Skip to main content

Virtualization Strategy: Wanna go to the future? Learn from the past!

Robert offers some really insightful points here, as an ex-Novell employee, he knows what went wrong back then.

Quoting Robert:

So how is history repeating itself, you may ask? So in late 2004, Microsoft acquired the virtualization assets of Connectix and launched Microsoft Virtual Server 2005. By comparison to VMware, it doesn't scale and performance is so poor its not really useful to the broad market. Hmmm - Sounds like LAN Manager doesn't it? So Microsoft has restarted from scratch and is launching Hyper-V, its new virtualization solution. At this point, it's a promise, and from Beta reports appears to be akin to Windows NT first releases: better than before, and good enough for a broader market, but still not as rich and mature as VMware's ESX server. So what will the clincher be? Microsoft is already showing that it is integrating its virtualization solution with its whole course meal; integrations with its broad menu of products. On January 21st, Microsoft announced it's virtualization strategy. The key points are that Microsoft is integrating with its desktop monopoly and its other "virtualization" products, such as terminal server, to build a broader solution. The "good enough" product plus Microsoft's developer community will make this a very difficult beast for VMware to deal with. Hmmm - Sounds like what happened to NetWare when Microsoft integrated Exchange with Active Directory.


Good pointers from Richard, see the rest 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