- IE 8 hits Beta 2, privacy features added
- 10 Firefox add-ons for better browsing
- Cisco buys PostPath
- 595 immigrants arrested at electronics plant
- Locked iPhones can be unlocked without password
Newsletters | Podcasts | Chats | Opinions | RSS Feeds | This Week In Print | IT Careers | Community | Reports | Downloads | Slideshows | New Data Center
Partner Sites:App Performance | On Demand Security | Networking Solution | SOA | Value of WDS
With the release Thursday of Hyper-V as a free download to Windows Server 2008 users, Microsoft is drastically undercutting the prices of x86 server virtualization pioneer VMware. But while Microsoft provides good enough capabilities for many use cases, there are still numerous reasons for an enterprise to choose VMware, analysts say.
"It's a question of capabilities," says Forrester analyst Christopher Voce. "VMware is a mature product in several areas. With regard to resilience, they still hold a lead over Microsoft feature-wise."
Analysts have pointed out that Microsoft's Hyper-V is missing two key features found in VMware. One is live migration, the ability to move an application running on a virtual server from one physical device to another. (Compare server products.) VMware can accomplish this task immediately with no downtime. It takes Microsoft a few seconds.
A second big feature where VMware has a leg up is "hot add," the ability to add memory to a virtual server while it's running.
Live migration in particular is important to large enterprises that might have hundreds or thousands of virtual servers, says Laura DiDio, a Yankee Group analyst. Live migration is available from Citrix's XenSource products, so there's another option for enterprises that can't tolerate any downtime, she says.
"Microsoft has quick migration, which is supposed to approximate it, but it's not really the same thing," she says. "Live migration does make life easier if you're a large firm. All those seconds and minutes do save you money."
Microsoft could upgrade its features in the future, but didn't want to delay the release of Hyper-V because of a few missing capabilities, Voce says.
"It was a question of getting the product out in the wild," he says.
Hyper-V's a good option if your goal is primarily to consolidate servers, and particularly if your administrators have been trained mostly on Microsoft technologies, Voce says.
Price is probably the biggest advantage Microsoft has over VMware and other virtualization vendors. Microsoft's Hyper-V is free to users with a Windows Server 2008 license, and a stand-alone version, due by year-end, will cost $28.
VMware says it will offer better ROI than Hyper-V with technology that can deliver more virtual servers without a performance hit, resulting in a lower "cost per virtual machine."
Partner Content
Explore the Ultrium Edge
The powerful tape technology can address data security with tape encryption as well as long term data protection.
Find out more
Disk and Tape Square Off
Discover what disk and tape really cost -- and which solution provides lower total cost of ownership and optimizes energy use for your organization
Download the White Paper
Don't Fall For The Myths
The Clipper Group explores the truth behind the myths of tape, digging into the misconceptions in the disk vs. tape debate.
Download the White Paper
Will You Add Tape Too?
Over two thirds of disk-only users look to add tape back into storage infrastructure according to recent survey.
Download Survey Information
Comments (7)
Almost...By Anonymous on July 22, 2008, 7:57 pmBut then you still have to license the OSs running in VMs on VMWare. If you have Server 2008 enterprise you can run 4 VMs of Server at no additional cost. If you...
Reply | Read entire comment
Just a thought...By Anonymous on July 10, 2008, 3:16 pmAlot of you are forgetting that with Windows 2008, you are permitted to run up to 4 instances of the OS for FREE in the virtual space for each Host server license....
Reply | Read entire comment
ExactlyBy Anonymous on July 2, 2008, 9:36 pmHyper-v is NOT Free, not by a long shot. The real scoop: Hyper-v = 1 2008 license + $28 ESXi = $495 Which is cheaper? If you are going to use hyper-v for VMs...
Reply | Read entire comment
I useBy Anonymous on June 26, 2008, 9:10 pmVMWare server I have 5 instances of it with about 17 virutal machines running. I run it ontop of fedora so I have these systems for the cost of the guest license...
Reply | Read entire comment
Free?By Anonymous on June 26, 2008, 6:34 pmHave you looked at the price of Windows Server 2008? It's like the surprise in the cereal box.
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments