VM /ETC

I would like to vote for all three.
I still consider VMware too expen$ive, particularly for the SMB market.
I would withdraw this objection if VMware removed the 3-host limits and just sold a vCenter without limiting what one can do with it.
I have not seen any comments anywhere on whether vCenter 4 will have an internal DB like vCenter 2.5 has (SQL Express 2005, which I expect to be SQL 2008 in vCenter 4).
Thank you, Tom

Tom,

If you mean vSphere is more expensive for the open source SMB market then yes, but too expensive for the entire SMB market? If you compare a 20 server shop that uses a 2 host VI even with shared storage to 20 physical host data center how can you make that claim? Maybe you are looking at just licenses, but that's rather narrow sighted. Consider all that is involved from system administration to hardware maintenance and VI, whether using VMware or not, is a better solution. Don't generically claim that VMware is too expensive for the SMB!

Besides, even the open source SMB can use the free VMware hosts. Now if you have beef that you can't get all the best features in that price range, then you need to adjust your expectations. “You get what you pay for.”

Lou,

You are correct. vSphere basically still uses the same database back ends as VI3 but there are some changes. Oracle 9i and Microsoft SQL Server 2000 are no longer supported. IBM DB2 is now supported as well.

The new pricing for SMBs is an improvement, they've cut the price by a lot.
Unfortunately, they haven't cut the price enough, and they still aren't providing the SMBs
the ability to manage unlimited hosts, and vMotion, which the competition is and will be providing for free.

This is too little too late; this price improvement should have come a year ago. The competition is providing unlimited central management of unlimited virtualization hosts, and vMotion, at no cost.

An SMB is not defined by the number of VMs. There's no reason a SMB wouldn't
necessarily have reason to make 50 VMs and need 4 or 5 server hosts.

A SMB embracing virtualization properly and taking full advantage of it
would be expected to have more VMs than 'physical servers'
most SMBs would have without virtualization.

Holding off on vSphere implementation until early next year probably, at least in the production environments. I'm sure it will be run extensively in the lab first. VMware has added a few nice features but I'm not in a real hurry to roll out vSphere to be honest. I don't feel I've gotten enough mileage out of 3.5.0 yet. I'm struggling to keep up with the evaluation and implementation as fast as the product is coming from manufacturing. I'd like to see VMware slow down a little and improve quality. There are plenty of feature enhancements that could have been made to the current product.

this is nice information need to know more

Regards

name

“Well ,your details is really reasonable and you guy give us valuable informative post. I actually love playing various sports and I believe only sports can make you energetic. I like this forum because I learned so much knowledge in here,and there are all kinds of newest news to us
By the way ,recently I gonna buy some shoes ,will you guys give some suggestions for me from below websites at http://vibramshoesonline.com/ thanks!