Happy holidays! windows server 2008 RC1 with hyper-v beta now available!

The stage is set for an epic clash. On one side you have VMware. The other you have Microsoft/Citrix(with Xen)/Novell(Xen and Linux). VMware is a one trick pony. They are a server virtualization provider. The Microsoft trio brings low cost virtualization, applications, access, and Operating Systems to the fight, along with Microsoft's extensive partner and developer community. I think VMware's days are numbered. VMware has a great virtualization platform, but given time any company can duplicate it. But Microsoft with Citrix and Novell have all the things people want virtualization for, to run all those systems and applications you need.

One thing I really like about VMware is that it sits on a RedHat-ish Linux OS. When I installed it last year I put all the patches available for it at the time and never looked back or installed more patches, because I feel it is relatively safe to do so. I also don't have to worry about constant patches needing to be installed, as you see in the Windows OS.

Now, there will certainly be a financial reason to look at virtualization in 2008, but I am guessing it will still be the same pros and cons as the current Microsoft virtual solutions on 2003 vs the Linux based solutions with stability and very little OS patching required.

VMware may be a one trick pony, but that also means that they are much more focused on this technology. Also, let's not forget that they have resources and partners of their own. In any event I would not discount a company the currently holds approximately 75% of this market, and has a loyal customer base. In other words, this is going to be one heck of a fight.

I do have to say I'm unclear about the value Citrix brings Microsoft in the long run. Sure, at this stage of the game Microsoft is happy to partner with anyone against VMware. Also, I'm guessing Microsoft is pleased about any customer Citrix is able to take away from VMware, but maybe the reason is that Microsoft believes it will be easier to take this customer away from Citrix further down the line. Previously I had thought that Microsoft is looking for Citrix to provide the management tools, but listening to these interviews it's obvious that this is not the case. The hypervisor is becoming a commodity and Microsoft will not let anyone else make the big bucks on management.

Finally, if we are discussing equines, what about dark horse Oracle?

"I do have to say I'm unclear about the value Citrix brings Microsoft in the long run"

 Funny, people were saying the same thing in 1997! :-)

Actually I do see the value Citrix, and Citrix alternatives, provide on top of the Microsoft TS infrastructure. It has been discussed here often enough that Microsoft has intentionally decided not to compete with Citrix in this category. This is because TS isn't, and has never been core to Microsoft. As a result, while Microsoft's TS capabilities have indeed been enhanced, it remains an entry-level solution. If you are a tiny company then WS08 TS may be good enough, otherwise there are several alternatives you should check out.

Virtualization OTOH is core to Microsoft. I don't see Microsoft handing over critical aspects of virtualization to Citrix or anybody else. Maybe VDI for now because Microsoft is so focused on VMware and server virtualization. But if VDI does eventually grow beyond TS I believe Microsoft will enter this market in a strong way.

Vmware is tried and tested where MS is new to the arena. It will be a interesting fight but I think it will take MS a few years to catch up and god knows where VMware may be by then. We will be sticking for VMware for our next 3 year plan as it proven technology. During that time we will monitor and reivew the products to see what develops but who wants to be on the bleeding edge of MS VM to be a crash test dummy? I dont as I have a mortgage to pay and recommending .0 release is career suicide if you ask me!

1. Doug Brown recently interviewed Mike Neil, Microtost's General Manager of Virtualization Strategy. In the interview Doug asks Mike about their cooperation with Citrix. Mike's answer was that they are looking to achieve great interoperability between the Citrix and Microsoft virtualization products so that "if customers chose to use Xen-based solutions in the short-term they'd be able to take that investment and very easily move that to a Viridian (Hyper-V) environment ... or vice versa". Very amusing.

2. I wonder if that belated vice versa also includes Oracle VM and Sun.

3. 4sysops, a site dedicated to Windows Administrators, recently reviewed both Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager (VMM) and VMware Server 2 Beta. Here is a very interesting quote:

Even though VMM didn’t really convince me to move to Virtual Server, my test of VMware Server 2 did

Also amusing, some tech reporters actually think that Hyper-V is built on Xen. The Microsoft Windows Server Division issues a rebuttal:

Can you imagine GPL code running in the Windows kernal (hypervisor layer) ... now that'd be something. I think Jim Allchin would come out of retirement for that one ;-)

A hypervisor is essentially a multitasking operating system that sits below traditional operating systems. Microsoft has more experience and installs with x86 systems than any other company, especially VMware. Saying that VMware is more proven is a bogus argument. The compatibility list for VMware is .01% as long as the list for the Windows OS. Microsoft's 20+ years of experience developing software on the x86 platform focused on building a hypervisor that only needs to support the subset of hardware that makes sense for hypervisors will easily overcome any perceived reliability advantage VMware has.

 Citrix's installed base in the terminal server market will look to them for VDI solutions. Microsoft wants them to run their OS on the desktop. It is extremely important that Microsoft makes sure that their OSes run as well as possible on all VDI platforms, including Xen. Citrix gives Microsoft the best bang for the buck in the Xen world.

"The compatibility list for VMware is .01% as long as the list for the Windows OS."

This is a really good point and is one of the key advantages of the Hyper-V design, with a Windows server instance in the parent partition managing the interaction with the hardware & device drivers.

Novell was once "more proven" in the network operating system space than Microsoft...and we know how that has turned out.  VMware is simply getting what it can, while they can (and those being pitched 3-year enterprise licenses from Vmware should understand this part of Vmware's agenda)