Skip to main content

Why Google and VMware should unite



Because I say so...OK kidding. Lets just get some straight facts and see what they both have in common. Forget all the biased and unbiased opinions, both of these companies

  • rock!
  • have a solid engineering base
  • are sound
  • are young (at heart and age)
  • are mean and lean
  • have (and will continue to have) ideas that could blow off all the punditry and make the *analysts* again try to figure out yet another way to blow the competition away!
  • are in need to set up a good face against Microsoft, I mean if MS doesn't like then it'll try to eat them alive.
  • are moving rapidly towards the datacenter/utility computing model and since their approach is fresh and new , they can set up a whole new standard for ways where new startups can just get on to doing business, cutting lose from the cultural boundaries which limit us from doing what we so badly should be doing (listen to what I have to say about , set yourself free/Floating identities)
and besides then I just have to send my resume to one office ;-)
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more