Anyone who reads this blog will know that I’m incredibly passionate about Microsoft Virtualisation, the capabilities it can provide into an infrastructure and the great value for money it provides whilst doing so.  What really pees me off however, is when the information around Microsoft Virtualisation that circulates the web, is plain inaccurate (a.k.a FUD).  Things like the image from a table below.  Whilst the footprint information about Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V is more or less accurate, the statement around an ‘easier target for security attacks and a performance overhead’ is false.  If you want to know just how false the information is, and how ‘bad’ Microsoft patching actually is, I’d strongly recommend checking out Jeff’s post

ESXi1

Also, quotes like this (from here http://www.vmware.com/technology/whyvmware/architectures.html#c132894) “Microsoft attempted to follow VMware’s lead to reduce the attack surface of its virtualization platform by offering Windows Server Core (a subset of Windows Server 2008) as an alternative parent partition to a full Windows Server 2008 install. However, the disk footprint of Server Core in its virtualization role is still approximately 2.6 gigabytes (GB). Until Microsoft changes its virtualization architecture to remove its dependency on Windows, it will remain large and vulnerable to Windows patches, updates, and security breaches. All of the proprietary Xen-based offerings, such as those from Citrix, Oracle, Red Hat, Novell, Virtual Iron, etc., face similar issues by relying upon general purpose Linux as a core part of their virtualization architectures.”  don’t tend to quite add up, especially after you’ve read Jeff’s explanation of the truth around patching, and security breaches.

Finally, images like this:

ESXi2

Yes, Hyper-V has a larger footprint on disk than VMware’s ESXi, but does that make it any less secure, any less patched, any less reliable, any less performant, or any less robust?  See for yourself.

As for security, and I’m sure this is something that Jeff will address in future posts, but as a first look, show me VMware’s Security Development Lifecycle, as a methodology to develop secure code…(click on the image to enlarge…)

Security

Security by deniability?  For those of you who repeat the search, and click on the first VMware link, you’ll see it takes you to a website detailing the benefits of VMware Lab Manager…

As for patching, reliability, performance etc, I’ll hand over to Jeff for that one – definitely worth a read…

TwitThis