Flat out--it is too expensive. It costs 4K or 5K per server for the licensing. It is a wonderful product with many advanced features, but these advanced features (such a vmotion) require SAN connectivity to take full advantage of them. So you end up buying and maintaining a SAN as part of your investment. SAN units are expensive, so I like to run them for a few years. I have some Clariions for another project and years 4 and 5 support on these SANs run $109,000 per year each. When you factor in your savings in HVAC and server utilization, you have the amortize the SAN that you otherwise would not need against this. It is also a poor investment on older equipment which I have a good deal of (hand-me-downs from our screaming fast production boxes that I use for infrastructure). So I have been running my low-volume stuff on Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 without a hitch for years now including dhcp, domain controllers, and various other knick-knacks.
I am eagerly awaiting the final version of Hyper-V. I tried Oracle's implementation of Xen, but had some trouble with it. Even if I don't like Hyper-V better than ESX (or Infrastructure), maybe the competition will bring VMWare's price down to below $1,000 per box. The price sure dropped on the old VMWare Server product when they got competition (to free). I am hoping the same will happen for me. Otherwise, I will probably implement Hyper-V if it is halfway decent.
As for the stock, I will evaluate Hyper-V when the final version ships and perhaps buy VMW again after they cut the prices if VMW still has a much better product.
I wouldn't say that. I like VMWare's free products very much, thank you. As for the nasty homeless shelter crack, that is one of those things that people write on message boards because they don't think of the other posters as people.
In these tough times where one faces a capital budget of zero for the year, free products are wonderful. Like another poster pointed out, the reason VMWare did this is to hook people like me on their product so that they could sell me the good stuff later.
As for the stock, I am quite happy with the common shares I bought at the close yesterday and the Jan-2011 calls I chased them with (along with my AKAM calls).
Last year, I tested Hyper-V like I said I would and found it to be rather irritating to worth with and inferior in many ways to ESX. Meanwhile, VMWare came out with the free ESXi. I am nearly through with the project to move my shop off of Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to ESX. I love the product. With VRanger Pro now being able to back up the free version of VMWare, I am very nearly set in my own little shop.
I am also the systems architect on a much larger scale for some systems that run on physical servers that I do not manage. I plan to incorporate virtualization in a big way on future builds. The Enterprise edition is very expensive and I am not sure whether or I will use it in this project--especially given how tight capital budgets are right now. I might forego the benefits of Enterprise edition and deploy using the free version and internal drives for now--I have not decided yet.
I now have very little doubt that VMWare will be the eventual virtualization winner and am considering purchasing the stock.
What point is there in being the eventual "virtualization winner" if the product everyone is using is the one you're giving away for FREE? lol. You may know a lot about servers, but you don't seem to have quite gotten the idea behind engaging in business.
Good post. SANs were very expensive for SMBs, but they are coming down to earth. HP came out with Mid Market SAN Early this year.
You might want to consider Citrix XenServer. At least give it a test run. You can download it free. It is much faster than MSFT and is so darn easy to use. Plus you can use NFS, Sofware SANs, Hardware SANs, NetApp, or local storage.
If I ran VMW I probably wouldn't lower the prices for a long while. (I think that is what ESXi is supposed to be.) The big players want VMware and they don't seem to flinch about paying for it.