Just an fyi for all the Microsoft virtual server dreamers out there. MS Virtual Server doesnt stand a chance against Vmware's ESX server. Microsoft virtual server product runs on top of another OS like windows server 2003. So we all know how window slows down servers compared to linux, right? well now you're telling me that on top of that slow windows OS you�re going to install the virtual server software? And then within that software you�re going to run multiple virtual machines? Trust me this is terribly slow. It sounds like VMware's old product called GSX server that they came out with in 1995.
ESX on the other hand is a real DATA CENTER product. ESX is popular because you install it by it's self on the server hardware, no need to run it on another OS like windows. ESX uses a striped down linux kernel for the OS, so it's performance impressive, unlike windows.
However I'll admit that Vmware is a little expenise, but you get what you pay for.
Quote: "The thing is, the touted performance of ESX is no longer there on new hardware. IntelVT and AMDVTx are both capable of entirely offsetting the prior disadvantage of �emulation�. When you�re a Windows-only (or Windows-mostly) shop, Virtual Server can outperform ESX by quite a bit because VS hooks into the HAL directly. SQL on VS is much faster than on ESX and has so much higher hardware compatibility."
More info here: http://servervirtualization.blogs.techtarget.com/2007/06/04/vmware-esx-configuration-cost-problems-spur-users-switch-to-microsoft-virtual-server/?track=NL-653&ad=590818&asrc=EM_NLT_1536458&uid=592874
FUD. Readers, please read the comments by the other "specialists" in response to that one article (link provided by dinveko) to get the full info. And don't depend on just one person's opinion.
Here is some info from the so call specialist from the same site but less subjective:
Quote: "VPC crashed every time I attempted to access the virtual drive (mapped to the physical drive). Support is non-existent for VPC 2K7 because Microsoft doesn�t even list it as a product at the support website. "
It has special department - Intel Capital - that does it. 100 M dollars that Intel invested in VMWare is tiny percentage of Intel investments. Perhaps it just wanted to make some buck (as in VMW going up from $30 to $50) :-)
Welcome back vjssertblah LOL
You are funnier than George Kostanza.
Re: MS Virtual Server will never be serious competion for ESX (Not rated) 26-Aug-07 12:48 pm Just one answer.....Intel & Cisco bought into VMW for a reason!! Intel is swaying from Microsoft and towards VMW. That is easy to see.....
You're a bit off point. GSX server changed its name to VMware Server. Server is their free version and runs on top of Windows OS as a VM host.
Esx is more robust; nonetheless, I have to node in agreement with Retired_Analyst that it still takes a performance hit.
So what stops MS from stripping down windows? You think they don't understand how to strip down their own OS? Or you think they don't know Linux? If VMW can strip down linux I tell you 200 startups can do that. The tricky part is virtualizing, which MS and couple other like XEN and Paralles do quite well. XEN comes pre-installed with Linux! So XEN covers linux while MS virtualPC covers windows, all for FREE! Good luck VMW selling that $200 workstation software. The barrier for entry on that 100MB install tiny little OS is not very high trust me. VMW beat it to the game, but MS is not standing still. BTW ESX incurs 15%+ performance hit, you think real mission critical houses who payed top dollar for hardware will
pay more top dollar to slow itself down 15%? People who hype virtualization do not understand how good modern OS are, yes even Windows. Virtualization is very impressive and a killer app for sw testing/hobbists etc but that is well served by the free versions from MS and XEN. It is far from a must-have for most if not all big COs who have competent staff. Hype it all you want, the fact is ESX has been around for YEARS and the PE is now 230. Who knows maybe 200Mil rev came from EMC itself?
"The tricky part is virtualizing, which MS and couple other like XEN and Paralles do quite well."
That was so freaking funny, quite well my butt. Xen ok, but MS and Parallels??? Not even close. Have you even use any of those products? And if MS were to strip down their OS to and put more effect into having a product to compete with ESX, how do you know they will ofter it for free??? you don't. Also Xen's enterprise products are not FREE. Cheaper then VMW's ESX, yes, but not FREE! If you are talking about Xen's free products, VMware has free products too!
Workstation cost about $200, because it offers a lot more then what the free products offer. Like anything else, higher price for a better product that has more capabilities. But I'm sure you know that since you are retired and rich, right? Workstation is gear towards the software developer community, which I know people that work at Google and other companys love using and willing to pay for.
Most of the post I read by you have be negative and against VMW. You'll just a hater that don't know all the facts.
Sorry but 90% of the virtual world disagrees with you.
You can say or talk down VMW all you want, but it does not change the facts. Your vague attempt to add credibility by the use of your alias name is just one more indication of attempts to make virtualization as easy as baking a pie.
Smart people understand this and the stupid ones will suffer because of your holier then thou attitude. The market will decide.