kubernetes
LINBIT makes DRBD, the block-level replication driver built into the Linux kernel, and LINSTOR, the orchestration layer that turns DRBD volumes into a storage pool Proxmox VE lists as a native backend alongside Ceph and ZFS.
For a cluster that wants synchronous replication without Ceph's operational weight, DRBD is the simpler alternative, and both DRBD and LINSTOR are open source rather than paid add-ons. LINBIT also supports Kubernetes and CloudStack directly, so the same replication layer follows a workload that later moves off a single hypervisor.
The commercial layer sits on top of free software rather than replacing it. LINBIT SDS, HA, DR and VSAN package the open-source core with certified binaries, cluster-wide management and a support contract, priced by cluster or node plus a per-terabyte fee.
The Starter tier begins at about $1,000 per two nodes per year with community-style support; Basic, Plus and Enterprise tiers add SLA-backed response times and are quoted on request. Running DRBD and LINSTOR unsupported remains a legitimate option for a team comfortable operating storage software itself.
LINBIT HA-Solutions GmbH has operated from Vienna since 2001, one of the older names in this category and older than most of the hypervisors it now plugs into. The honest limits: LINBIT sells a storage layer, not a hypervisor, so it only matters once Proxmox, CloudStack or Kubernetes is already the plan, and DRBD's replication model demands a well-specified network in the same way Ceph and StorPool do.
What LINBIT does well
- Free and open source, no forced subscription
- Native Proxmox VE storage backend
- Also integrates with Kubernetes and CloudStack
- Support from about $1,000 per 2 nodes/year
- Two decades of DRBD development from Vienna
Where LINBIT falls short
- Storage layer only, not a hypervisor
- Needs a well-specified network like Ceph
- Higher support tiers quoted on request
- Smaller ecosystem than Ceph or StorPool
Standout feature. The open-source replication driver Proxmox itself lists as a native storage backend, free unless you want the support contract.
Munich, Germany
Founded 2017
Ceph management platform subscription from about $600/month for 100TB, decreasing per-TB rate up to about $1,086/month at 1PB; separate Ceph support plans from about $500/month for 100TB; official Proxmox VE, Backup Server and Mail Gateway subscriptions resold at list price
Best for: Teams wanting a supported, unmodified Ceph cluster under Proxmox
croit sells a management layer for Ceph rather than a Ceph fork, which is the detail that matters most: the underlying cluster stays 100% open-source Ceph, so nothing about adopting croit locks a customer into a proprietary storage format. The web interface handles cluster bring-up, OSD and node management, monitoring and updates, cutting the time to a running cluster from days of command-line work to, by croit's own account, minutes.
As an official Proxmox Gold Partner, croit's second business is VMware-to-Proxmox migration itself: architecture design, a documented migration plan and managed support for the cut-over, on top of the storage layer Proxmox needs underneath it.
It also resells official Proxmox VE, Backup Server and Mail Gateway subscriptions directly. Pricing for the Ceph management platform is capacity-based, from about $600 a month for 100TB down to a lower per-terabyte rate near 1PB; separate Ceph support plans start near $500 a month for the same 100TB baseline.
croit GmbH has operated from Munich since its 2017 registration, under German and EU jurisdiction. The trade-offs: this is a management and migration layer rather than a from-scratch hypervisor platform, so it is worth choosing specifically for Ceph and Proxmox rather than as a general VMware exit, and capacity-based pricing means cost tracks storage growth rather than a flat subscription.
What croit does well
- Unmodified, standard open-source Ceph underneath
- Official Proxmox Gold Partner for VMware migrations
- Cluster bring-up in minutes rather than days
- Capacity-based pricing that scales with storage
- German company under EU jurisdiction
Where croit falls short
- Management layer, not a hypervisor of its own
- Only useful once Ceph is the storage choice
- Pricing rises with capacity rather than staying flat
- Smaller company than the Ceph vendors it competes with
Standout feature. A GUI over standard Ceph plus an official Proxmox partnership — the migration project and the storage layer from one Munich vendor.
Schaffhausen, Switzerland
Subscription licensed by storage capacity, from 10TB up to unlimited storage, with pay-as-you-go options for service providers; quoted on request
Best for: Organisations wanting VMs, storage and networking in one HCI package
Acronis Cyber Infrastructure is hyperconverged rather than a hypervisor on its own: KVM-based virtualisation, software-defined block, file and object storage, and software-defined networking for tenant isolation, all in one deployable stack rather than three products stitched together. That combination targets the same VMware vSAN and Nutanix comparison Proxmox and SUSE Virtualization compete in, from a different angle — storage and virtualisation designed together from the start rather than a hypervisor with a storage plugin added later.
The licensing model is capacity-based rather than per-core or per-VM: subscriptions run from 10TB up to unlimited storage, with pay-as-you-go pricing available for service providers reselling capacity, and exact numbers are quoted on request. That is a meaningfully different arithmetic from VMware's per-core licensing, and closer to how StorPool or croit price than to how Proxmox or XCP-ng do.
Acronis International GmbH is based in Schaffhausen, Switzerland — the same canton as Virtuozzo, reflecting a shared corporate history between the two — under Swiss jurisdiction with an EU adequacy decision. Acronis is better known for backup and cyber protection than for virtualisation, and Cyber Infrastructure is the product where that heritage shows: disaster recovery and backup workloads are a natural fit, general-purpose VM hosting less so, and published pricing is absent entirely.
What Acronis Cyber Infrastructure does well
- VMs, storage and networking in one HCI stack
- Capacity-based licensing, not per-core
- Strong fit for backup and disaster-recovery workloads
- Multi-tenant isolation built in
- Swiss jurisdiction, EU adequacy decision
Where Acronis Cyber Infrastructure falls short
- No published pricing at all
- Backup heritage shows more than general VM hosting
- Proprietary rather than open source
- Newer to pure virtualisation than the HCI specialists
Standout feature. Compute, storage and networking engineered together as one hyperconverged package, priced by capacity rather than by core.
London, United Kingdom
Founded 2012
Hardware-and-software appliance bundle with all HyperCloud capabilities included, no additional feature licences, per-usage fees or egress charges; pricing quoted on request
Best for: Buyers wanting a private-cloud appliance with no per-feature licensing
SoftIron HyperCloud is sold as a sealed appliance rather than software you install on your own hardware: stateless nodes that auto-configure from the cluster, distributed management with no single point of failure, and every capability included out of the box rather than gated behind a licence tier.
That is a different proposition from Proxmox or XCP-ng, which are software you run on hardware you choose — HyperCloud is hardware and software from one vendor, closer in spirit to a Nutanix appliance than to a DIY hypervisor stack.
The pricing philosophy is the headline feature: no additional feature licences, no per-usage fees and no egress charges once the appliance is bought, which is precisely the per-core, per-feature licensing model driving organisations out of VMware in the first place. Actual numbers are not published; SoftIron quotes based on the deployment.
SoftIron Ltd has operated from London since its 2012 incorporation, under UK jurisdiction with an adequacy decision covering data transfers. The trade-off for the plug-and-play appliance model is choice: buying HyperCloud means buying SoftIron's hardware as well as its software, which suits a buyer who wants one throat to choke over one who wants to keep existing servers, and there is no published price list to compare against a Proxmox or XCP-ng quote.
What SoftIron HyperCloud does well
- All capabilities included, no feature licensing
- Stateless nodes with no single point of failure
- Hardware and software from one vendor
- No per-usage or egress fees
- UK company, adequacy-covered jurisdiction
Where SoftIron HyperCloud falls short
- Hardware appliance, not software for your own servers
- No published pricing
- Locks you into SoftIron hardware
- Younger virtualisation track record than the hypervisor specialists
Standout feature. Every capability included in the appliance price — the per-feature licensing VMware customers are fleeing, deliberately absent.
Hamburg, Germany
Founded 2016
Essential from €149/month (up to 3 servers, community support) / Business from €294/month / Business Pro from €594/month / Enterprise from €894/month (24/7 support) / Enterprise Plus quoted on request
Best for: Kubernetes-native teams wanting VMs and containers on one control plane
Kubermatic Virtualization runs virtual machines through KubeVirt on the same Kubernetes control plane Kubermatic already sells for containers, with Kube-OVN for networking and KubeOne for cluster provisioning underneath. It is the same architectural bet SUSE Virtualization makes with Harvester — VMs as Kubernetes workloads rather than a separate hypervisor stack — from a second German vendor, with live migration, automatic restart on host failure and a single management console across both workload types.
Kubermatic prices it directly rather than quoting on request for every tier: Essential starts at €149 a month for up to three servers with community support, Business from €294 with limited support tickets, Business Pro and Enterprise add unlimited and 24/7 support up to €894 a month, and Enterprise Plus — multi-tenancy, ten or more sockets, KubeLB integration — is quoted separately. That published ladder is unusual in this category, where most competitors quote everything on request.
Kubermatic GmbH has operated from Hamburg since 2016 (originally as Loodse), holds ISO 27001 and ISO 9001 certification, and markets the product explicitly at organisations reconsidering VMware after the Broadcom licensing change. The honest limit: this is Kubernetes-native virtualisation, so it rewards a team that already runs Kubernetes and penalises one that does not, in the same way SUSE Virtualization does — KubeVirt's VM feature set still trails a mature hypervisor's.
What Kubermatic Virtualization does well
- Published pricing from €149/month, unusual in this category
- VMs and containers on one Kubernetes control plane
- Live migration and automatic host failover
- ISO 27001 and ISO 9001 certified
- German company, explicitly positioned as a VMware exit
Where Kubermatic Virtualization falls short
- Rewards teams already running Kubernetes
- KubeVirt trails mature hypervisors on VM features
- Essential tier capped at three servers
- Enterprise Plus pricing not published
Standout feature. A published price list starting at €149 a month, in a category where almost everyone else quotes on request.
London, United Kingdom
Founded 2011
CloudStack support subscriptions, managed IaaS delivery and VMware-migration consulting, all quoted on request; no published price list
Best for: Organisations building on Apache CloudStack rather than OpenStack
ShapeBlue is not a software vendor in the way Proxmox or SUSE are — Apache CloudStack is a foundation project nobody owns — but it is the largest independent integrator of it, and the closest thing CloudStack has to Canonical's role for OpenStack.
CloudStack itself is a full IaaS platform, the same conceptual space as OpenStack and OpenNebula, and ShapeBlue's pitch is that it is simpler to run at scale, which is why it underpins large service-provider clouds this category otherwise doesn't reach.
The commercial model is engineering, support and migration rather than a licensed product: CloudStack software development, second-to-fourth-line infrastructure support with P1 to P3 severity tiers, consulting, training and certification, and dedicated VMware-to-CloudStack migration work. None of it is priced publicly — every engagement is quoted, which puts ShapeBlue closer to Virtuozzo's or Acronis's opacity than to Kubermatic's published ladder.
Shape Blue Ltd has been UK-registered since 2011 and is structured as a 100% employee-owned company, an unusual ownership model in this category. The trade-off is the one that comes with any integrator: there is no product to trial, evaluating ShapeBlue means evaluating Apache CloudStack itself plus the specific engagement ShapeBlue proposes, and a buyer who wants a fixed licence fee should look elsewhere in this grid.
What ShapeBlue does well
- Largest independent Apache CloudStack integrator
- 100% employee-owned
- Apache 2.0, no licensing cost for the software itself
- Dedicated VMware-to-CloudStack migration practice
- UK company since 2011
Where ShapeBlue falls short
- No published pricing for support or engineering
- Not a self-contained product like the rest of this grid
- CloudStack has a smaller ecosystem than OpenStack
- Evaluating it means evaluating an integrator, not software
Standout feature. The CloudStack specialist for a category otherwise built around OpenStack and OpenNebula — an entirely different open-source IaaS lineage.
Zug, Switzerland
Founded 2009
Revenue-share partnership pricing for service-provider partners, with no platform licence fee or minimum commitment; end users billed a utility rate per CPU, RAM, storage and bandwidth, billed to the second
Best for: Hosting companies wanting to resell a European-built cloud stack
CloudSigma is the second vendor in this category, after Virtuozzo, aimed at people who resell infrastructure rather than run it internally — but the model is different again: instead of licensing software to install, CloudSigma runs the cloud stack itself and shares revenue with the partner whose brand it appears under. "Launch your own sovereign cloud in weeks" is the pitch, and it is a genuinely different answer to the VMware-exit question than anything else in this grid, because the partner never operates a hypervisor at all.
Pricing follows the same logic on both sides: no platform licence fee or minimum commitment for the partner, just a share of what the end customer pays, and end customers are billed a per-second, per-unit rate for CPU, RAM, storage and bandwidth with no bundled instance tiers to overpay for. Exact revenue-share terms are not published and depend on the partner's target market.
CloudSigma AG is registered in Zug, Switzerland (CHE-115.204.434), having launched in Zurich in 2009, under Swiss jurisdiction with an EU adequacy decision. It is the wrong fit for anyone wanting to own and operate their own virtualisation stack — that is every other entry in this category — and it only makes sense for a business that wants to become a cloud provider without building the underlying platform itself.
What CloudSigma does well
- Revenue-share model, no platform licence fee
- Per-second utility billing for end customers
- No bundled instance tiers to overpay for
- Swiss jurisdiction, EU adequacy decision
- Operating since 2009
Where CloudSigma falls short
- For reselling capacity, not for running your own stack
- Revenue-share terms not published
- Wrong fit for internal enterprise IT
- Smallest jurisdiction footprint (Zug) of the Swiss entries
Standout feature. The only entry here where the buyer never touches a hypervisor at all — CloudSigma runs it and shares the revenue.
