Skip to main content

Virtualization: Burton Group accused of being Microsoft's mouthpiece

We all know how Yankee Group was shredded by the community when they came out with all kinds of figures against the Open Source, Linux and having written several articles which were apparently biased. Well at Slashdot Yankee was shredded pretty bad!

I don't know if Burton group is biased but this blogger thinks so:

Is the Burton Group not even trying to conceal its love and obedience for Microsoft? Remember that previous post and very recent “love letter”? How about the Group’s dependence on Microsoft technologies? Who will the Burton Group attack next, on behalf of its beloved masters? That is just what today’s analysts are for.
Check out the rest

Update:

This blogger takes a totally different road to interpretation though. Grammatical errors aside and a daedal yet balderdash one-line analysis:

But Mr. Jones post is interesting for another reason: throught it the Burton Group takes a strong and neat position against Microsoft.


... he "cleverly" shows that you can render a post absolutely, multi-directionally (un)interpretable. Well we've had our excitement of the day now, moving on...;-)


My take:

He did attempt to offer some advice:

So what can VMware do? VMware needs to build out its menu. It needs to offer soup-to-nuts IT solutions. And it needs to do this with disruptive technology such as SaaS, not with the traditional methods that Microsoft already has wrapped up.
Although, given a long story, it could have been a bit more detailed out than the long build-up, which I do agree is a good way to look back and see where VMware can indeed make that detour strategic move. Open sourcing ESX may be a strategy to immediately go for the "alternate market" horizontally. Look what sun is doing, they are gaining ground and doing well. A bit later but still on the train. And besides that we should not forget that VMware's ESX server is a strong product in the market, Citrix's Xenserver is getting closer but VMware has more market adoption than ever. Tomorrow VMware will be coming out with its figures and I am expecting increasing sales. Will that be the same case end 2008? I don't think so but it still can be if VMware starts going to expand its suite, which it is doing.

I must say that no matter what you say, it is the consumer who has to deal with a good or a bad product. Jones does has some good pointers but we should also remember that we are not living in the 90s. It is very web 2.0, people are telling me that all of VMware's stock depends on its ESX's hypervisor security but should Microsoft's Hyper-V be slow, lag a lot behind, be patch and bug-prone, then that too could spell disaster. So what do you think should happen soon:

  1. VMware has to go for the clouds
  2. Acquire soon SaaS friendly DRP firm
  3. Tie with Google to start the build-ups across the globe (My "dog ears" are telling me that Google is doing that on a mass scale)
  4. Go solid into I/O, InovaWave is a good party
  5. FastScale is good in compressing the VMs, that too can be a good one to have
Anyways there is a lot to be done and other vendors like Sun, Oracle too aren't going to be sitting quietly. And we still haven't heard from IBM. Sam?

Labeled under "Opinions" (I don't have "Gibberish" label yet)
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