How do they REALLY compare?

My fellow IT Evangelist, Kevin Remde just posted the first in a series of “VMware or Microsoft” posts. This is a series of blog posts that lend some perspective to claims on the VMware side and raise awareness of what Microsoft Hyper-V is capable of. I am of course a Microsoft employee which means no matter how objective I say I am, the general perception will be that I am pro-Microsoft and anti-everything else. But I encourage you to follow the series yourself as we are linking to a variety of Microsoft, independent, and even VMware materials throughout the course of the series.

 

Here is a brief teaser -

 

In a currently available document that VMware provides, comparing vSphere 5 to the as-of-then beta of what is now Hyper-V in Windows Server 2012, VMware makes the claim that they have a “Purpose-Built Hypervisor”, with “no reliance on a general purpose OS”, whereas Microsoft depends upon the Server OS to be there.

[Insert annoyingly-loud buzzer sound indicating a wrong answer here]

To address VMware's claim, let’s answer a couple of questions: What is Hyper-V?

“It’s a virtualization hypervisor.”

Right.  And where is it installed?

“On Windows Server.”

[Insert an even more annoyingly-loud buzzer sound indicating a wrong answer here]

Wrong!  It is installed UNDER Windows Server.

Read the rest of his post here…

 

-Cheers!