Proxmox VE: a credible alternative, not an automatic migration
Broadcom's acquisition of VMware has led many companies to re-examine their virtualisation strategy: changing product bundles, a stronger shift to subscriptions, grouped features, pressure at renewal time and a search for alternatives. In this context, Proxmox Virtual Environment (VE) has become one of the most frequently cited names.
What the VMware price rise really means
The figures published since the Broadcom acquisition give a concrete measure of the pricing pressure pushing companies to compare alternatives:
Respondents who faced a cost increase above 25%: 59%.
Respondents who faced an increase of 100% or more (2026): 14%.
Price rise reported by European customers since the acquisition: up to 800 to 1,500%.
Multiplication of licence costs reported in some extreme cases: 8 to 15 times.
Companies that stayed with VMware despite the rise: 56%.
Companies that completed a full migration to an alternative: only 4%.
Companies migrating or actively considering it: 40%.
The most revealing point in these figures: despite sometimes spectacular price rises, the predicted mass exodus has not happened. Only 4% of companies have completed a full migration, as the technical complexity of the change remains, for many, more of a deterrent than the bill itself. That does not mean doing nothing: 40% of companies are migrating or actively considering it, a figure that reflects a genuine strategic rethink, not panic.
Proxmox VE is an open-source virtualisation platform combining KVM virtual machines, LXC containers, a web interface, clustering, high availability and a range of storage options. It can be highly relevant for regaining control of some infrastructure costs, provided usage and constraints are compared seriously.
What the different business model means in practice
VMware's subscription model under Broadcom now charges per processor core, with minimum tiers per physical host, a structure that particularly penalises architectures with high-core-count servers, even lightly used ones. The Proxmox model, with no mandatory per-socket licence, lets you size the (optional) support cost independently of the installed hardware power. For a small or mid-sized business whose infrastructure was sized to absorb future growth rather than run at full capacity from day one, this difference in pricing logic can add up to a substantial gap over the hardware's lifetime.
Why consider Proxmox VE
Open-source model: no per-socket licence comparable to historical models, with support subscriptions available as an option.
KVM and LXC: full virtual machines and lightweight containers in the same console.
Built-in web interface: centralised administration without a separate console.
High availability and clustering: useful features for well-designed small and mid-sized infrastructures.
Flexible storage: support for ZFS, Ceph, NFS, iSCSI and local storage depending on the architecture.
Points to watch
Proxmox is not a plug-and-play replacement for VMware. Before migrating, check:
The VMware features actually in use: vSAN, NSX, backup, monitoring, automation, DRS, templates, third-party integrations.
The compatibility of backup and disaster recovery tools.
In-house skills in Linux, networking, storage and virtualisation.
Support requirements for critical production.
The cost of migration: audit, tests, VM conversion, cutover windows, documentation and training.
Comparing several scenarios in 2026
The right approach is not a binary choice between VMware and Proxmox. An audit should compare several paths:
Keep VMware on the critical scope if the advanced features are genuinely needed and the budget is acceptable, which remains the choice of 56% of the companies surveyed despite the price rise.
Migrate to Proxmox VE for small and mid-sized clusters, standard workloads or environments where cost control comes first.
Consider Hyper-V or Azure Local (formerly Azure Stack HCI) if the business is already heavily invested in the Microsoft ecosystem.
Take a hybrid approach: keep one platform for some workloads and migrate the others gradually, the path chosen by most of the 40% of companies actively considering a change.
This comparison should cover three to five years, including licences, support, hardware, backup, administration time, upskilling and operational risk.
Migrate without rushing
Rising costs or renewal pressure can create a sense of urgency, but a poorly prepared migration often costs more than the licences it was supposed to save. That is precisely why only 4% of companies have taken the step of a full migration despite sometimes considerable price rises. The right reflex is to start with an accurate inventory, then a pilot on a non-critical scope. The pilot's results then show whether Proxmox should become the main platform, a partial alternative or simply an option kept in reserve.
This kind of decision benefits from a prior IT audit.
How mature Proxmox is in production
The question that comes to every decision-maker's mind is legitimate: is a free, open-source tool serious enough to run a company's infrastructure? For Proxmox VE, the answer is yes, provided you give yourself the means. The platform is no niche project: it is built on components proven over many years, the Linux kernel, the KVM hypervisor and the ZFS file system, and backed by an active community and a vendor offering paid support subscriptions for professional use. Many small and mid-sized businesses already run it in production without particular incident.
The real point of vigilance is not the tool's reliability but the skills around it. Proxmox assumes a comfort with Linux, networking and storage that not every team has. Where VMware hides part of the complexity behind very polished interfaces, Proxmox asks you to understand a little better what is happening under the bonnet. It is manageable, but it needs preparing, through training or support, rather than being improvised on a Monday morning.
Hybrid, often the best compromise
Faced with this choice, many companies reject all-or-nothing, and they are right. Nothing forces you to choose between VMware and Proxmox for the entire estate. The most prudent path is often to keep the historical platform for the most critical workloads, or those that depend on advanced features, while gradually moving standard, less sensitive workloads to Proxmox, where the savings are immediate and the risk low. The effort is spread out, skills grow without pressure, and you keep a way back if an obstacle arises. This is precisely the gradual approach chosen by most of the companies actively considering a change.
Decide with full knowledge, not in a hurry
Proxmox VE is a credible, mature alternative to VMware, but it is only justified by an honest comparison over three to five years and on your real context, not as a mere reaction to an invoice. The Broadcom price rise is a good reason to reopen the file; it is not a good reason to migrate in a hurry, as our article on leaving VMware and controlling software costs points out.
SolidKern works across several environments and has no vendor bias: our role is to recommend the solution that genuinely fits your context. Discover our virtualisation migration service, or contact us to assess a migration to Proxmox, planned to limit the impact on your business.
Sources: Usine Digitale, VMware: despite the price rise, no mass exodus · Proxmox VE, official overview · Microsoft Tech Community, Introducing Azure Local