MS Webcast: Hyper-V, Vmware Comparison

[office politics]

link -> Webcast: Hyper-V for the VMware Administrator « IT Core Blog

If you are a VMware administrator or you are considering a virtualization platform purchase, then this webcast is for you. Using demonstrations, we compare Microsoft and VMware virtualization platforms and highlight the differences in the two platforms. Topics we cover include Failover Clustering, the Microsoft high availability solution; live migration, how Microsoft does VMotion; using Performance and Resource Optimization (PRO) to move virtual machines; and much more.

click the link above to find the webcast.

 

[remixedcat]

Argg not this again. Hyper-V will never compare to VMWare's solid virtualization track record. vmware is proven and used more in the hosting industry then hyper-v is.

Vsphere or ESXi Hypervisor has much less overhead then server 2008 with hyper-v.

Most of the top managed hosting providers use VMWare virtualization rather then MS hyper v.

setting up vmware vsphere and nodes is much easier then hyper-v is.

 

[office politics]

i wont argue vmware's advantage in performance with large workloads or features of management tools. However, vmware can not hold a torch to MS in terms of cost. So the question becomes when does the workload justify the cost of the better software? Will Hyper-V fit the needs of a smaller environment? Most likely, it will. I think the differences between products is similar to the differences between the iPhone and Google. The iPhone was released way before Android. It was a great device that appealed to the masses. When released, I didn't like Android. I think this was mainly because I didn't know what it could do or how to use it. As it gained popularity, I started to understand it better. It started maturing as a product and i finally tried it. I loved it. As time progresses, i think i will like MS's product more as the development continues. Especially for the company's environments because they are mainly a MS shop with a small amount of servers.

 

[remixedcat]

hyper-v might be fine for a branch office or medium office, but when you pool resources like a 1TB RAM VM instance hyper-v lags behind.

also for hosting hyper-v is problematic.

and also vmware's management interfaces are extremely easy. there are even third party ones that make it even easier as well.

 

[CntdwnToExtn]

hyper-v might be fine for a branch office or medium office, but when you pool resources like a 1TB RAM VM instance hyper-v lags behind.

also for hosting hyper-v is problematic.

and also vmware's management interfaces are extremely easy. there are even third party ones that make it even easier as well.

That is if you can afford the the new VMware licensing costs for a 1TB system. I almosts did something in my pants when VMware released pricing for version 5 and pulled an extremely low move and charge not only by processor (even though they state they don't) and put most of the cost on "vRAM". It was so bad when they released the pricing they HAD to bump it up to 96gig vRAM per processor. Original vSphere 5 pricing had a 1TB system close to $100,000 in licensing alone. Cheaper to go physical or migrate to Hyper-V or Xen.

It is true that Hyper-V isn't quite there yet, but they are making huge strides with the Administration software in the System Center solutions they offer and I have no doubt in my mind Hyper-V is going to be re-vamped under this product line; maybe in the 2012 System Center releases