Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

re: Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

Mike Sterling — Mon, 02 May 2011 03:22:11 GMT

@Sharininder - we've submitted a patch to address the kernel panic on Ubuntu 10.10. It's been accepted by the Ubuntu team, and will be coming down as an update soon.

-Mike

re: Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

Hameed Mohammed — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 02:59:31 GMT

To add to David's insights, we have moved on from solving VM sprawl to app sprawl in data centers now. Apps run all over. It is critical to monitor and manage with a view of the application vs. just servers. System Center and Hyper-V make 'Application Aware' clouds a reality, today.

re: Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

OtherKevin — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:50:56 GMT

@Sharininder: Maybe there is a reason that Ubuntu isn't supported on Hyper-V? How'd it work with Suse and RedHat (the Linux distros that have been tested and supported)?

re: Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

Sharninder — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:53:17 GMT

The infoworld article referenced above has this to say:

"VMware's feature set, reputation, and pricing all reflect that fact. But where there used to be little competition, you'll now find a select group of challengers that have brought a wealth of enterprise features to their virtualization solutions and begun to give VMware a run for its money."

As far as I can tell this doesn't mean that Hyper-V is giving VMware a run for it's money. It only means that there are other contenders in the business. Management features are the key and among the four solutions tested, Hyper-V still is the third.

I'm excited about the promise that Microsoft's virtualization strategy holds, but spreading FUD and misinformation doesn't help anyone.

I installed Hyper-V, KVM, Xen and VMware on 4 servers today and tried installing the same Ubuntu 10.10 image on all of them for some testing that we're doing. All, except Hyper-V, installed Ubuntu flawlessly. On Hyper-V all I got was a kernel panic.

re: Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

Chris — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:13:54 GMT

Great article, I agree with most of what is said here. One thing that is not very clearly addressed however, which I feel is becoming increasingly important while we as an industry expand on our virtualization implementations, is how virtualization can significantly strengthen an organizations disaster recovery and business continuity stance.

This is an important piece of what goes into the decision regarding which hypervisor may be appropriate for any organization. Unfortunately right now Microsoft is a bit shy on the application support for Hyper-V, when it comes to enterprise DR.

There are some great products working their way out into the market which will help address this issue however, and from what I am hearing the trend is heading towards Hyper-V, which we are all looking forward to. Some unique products such as TransactVM(.com) will provide relief for the places where SCVMM is lacking, specifically in regards to failover and recovery of Hyper-V systems in the enterprise.

All things considered, I am excited about the direction Microsoft is heading with their Virtualization strategy, thanks David!

re: Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center Raise the Stakes in the Virtualization Race

OtherKevin — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:23:10 GMT

Sorry if this is a double-post, I'm having browser issues.

You should take exception to the pricing information published on page 6. It is incorrect with regards to Hyper-V and makes Hyper-V appear to be the most expensive product reviewed. Contrary to the claims made in the article the licensing around Hyper-V is not complex. It breaks down like this:

Hyper-V 2008 R2 - Free

System Center SMSD - $1315 per CPU

Using this model Hyper-V 2008 R2 comes out to be one of the least expensive solutions available, as you well know, and provide the most in-depth management tools available. Unfortunately, InfoWorld has chosen to mix into the Hyper-V pricing the cost of the guest OS licensing, though it failed to do so with all of the other products reviewed. The ONLY reason why you would need to buy a server OS license with Hyper-V would be to license the Windows Server VMs running inside it, and you would still need to do this if you were running Windows Server VMs on any other Hypervisor. I have no doubt that the authors of the articles are aware of this fact, as they clearly point out on page 6 that VMware shops are typically buying Windows Server 2008 R2 Datacenter licenses to ensure that their Windows VMs are properly licensed. InfoWorld needs to modify the article to either remove the OS licensing cost from the Hyper-V calculations or ADD the OS licensing costs into the competing products.