Skip to main content

Competitors happy at VMware's success

"It's a little awkward to actually be happy for a competitor," Thibault admitted. But his company, Virtual Iron Inc., is riding the wave of free publicity generated by the VMware offering, and by Citrix Systems Inc.'s $500 million purchase of the virtualization software company XenSource the following day.

VMware and XenSource are leaders in the booming market for server virtualization software - programs that let companies get far more work out of the server computers they own.

Virtual Iron, of based in Lowell, is a low-profile upstart in the same business. But Thibault hopes to build his privately held company into an industry giant with cut-rate pricing and a focus on serving small and mid-size companies.

Businesses of every size are adopting virtualization as a way of capping costs and simplifying data management. Server virtualization software lets a company run multiple applications on a single server computer, reducing the number of machines a company must buy. It also treats multiple machines like one big computer, making it easy to move programs from one machine to another, shut down individual computers for maintenance, or add new computers to the data center.


Read on...
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