Which one is better?

You're on a Microsoft forum, what do you think the general answer would be?
VMware Workstation 9 and Hyper-V are very different products and are designed for
different solutions.
Workstation 9 is a desktop virtualization program, it's a type 2 hypervisor. It runs on top
of the OS as an application.
Hyper-V is a type 1 hypervisor, it runs below the host's OS. VMware's comparable
product to Hyper-V is ESXi.
If you're running a production server Hyper-V should be your choice. I don't understand
your statement about roles, you'd only install the Hyper-V role on the host, you wouldn't
add the DC role to it.
First, you install Hyper-V on the host, you don't mention which on, Hyper-V Server or
Windows Server, but the end result is the same. Once you have Hyper-V or the Hyper-V
role installed, you then create a virtual machine, install Windows and promote it to a
DC. If you want to add other VMs, you simply do that, add extra VMs and install the OS,
etc.
=====
Workstation installs on top of your operating system. And Hyper-V installs under it.
Hyper-V is far closer to ESX, only that what you see at the console is Windows, not
Linux/UNIX.

Usb & web cam

One of the notable feature that Hyper-V doesnt have compare to VMware Workstation/Player is USB Pass-through.
(e.g. You cannot relay USB Connection to the Guest VM on Hyper-V while it is naturally supported on VMware
Workstation).

If you want to use something like a USB webcam then VMWARE again. VMWARE
is superior when it comes to attaching and detaching all sorts of devices to the
VM.
MacOSX and MacOSX enable in fusion not in hyper v
VMware Workstation and Fusion are essentially the same thing but Workstation is for Windows and Fusion is for
Mac. The only notable difference is that you can host virtualized MacOSX and MacOSX Server on VMware Fusion
while VMware Workstation cannot.

http://packageology.com/2012/08/windows-8-hyper-v-vmware-workstation-9/

cost

HYPER-V is free while WORKSTATION costs around 180 EUR for a non upgrade
version.

Graphic & home user

HOME user where you plug in things like mobile phones and other hardware and
you tinker around a bit then VMWARE is probably the choice you should use.
Note also VMWARE supports 3d acceleration and graphics so your games will
run. HYPER-V will use whatever your RDP supports - so even 2-D rendering is
likely to be better with VMWARE. For normal "office" type work probably not a
big issue.

What is the basic difference between

VMware and Hyper-V
(This answer is adapted from a Techscrawl.com blog entry VMWare ESX / Microsoft Hyper-V Comparison Posted
on 14 Aug 2008 by Clay)
Microsoft Hyper-V and VMware ESX are hypervisor based solutions. They install directly on the hardware and require
no lower level OS beneath them, however their architecture is quite different.
The hypervisor is a critical component of and foundation of virtual infrastructures. Fundamental characteristics of a
hypervisor are:

Have a purpose-built, thin OS independent architecture for enhanced reliability and robustness
Make optimal use of available hardware resources
Deliver performance acceleration features that support mission critical applications
Enable advanced capabilities not previously possible on physical systems
ESX installs a hypervisor on the hardware. It acts as the intermediary between the hardware and any virtual
machines running on the server. Hardware device drivers are included in the hypervisor. This is called a direct driver
model.
Hyper-V also installs on bare metal. But all management functions and access to hardware is controlled via a root
partition that runs the Windows Server (or Server Core) 2008 OS. This root partition is actually a special virtual
machine, through which hardware I/O requests from child partitions travel via the VMBus architecture. This is called
an indirect driver model. So basically before you enable the Hyper-V role, your server OS is of the typical
architecture, after enabling the role, Hyper-V installs itself on top of the hardware, and places your original OS into
this special virtual machine, the root partition.
A comparison of certain key features between platforms:

ESX supports both 32 & 64-bit hosts, Hyper-V requires a 64-bit host that supports hardware-assisted
virtualization. All platforms support 32 or 64-bit guests.
Maximum Logical Host CPUs: ESX = 32, Hyper-V = 16 (can do more, but not supported)
Maximum Supported Host Memory: ESX = 256 GB, Hyper-V = 2 TB (2008 Enterprise Ed.)
Maximum Memory per Guest OS (VM): ESX & Hyper-V = 64 GB
Maximum Supported Running VMs: ESX = 128, Hyper-V = limited only by available resources
RAM Over-Commitment: Supported in ESX, not supported in Hyper-V. (This allows RAM allocated to VMs
to exceed actual available RAM in host).
NIC Teaming: Native support in ESX. Hyper-V only supports via 3rd party drivers.
Maximum # Virtual Switches: ESX = 248, Hyper-V = unlimited

What is hyper v
Hyper-V, codenamed Viridian and formerly known as Windows Server Virtualization, is a native
hypervisor. it can create virtual machines on x86-64 systems. Starting with Windows 8, HyperV supersedes Windows Virtual PC as the hardware virtualization component of the client
editions of Windows NT