<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Project Highlander</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/doxley/archive/2008/12/01/project-highlander.aspx</link><description>Having better ‘green credentials’ than your competitor seems to be the in thing at the moment. You’ll often see a company saying that they will plant X number of trees for each purchase you make, etc. Of course, this is always a good thing and anything</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Project Highlander</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/doxley/archive/2008/12/01/project-highlander.aspx#3162748</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:04:04 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3162748</guid><dc:creator>nipman</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Good article. VMWare have a similar tool but people shouldn't take any of the numbers as gospel. Each business case for virtualization is absolutely unique because the assumptions in the cost model on these sites are never all relevant to one's organisation. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, these always have a cost reduction due to the reduced footprint of the server racks but in our organisation that is almost irrelevant as we have no plans to shrink the size of the datacentre or sell the space to another organization. Therefore we never realize 100% of the cost reduction assumed in these sorts of tools.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But as an eye opening exercise to understand the potential impact of virtualizing, these tools are useful sales tools only.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>