Skip to main content

Simon Crosby, CTO Citrix Virtualization on "Equivalency and Enterprise Readiness"

Also, before I address specifics, let's just deal with the concept of "enterprise ready" once and for all. The largest deployment of virtualization on the planet uses Xen, and that is at Amazon. Is Amazon not an enterprise? Every enterprise has a unique set of requirements, so when someone says that XenServer is not enterprise ready, my response is to ask what specific features are missing, and to prioritize those for development. I specifically reject statements by VMware resellers that we are not enterprise ready just because we have a different form factor of the product. But I do accept that we don't yet have all the bells and whistles that VMware has, and so that means that some people won't buy our product. We certainly do have every feature that VMware had for its first $1BN of revenue. But here's a good example of something we don't yet have: certification against EMC Clariion storage arrays. Anyone care to guess why? Fortunately with the help of our ecosystem partners, and with the Citrix portfolio of add-on features, we have an incredibly compelling offering - one that is suitable for most enterprises and that addresses both native and virtualized workloads.


Link
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