VM /ETC

Archive for the ‘feature comparison’ Category

Forget the feature matrix with all the check marks. Forget the price comparison and the price per virtual machine or cost per application. For the sake of consideration, assume an “apples to apples” scenario and focus on VMware and Microsoft virtualization solutions, vSphere Enterprise (or Plus) and Server 2008 R2 with the Hyper-V, as production implementation projects. Put yourself in the shoes of someone responsible for implementing both virtual infrastructures and following best practices. Forget bias. Forget allegiance. Build the best virtual infrastructure design based on the prerequisites and requirements of each solution. Build it with the best interest of the company who will administer and support it going forward.

There is a lot to consider in the first paragraph, and as any consultant would say, the final decision depends on what other objectives the solution will need to satisfy besides just serving as server infrastructure. Again, for the sake of consideration, I’m going to zoom in on the server infrastructure and leave the “other” out of the implementation.

Again, for the sake of consideration, can the difference between choosing to implement production virtual infrastructure with VMware or Microsoft be simplified to a aligning with either companies strategic vision? I’ll attempt to make that case in this post.

For the sake of being open and honest before I continue, I’ll state up front that I personally have yet to implement a production Hyper-V environment, but as a consulting engineer working for a large Microsoft partner, I’ve sat in certification training, experimented a little in the home lab, and have been looking very closely at the implementation services needed to deploy Hyper-V for customers recently.

This post holds my thoughts on some major implementation differences as I understand them today. Please point out where I have missed the mark or help me consider other factors that I may have missed.
Read the rest of this entry »

VMware has announced a new online calculator that specifically compares the total cost of implementing VI 3.X and Microsoft Hyper-V. An online tool similar to Microsoft’s competitive calculator introduced last year, the VMware Virtualization Cost-Per-Application Calculator is designed to emphasize that the cost of implementing virtual infrastructure is more than the expense of licenses. In the past many have criticized the cost of VMware’s flagship suite of VI 3.X Enterprise products as too expensive, and with both Citrix and Microsoft now claiming to offer free hypervisors, VMware’s new calculator helps illustrate the message that VM density at equal performance matters to the cost analysis bottom line.

“Following the lead of analysts and customers, VMware has adopted “cost per application” as a more accurate metric to compare costs between virtualization solutions. Going beyond a simplistic license price comparison, evaluating cost per application takes into consideration the number of virtual machines that can be run on a single server, or the ”virtual machine density” enabled by a specific virtualization solution. The higher the virtual machine density enabled, the higher the server consolidation ratio. The higher the consolidation ratio, the more an organization can reduce its infrastructure costs (including costs for servers, networking. storage, power and datacenter space), and software costs, (including guest operating system and virtualization software licenses). Following this logic, the solution that can provide the higher consolidation of servers – without an impact to performance – also provides the most value to customers.”

I decided to test the calculator with a 50 VM / application example. Read the rest of this entry »

PCQuest has published a performance comparison of popular virtualization platforms from Microsoft, Citrix, and VMware. In the report titled Virtualization Platforms Compared, the testing measures various CPU and graphics card benchmarks of the VMs running on the different platforms. Check the report out for yourself, but the testing details explained in the report left me confused. Since there is no option for comments at PCQuest I am posting about it here at VM /ETC.

Here’s the test setup info from the report: Read the rest of this entry »

I was lucky enough to attend a live demonstration of the new Hyper9 virtual infrastructure search and monitoring tool this week, and as a result a limited number of VM /ETC readers will be lucky enough to have access to the currently closed Hyper9 beta program in the near future. Stay tuned to VM /ETC for information on signing up for access to the exclusive beta program, but for now, this post provides a first look at some of the features demonstrated to me. I’ve also been given permission to provide some screen shots.

Hyper9 was announced publically back in September, and then caught the attention of many VMworld 2008 attendees. Scott Lowe, Edward Haletky, Eric Siebert, and Keith Ward are some of the many that have already written about their impressions of this tool’s capabilities. In general, Hyper9 is a search based management tool that promises to “rock your world” of virtual infrastructure management. Hyper9 can be used to query for information at the hardware, hypervisor, and VM operating system levels.

So, what exactly is Hyper9 and what’s so special about a tool that can search against all objects in your virtual infrastructure? Read the rest of this entry »

Updated 12.08.08 – The difference between free ESXi and licensed ESXi has been a very popular topic and one of my most read posts. Now with the release of ESX/ESXi 3.5 Update 3 there have been some feature changes in the free ESXi that I want to point out. I have also made a few corrections. I have left my original text for reference. Thanks go to Mike Dipetrillo for asisstance with these updates.

update 12.15.08 – the ESXi 3.5 Update 3 RCLI API was unintentionally opened. The remote administration abilities will be locked down again in the next release. Please see my updated post on this new information.

In case you’ve been “holed up” in the data center for the last month (I don’t doubt that a few admins have) and maybe haven’t heard yet, VMware now offers a free version of ESXi. Yes, VMware has made a version of it’s enterprise class, bare metal installable hypervisor available for download at no charge. There is no trial period or demo license required. There are no guest limitations on the host. So, there has to be a “gotcha”, right? Not really, but you do need to understand the differences between the free ESXi and VI ESXi (licensed) versions.

Although ESXi runs the same code and is on the same distribution schedule as ESX, VMware’s intended usage is a little different than what VMware administrators are used to, and therefore the ESXi product has some functional differences that need to be understood – especially for the free ESXi version. This post explores some of the major differences, and can hopefully help VI administrators make the correct decisions about what version of ESX to implement. I concentrate most on the differences between the free and licensed versions of ESXi as they are the most likely versions to confuse administrators used to VMware’s full ESX 3.5 enterprise solution. Read the rest of this entry »

The title of this post is part of a quote from David Davis’ SearchCIO article titled COMPARISON: Microsoft vs. VMware. David’s article was published back on June 4, and it’s been sitting in my drafts “screaming at me” to comment on here at VM /ETC. Now, with Hyper-V having been released and Microsoft’s marketing machine starting to cloud virtualization reality, I point my readers to David’s arguments as examples of sane and logical analysis of the two products. Here’s the entire quote my title is taken from in the context it was written:

“VMware is obviously the most experienced company when it comes to delivering a virtualisation product. The company has 10 years of virtualisation experience and a huge customer base, including 100% of the Fortune 500 companies and 92% of the Fortune 1000, totaling over 100,000 customers worldwide. VMware also holds 11 virtualisation patents, and in 2007 their revenue hit the $US1.33 billion mark.

This is in comparison to Microsoft which has a new virtualisation product, little enterprise virtualisation experience, and, to date, no Fortune 500 customers who have adopted their enterprise virtualisation product in a production environment. Ask yourself, which of these companies sounds more qualified to deliver your enterprise virtualisation solution?”

David’s article goes on to make excellent comparison points about Read the rest of this entry »

John Troyer from VMTN has hosted the first podcast episode of VMware Communities Roundtable and has posted a summary of the call notes at VMware Communities Roundtable podcast #1 | VMTN Blog. I am honored to have one of my “things that make you go hmmmm” (on the Quick Migration vs VMotion discussion) posts listed as a reference for one of the topics of the episode.

John announces the new series and the objective of the Roundtable podcasts with the following summary:

“Each week, we’ll bring together experts and leaders from the VMware Communities and virtualization blogs to discuss the interesting topics in virtualization. Think of this as if it were a group meeting up at VMworld over a pint to chat about the latest news.”

The episode lasts somewhere between 50 minutes to an hour and is a recorded call between John and an attendee list consisting of some of the virtualization community’s top minds from all over the world. VMware Community profiles of the individuals contributing to episode 1 are:

• Steve Beaver – sbeaver
• Tom Howarth
• Alex Mittell – mittell
• Eric Siebert – esiebert7625
• Edward Haletky -Texiwill
• Dave Mishchenko

Go to John’s VMTN post to listen or download the podcast, but the following is my quick summary and take-aways from the call. Read the rest of this entry »