Skip to main content

Marathon gets the "Best of VMworld award"; CEO thrilled about VMworld developments


"It was a little surprising, but welcome," said Marathon CEO Gary Phillips of the award. His company was happy to accept the TechTarget-sponsored award in the New Technology category, though Marathon "has been shipping a product since January 2004 based on a virtualization architecture," he said.

"We're able to provide continuous availability, in such a way that it's transparent to the application, and everything's automated so it installs in hours. A good portion of our customers are SMBs, so they're very compelled by the fact that it's plug and play," said Phillips, who described his partner base as "100 percent channel."

Marathon has about 150 channel partners, with that number breaking down about 50-50 between system builders and system integrators, Phillips said.

Key Information Systems has built a successful partnership with Marathon, said Pete Elliot, VP of marketing at the Woodland Hills, Calif.-based system integrator.

"Our pedigree is availability, keeping systems up and running. We take hardware and software and makes it work for companies. We take products like Marathon and bundle them with an HP or IBM component and make them work," said Elliot, whose company is an IBM Premier Business Partner.


Read the rest...
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