Skip to main content

So whatever happened to Xen?



But now that Novell and Red Hat have both been shipping Xen in their commercial Linux distributions for some months, things have grown eerily quiet. Sure, there is still product news coming out of the Xen vendors, and we'll get to that in a moment. But what I'd really like to know is - who's actually using this stuff in production? And I mean actual end-user organizations, not ISPs or hosters. Based on the absence of Xen-related chatter, my guess is that production users of Xen are still few and far between.


Xen has a long way to go and Microsoft has a much longer way to go. Much much longer.

Original post.

PS: Kris Buytaert responds to the Xen issue...

This is where you go wrong.. you don't know what they are using it for. They might be using Xen in a production environment at a huge bank or telco, not telling you because they are perfectly happy with the way it is running. Nobody will ever see a dime (apart from the guys paycheck) for having implemented 200 CentOS based Xen servers. But they are there (trust me I know they are there..) and both VMWare and XenSource are loosing business there, altough probably not the business they want. Are these deployments showing up in any sales figures ready to compare the "sales" of Xen vs the sales of VMWare ? No , and they never will...


Check out the response here.
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