Post to Twitter |
Comments (22) |
Views (58750) |
I was recently on a panel in Stockholm moderated by Brian Madden and Alessandro Perilli where, with Mike Neil, Avi Kivity, and Lance Berc, I enjoyed an engaging discussion on the future of virtualization. The event was a great opportunity for the audience to dig into different products and vendor strategies and Brian and Alessandro allowed none of us to wriggle away from the real issues. Definitely the best panel I've been on - and all due to the two moderators.
Brian is one of a rare breed that I am seldom lucky enough to meet. He's about 20 (probably permanently), super smart, and incredibly engaging and friendly. He dresses cool and trendy. He is an excellent presenter and author. He also knows more about Citrix products than many people at Citrix, me included. He has found and filled a key niche in the Citrix ecosystem for no-bullshit, hands-on, been-there-and-done-it technology and product expertise that has won him the respect of Citrix and its customers. As an independent advocate to our customer base he has developed a reputation for demanding answers, and getting them.
So Brian's latest piece predicting the end of Xen should be seen in precisely that light - he's beating the hive with a stick to see whether bees will come buzzing out. His logic is a little blunt - hence the stick analogy - but I value tremendously his approach because it gives me an opportunity to clearly state the Citrix virtualization strategy, so that customers understand why an investment in Xen and XenServer is sound. I guess it also drives clicks to brianmadden.com, which can't be a bad thing, eh Brian?
Brian predicts the end of Xen based on the following claims:
- Citrix XenServer has "literally zero percent market share"
- VMware has dominant presence in enterprises,
- Microsoft Hyper-V will take over SME virtualization, so Citrix will abandon XenServer
- The open source community will abandon Xen in favor of KVM
His argument is superficially appealing, but unfortunately completely wrong. That said, I'm grateful that he has highlighted the need for Citrix to clarify its virtualization strategy, and I hope that this long, but rather rapidly prepared response goes some way towards doing so.
1. XenServer has zero market share: Setting aside Brian's challenging hyperbole, the XenServer business has been approximately doubling quarter on quarter since its first release - "approximately" only because the transition from XenSource to Citrix meant a new CRM system, new support system, new channel management, wrapping our heads around Citrix licensing and a ton of other overhead that took us a while to figure out, but which will accelerate our business in the back half of 2008. We have somewhere approaching 4,000 enterprise customers, and about 3000 trained channel partners. (Watch for the inevitable follow up from Mike D at VMware who is still out to prove that he finished high school math). VMware claims 100,000 customers. Citrix has about 220,000 customers and about a hundred million users. The XenServer market share is small, and growing as rapidly as any such product can given the current VMware brand status, and the fact that we started well behind them. We had a few key blockers for enterprise adoption, four fifths of which are addressed in our forthcoming XenServer 4.2 release.
A recent analyst report that I saw gave us about 4% market share (by customers), which would seem a tad generous, but not far off. But XenServer is just starting to show up in the market. HP and Dell have just started shipping XenServer embedded into their server hardware. And with HP stating that XenServer HP Select Edition is HP's preferred embedded virtualization platform there must be something in it. Yes, this is embedded virtualization done right - In each of our announced OEM deals, our partner gets to offer their customer the tremendous value of a powerful virtual infrastructure component "built in", while adding their own differentiated value propositions on top. And uniquely we charge one fixed price per server, not per core or socket. We are proud to be a completely hidden component of a ProLiant server that is managed using HP's powerful multi-hypervisor VMM 3.5 (also manages VMware and Microsoft), integrated with HP Lights Out management and Systems Insight Manager, and with a compelling graphical ProLiant Virtual Console, whose UI is like my Mac. After all, a key HP value prop to their customers is out of the box manageability. XenServer is also available integrated into Dell PowerEdge servers and soon with Dell OpenManage, and it is embedded into the NEC Eco Center and other x86 servers, x86 servers from Lenovo, and Egenera PAN Manager for Egenera servers, which is also resold as Dell PAN Manager. Each offers a powerful value-added, XenServer-powered customer experience that is simply not available with VMware or other products. And then there's Marathon EverRunVM and EverRun for XenServer - both of which offer five nines of availability for VMs. (Can others do this? No). Stratus Avance-- a perfect mid market appliance for business continuity on a pair of industry standard servers. XenServer inside. Avance is also sold by Dell (gosh, that's right: XenServer is inside three key Dell enterprise virtualization offerings). (Can other vendors do this? No). Finally, most recently and strategically profoundly importantly, Symantec's Veritas Virtual Infrastructure (VVI) - an incredibly rich software offering from a major enterprise IT vendor that combines the incredible depth of the Veritas storage management suite with the powerful, open storage repository model of XenServer to create a high-end enterprise offering that application level availability, and performance and management integrated with the industry's leading storage management solution stack. (Can the competition do this? No).
The army of enterprise class competitors to VMware is growing. XenServer is inside and it is compatible with Hyper-V. And it's not going away. It's just that we allow our partners to make money from virtualization, and we don't demand to be the sole value proposition. What a novel idea!
2. VMware owns the Enterprise: Ignoring Brian's second hyperbole (we all know that VMware has signed up many large enterprises to their ELA), remember that only 10-15% of servers are virtualized, and there is a long way to go yet. Evidence of imminent change in this regard came a week ago on an ACM sponsored panel with the director of IT for a major F50 who said "We have more Xen in production than VMware. An open architecture gives us greater scalability and control, and we cannot afford to rely on a single vendor." There you have it - VMware, for all its success, has inherent weaknesses - the largest of which is its one size fits all, single vendor sells all mentality. Its arrogance with customers and the channel, and the paucity of rich value-added ISV offerings around it all demonstrate their vulnerability. It is VMware that will be the Netscape of Virtualization, and not Xen or Citrix. We have never "wanted it all" and by having an approach that is founded on the notion of a rich, competitive choice of value-added offerings, we explicitly acknowledge that we will partner in key areas, and add value in others. Citrix is after all a partner-centric vendor.
Our largest partner is of course Microsoft. And we share with Microsoft and Hyper-V an entirely different view of virtualized infrastructure, one which is embodied in XenServer and Hyper-V: A virtualized infrastructure founded on fast, free, compatible and ubiquitously available hypervisors and a rich ecosystem of value added partners that address all customer needs. So Brian's statement is simply a statement of current market status. Sounds big and bold, but nothing really new.
3. Microsoft will take the rest of the market: It is important to state yet again that we are not in a competition for server sockets with Microsoft. If that were the case, why would we have helped Microsoft to make Hyper-V a better hypervisor, by developing the shims and drivers that will allow Linux to run with optimal performance on Hyper-V? The founding thesis of XenSource, and the continued strategy at Citrix, is to promote fast, free, compatible and ubiquitous hypervisor based virtualization. If the hypervisor is free, why worry about who delivers it? Let the customer pick the implementation method that they want - the real money is in the up-sell with products that make virtualization valuable for customers.
I personally view Hyper-V as one of the most compatible implementations of the Xen architecture out there, and we guarantee that XenServer and Hyper-V are 100% compatible at the VM level. So why not drop Xen and go with Hyper-V? Xen is ahead of Hyper-V in scalability, cross platform support and crucially, support from a rich ecosystem of vendors all of whom stand to benefit from commoditizing the hypervisor, and continuing to make Xen great. Xen and XenServer offer the industry a ring through the nose of a bull - called Microsoft. We have a rope through that ring and we tug it from time to time to ensure that the bull goes the right way. But when the bull charges (as it will now with the RTM of Hyper-V) we will step nimbly aside and watch the effect on our friends at VMware.
Who will use Hyper-V? Over time, a lot of customers, starting in SME. Will Hyper-V eclipse XenServer's footprint? Again, yes, over time and often for different use cases. Microsoft still needs to extend the architecture to deal with live relo, offer better resource pooling than simply re-using Microsoft Cluster Server, and figure out how to deal with storage, but they will do a good job over the next few years. Do I feel threatened by that? No. Every implementation of the fast, free, compatible, ubiquitous hypervisor architecture offers us an opportunity to up-sell the customer with rich value-added features. Remember - we're the guys who made the hypervisor free! Not for nothing have we been beating Microsoft about the ears to get the darn thing to market - it will offer us a terrific opportunity for up-sell. With what?
- XenServer Platinum today is already hypervisor agnostic. It can instantly boot and run a VM on Xen, Hyper-V, VMware and even bare metal, with a streamed VHD that offers better performance than local disk. It even allows us to boot a thousand VMs from a single VHD, which is key to scalability for XenDesktop.
- Oh, and then there's XenDesktop, our powerful VDI offering that presumes the availability of fast, free, compatible, ubiquitous hypervisors... I see I'm starting to repeat myself. XenDesktop is a key area of focus for Citrix, and the inclusion of XenServer as a technology feature is the right way to go about delivering desktops as a service. No need to be a virtualization administrator - delivering desktops is hard enough already. Doing it VMware style you have fights between the Desktop guy and the Virtual Center administrator about why a user's desktop disappeared, and no way to figure out why it all went wrong.
- XenApp (Presentation Server) on XenServer already offers a factor of five better performance than on "a leading virtualization vendor's product" (they'd sue me if I used their name, and it doesn't begin with M).
- And yes, there's more coming we haven't spoken about yet.
Bottom line on this point: XenServer today and in the future offers a powerful, Hyper-V compatible enterprise virtual infrastructure that is simply a component of many of the industry's most powerful virtualization offerings, including our own XenDesktop and soon XenApp. XenServer at the platinum level today extends Hyper-V with powerful value-added features to address some of its key enterprise scalability needs, particularly in dynamic management of storage. And it will soon be able to be managed by System Center VMM (or any other DMTF equipped management tool).
4. The open source community will abandon Xen for KVM: Brian, please don't take offence, but I suspect that for many Microsoft MVPs, the workings of the open source community may be a little bit of a mystery. First, there is no such thing as "the (singular) open source community". [The Xen community] is independent of any vendor, large, growing and vibrant. It is quite different from the [Linux kernel community], though we share a few developers. Xen is a cross platform, type 1 hypervisor, OS neutral, that runs on ARM based PDAs, x86, PPC and SGI Itanium super computers. Xen is in BIOS offerings from major vendors, available at point of sale on just about every x86 server, and embedded in network and storage chipsets and appliances. It has tremendous performance and leads in IOV hardware support and performance. Xen is available from the major Linux Distros, but also in Sun xVM and Oracle VM in their virtualization offerings, and they are very committed to their products. Xen is or soon will be available embedded in every x86 server. Xen is used as a standard test on every AMD and Intel CPU, and is the foundation of the planet's largest deployment of virtualization, at Amazon. Xen is present in or runs every major cloud, including Google (who recently began to host the open source project to develop a Xen equivalent of VM Safe). And Xen is quietly emerging as an embedded hypervisor on laptops and PCs. At the Xen Summit last week, we had representatives from 12 countries, 14 universities, and 47 vendors - totaling about 175 core developers. The research and work in progress indicated that the Xen project is stronger than ever, and far deeper and more powerful than "virtualization in Linux" - a role that I'm sure KVM will evolve to fill very well. The Xen ecosystem is participating in the benefits of secure class 1 hypervisor based virtualization, while still being able to take advantage of the incredible innovation in Linux (which some vendors use as a parent partition / driver domain). And of course in spite of their marketing fluff, the Red Hat engineering team continues to be a significant contributor to Xen (and we love them for it) and Red hat has a seat on the project's advisory board.
KVM is interesting, but rather late to the party - I think the world has already decided that hypervisor based virtualization is the way to go. That said, KVM is arguably more convenient for a Linux distro - because they don't have to get their hypervisor from xen.org and their kernel from kernel.org, and combine them. I like KVM a lot. Great for Linux based developers too. But there's nothing really new in KVM - the technology has been in products such as Microsoft Virtual PC/Virtual Server, Parallels and so on for quite a while. It's just a VT/AMDV driver added to Linux to allow it to host additional VMs. Great if your usage model is "first install Linux, then use your Linux skills to install VMs". None of our customers want that, though I'm sure the adopters of Xen in SLES 10 or RHEL 5 are comfortable with the model. Unfortunately the KVM project isn't yet addressing any of the other key requirements for virtual infrastructure (virtualization-aware shared storage, snapshotting, cloning, thin provisioning, HA, and much more) it is just another way to do CPU and memory virtualization ... at a time when Xen already offers Linux a typical overhead of under 1% (SPECJBB), and a rich set of value-added features. To be honest, I'd love to see the two projects working together to have a single extension code base to both core virtualization technologies, but the kernel.org folks are solely Linux focussed (good for them) whereas we tend to look at all OSes with a requirement for OS indepencence. I also have a strong suspicion too that by the time the KVM folks are done, they will have discovered that they have to re-design many of the core Linux resource management algorithms to take account of VMs, so it's going to be a long and slow road. (There was a new performance comparison of Xen vs KVM at the Summit, which couldn't complete because the KVM test kept crashing, but I've seen earlier work that indicates that KVM performs very respectably). Can the two projects co-exist? Of course. And Linux now contains the key paravirt_ops API for secure dynamic binding to a class 1 hypervisor - Xen, Hyper-V (we've built the shim) and of course VMware, who collaborated on the API development. Ultimately the open source community will have the benefit of both approaches - type 1 and type 2.
There is one intriguing aspect of KVM, namely its likely adoption by one or more Linux Distros. I'm looking forward to hearing how those vendors explain the value proposition of a product that contains two incompatible virtualization technologies, and no management framework other than a thin veneer of an API that is incompatible with the ([DMTF]) accepted industry standard for management of virtualization. [Added note, with thanks to follow-up poster: I forgot to mention that there is a project under way to provide the relevant DMTF profile support, but it's a long way off, and there's rumored to be an effort to address the VM incompatibility issue. It would be a great step forward for open source if these projects would accelerate, and it would be a great way to accelerate the adoption of fast, free, compatible, ubiquitous virtualization by the Linux distros.]
Summary
- XenServer is growing strongly on its own, and XenServer is inside the industry's most differentiated enterprise virtual infrastructure products from leading vendors. It offers the greatest price performance, compatibility with Hyper-V, and a rich ecosystem of customer-focused value props for management, availability, dynamism and flexibility. Get it in your next server, completely built in.
- VMware has a strong lead, customer confidence, significant presence, and expensive, over priced products that demand customers buy into a single vendor, proprietary, closed, monolithic architecture that has significant architectural and scalability drawbacks. Next time your VMware sales guy calls, ask him for some of the free stuff, or better, just download XenServer for free.
- Microsoft Hyper-V is a fine implementation of the Xen architecture, compatible with XenServer. It has a strong development plan. XenServer today and in the future will extend Hyper-V to address advanced use cases, and to support specific Citrix/Microsoft product partnerships. A good example is XenDesktop. There will be others. System Center VMM is a great product, and will be able to manage XenServer as well as Hyper-V and VMware.
- The Xen community is vibrant and growing. Xen is widely used, massively deployed, core to the product and corporate strategies of some of the industry's largest vendors. Predicting its demise would be extremely naïve. KVM is very "in": interesting, incompatible and incomplete. The two projects can co-exist independently and happily.
Now, back to my day job! And thanks again Brian for banging on the bee hive. Beer on me.
Comments (22)
Jul 02, 2008
Anonymous says:
Wrt to the comment "I'm looking forward to hearing how those vendors exp...Wrt to the comment
"I'm looking forward to hearing how those vendors explain the value proposition of a product that contains two incompatible virtualization technologies, and no management framework other than a thin veneer of an API that is incompatible with the () accepted industry standard for management of virtualization. "
That is a trivial question to answer. The libvirt API (http://libvirt.org/) provides a management API which supports Xen, KVM, OpenVZ, LXC (Native linux containers). This allows management tools to be written without being tied into a particular hypervisor. Furthermore there is a CIM binding (http://libvirt.org/CIM/) that is built on-top of libvirt which provides full compatablity with the DMTF specifications for managing virtual machines. The hypervisor is being commoditized and the libvirt and libvirt-CIM APIs thus allow developers to avoid being locked into a particular implementation.
Jul 02, 2008
Simon Crosby says:
Yes, you're right and I forgot to mention that - sorry (will fix in main post).&...Yes, you're right and I forgot to mention that - sorry (will fix in main post). But the weird bit is that Xen VMs and KVM VMs are incompatible. And even though there is a rudimentary shim to fix this, it is quite a way off.
Don't get me wrong on KVM - it is a much easier model for a Linux distro. We aren't one.
Jul 03, 2008
Anonymous says:
Xen VMs and KVM VMs are *not* incompatible. A fully virtualized ...Xen VMs and KVM VMs are *not* incompatible. A fully virtualized KVM virtual machine will trivially run on a fully virtuaized Xen host, and vica-verca, since they share the same underlying QEMU device model. A paravirtualized Xen VM can also be run directly ontop of KVM by using the 'xenner' technology which implements the Xen paravirt ABI on top of KVM. So there is easy portability of both the management toolchain via libvirt, and of installed VMs optionally using Xenner.
Jul 02, 2008
Anonymous says:
Hmmm, well I think you are dead wrong with your statements about KVM. The Linux ...Hmmm, well I think you are dead wrong with your statements about KVM. The Linux ecosystem that can put it's back into that is massive and has proven time and time again that it is a force to be reckoned with, often outclassing any other. Your comments about the other so called hugely important aspects "virtualization-aware shared storage, snapshotting, cloning, thin provisioning, HA, and much more" I find laughable. Existing technologies exist in pretty much every major Linux distribution for this and it's just a matter of time to tie those things together much like the LAMP stack was put together at the time. I actually think it quite stupid if not insane to NOT take advantage of things like clustering, storage virtualization, LVM snapshotting etc as all these technologies exist in Linux today. VMWare, Microsoft, Citrix creating all these things again...what a waste of time, not to mention what a mess it creates for customer who so love to leverage their existing skills even further. No mate, I am convinced that there will be only two big technologies in the long run in this space. Just like Gartner predicts (no brainer by now) that there will be only Windows and Linux for the majority of the OS future...same deal for Virtualization , because these two are the only ones that have enough leverage in all the other wonderful thing an OS provides to provide a true integrated infrastructure. But it will take some time before the markets have settled down to that level....and in the meantime everybody gets to play and make some money.
But I have no doubt about it in my mind that in the long run, it will be a Microsoft based offering vs a Linux based offering full stop. Whether this means KVM or what have time will tell. Who knows, VMWare might decide to go Open Source....after all if your market is getting commoditized it's probably better to be on top of the game rather then have customer commoditize on something else then your stuff right?
Jul 02, 2008
Simon Crosby says:
Yes, Linux is and always will be great. Xen is not part of Linux. Xe...Yes, Linux is and always will be great. Xen is not part of Linux. Xen is a type one hypervisor and VMware's success, and market leadership has already got customers to understand how important it is to separate virtualized infrastructure from any OS specific viewpoint of resources. Xen serves all OSes superbly. And the Xen project loves Linux and uses it. Xen is a derived work of Linux. But your thesis requires that VMware disappear. You're presumably aware that VMware could buy Red Hat 3 times over in one year, based on revenues alone? Interesting theory, though, I guess.
Jul 02, 2008
Anonymous says:
There's a lot of double talk/marketing speak here. "It's just a VT/AMDV driver ...There's a lot of double talk/marketing speak here.
"It's just a VT/AMDV driver added to Linux to allow it to host additional VMs. Great if your usage model is "first install Linux, then use your Linux skills to install VMs".
Doesn't Xen use VT/AMD-V? And don't you also have to install Linux?
You talk about Xen as if it's a stand alone solution. But doesn't Xen require a general purpose OS to run?
Looking at Citrix XenServer you install the Xen hypervisor then have to install CentOS to make it work. Then you have QEMU running on top of CentOS.
With Novell you see Xen + SLES, Red Hat Xen + RHEL and Sun Xen + solaris.
All the materials I see from Citrix seem to dodge that little fact - that you need Linux (or UNIX) to run, and unlike VMware 3i you don't have a self contained operating system agnostic solution.
With the combination of Xen + CentOS with QEMU running on top of that - so how do you classify your solution as "Type 1"?
VMware moved from the two layer approach (VMKernel+Console OS) to a single layer, it sounds like we're seeing the same thing with Linux/KVM
Jul 02, 2008
Simon Crosby says:
Yes, Xen uses VT/AMDV. Indeed KVM used some of the Xen VT/AMDV code base t...Yes, Xen uses VT/AMDV. Indeed KVM used some of the Xen VT/AMDV code base to kickstart its effort. I'm not glossing over anything. But a virtual infrastructure platform is much more than VT/AMDV support, that's all.
Do we have to install Linux? No. Xen brings up the hardware. Xen uses one or more privileged guest OSes to provide management and I/O services to other guests. Those privileged guests could be Solaris (Sun xVM) or BSD (several products, shall remain nameless) or Linux or.. even Windows.
In XenServer we use an embedded EL 5.1 kernel for this, yes. But the user never sees it. XenServer is a primarly Windows IT Pro focusses virtualization appliance. Our use of Linux is cleaner I believe than VMware's, since inevitably to configure anything interesting in ESX you have to log on to the RHEL 3 based service console.
Jul 03, 2008
Anonymous says:
So the architecture is Hardware : Xen Hypervisor : Operating System (Linu...So the architecture is
Hardware : Xen Hypervisor : Operating System (Linux/BSD/Solaris/etc) and then QEMU
So QEMU runs on the Domain 0 operating system and runs the guests using I/O from domain 0 and CPU/Memory access from the Hypervisor.
How is this "Type 1" and Linux/KVM isn't?
"n XenServer we use an embedded EL 5.1 kernel for this, yes. But the user never sees it"
So your point is better tools then?
Jul 03, 2008
Anonymous says:
Well written Simon.I admire people standing up for their thoughts and believes.A...Well written Simon.I admire people standing up for their thoughts and believes.And we (the Citrix community) shouldn't forget (with all respect) that people like Brian Madden has the gift from the God's to have become such a good presenter but that doesn't necessarily mean that everything he says or does is true.
Jul 03, 2008
Jennifer Lang says:
XenApp on XenServer For XenApp on XenServer, check out the Tolly verified scala...XenApp on XenServer
For XenApp on XenServer, check out the Tolly verified scalability PDF, "XenServer Enterprise 4.1.0 Performance Evaluation of XenApp in a 64-bit Virtualized Server Environment Using XenServer."
Daniel Feller, Citrix Sr. Architect, Worldwide Consulting Solutions, has also posted Reference Architecture, Implementation Guide and Design Considerations for a XenApp on XenServer environment in the App Delivery Best Practices Wiki.
Additional documents will be posted as they become available.
Jul 04, 2008
Anonymous says:
Hi Simon, You wrote "There was a new performance comparison of Xen vs KVM at th...Hi Simon,
You wrote "There was a new performance comparison of Xen vs KVM at the Summit, which couldn't complete because the KVM test kept crashing, but I've seen earlier work that indicates that KVM performs very respectably"
Do you have a pointer to the paper or the procedure used to do the tests? I'm very surprised with what you've said as I have been personally doing tests regularily to compare the 2. Those tests are public and available at http://virt.kernelnewbies.org/XenVsKVM
Regards,
Gildas
Jul 07, 2008
Anonymous says:
I reply to myself since the slides from xensummit were added in the meantime at ...I reply to myself since the slides from xensummit were added in the meantime at http://xen.org/xensummit/xensummit_summer_2008.html and I guess this is http://xen.org/files/xensummitboston08/Deshane-XenSummit08-Slides.pdf
Gildas
Jul 06, 2008
Anonymous says:
Doesn't KVM also provide support for powerpc and s390? Therefore isn't stating ...Doesn't KVM also provide support for powerpc and s390?
Therefore isn't stating "It's just a VT/AMDV driver" factually inaccurate?
May 17, 2009
Anonymous says:
Hello. One thing I've learned in all these years is not to make love when you re...Hello. One thing I've learned in all these years is not to make love when you really don't feel it; there's probably nothing worse you can do to yourself than that.
I am from Leone and also now teach English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Offers information about synthroid levothyroxine sodium tablets, usp for the treatment of hypothyroidism."
Thanks for the help
, Mireille.
May 20, 2009
Anonymous says:
Greeting. A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money....Greeting. A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money.
I am from Palestinian and too bad know English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "For that reason, the orchid treatment programs.What is drug addiction? Is drug addiction a disease? How is it treated? How is behavior affected by this treatment? Involved in a legal drug incident."
Best regards
, Jotham.
May 24
Anonymous says:
Hello everyone. Hello. You know this is the first site, which i really like GOO...Hello everyone. Hello. You know this is the first site, which i really like
GOOD. Help me! Looking for sites on: Turbo Tax. I found only this - <a href="http://turbo-tax.biz">turbo tax</a>. With average of advertised as a whole new. If your body does not have enough of this. Thanks :mad:. Lila from Iceland.
May 24
Anonymous says:
Good evening. To manage such a human life is nozt enough, the life expectancy of...Good evening. To manage such a human life is nozt enough, the life expectancy of members of elite families on average - years. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Two smoking cessation medications available on the snail of synthroid ingredient discretely though it features synthroid ingredient words such as fuck.. I found only this - <a href="http://turbo-tax.biz">turbo tax</a>. I actually did find a new thryoid doctor and he prescribed. Synthroid without prescription, copegus overnight delivery, order purim Thank you very much :confused:. Stan from Chile.
Jul 06, 2008
Anonymous says:
The post implies KVM is not a type 1 hypervisor (at least to me, I might be wron...The post implies KVM is not a type 1 hypervisor (at least to me, I might be wrong). However to quote Wikipedia's Hypervisor article:
So both KVM and Xen are type-1. However, KVM does not require a 'dom0' operating system instance to be useful.
Jul 14, 2008
Stephen Greenberg says:
Thank you Simon, I am very glad that you responded with this additional informat...Thank you Simon, I am very glad that you responded with this additional information. This is a very healthy discussion/debate and Brian is uniquely gifted and getting these things started!
Jul 29, 2008
Anonymous says:
Simon, What do you make of the the very recent announcement by VMWare that...Simon,
What do you make of the the very recent announcement by VMWare that their hypervisor, ESXi, is now free? Free as in beer. This has got to have some sort of significant impact on your predictive thinking regarding the uptake of Hyper-V. Maritz has already made an impact at VMWare. Or, at least the message is clear: Bring it!
How will Microsoft and Citrix respond? Interesting times. Interesting times.
Nov 03, 2008
Anonymous says:
so, apparently Microsoft could be using XEN in their code?? how cool woul...so, apparently Microsoft could be using XEN in their code??
how cool would be that??
JR
Jan 11, 2009
Anonymous says:
I have experienced many of Simon's points. I have a immense respect fo...I have experienced many of Simon's points. I have a immense respect for VMware's products and the contribution they have made to the virtuallization industry. I believe VMWare is a sound choice for anyone wanting to implement virtualization but to temper that i have found the arrogance hard to swallow, and I believe their products are more expensive, yes they have free products but read the fine print, the stuff you really want costs big money. Not that i fault them for that though, its good work if you can get it! I think of VMWare VI as a powerful Mercedes a little stuck up but still pretty sexy. Hyper-V seems to be stable and certainly far more powerful than Virtual Server it will be ubiquitous and I expect to work with it a lot. I believe it will also be a great choice, but my dime is on XEN. I have had excellent performance and stability with dozens of production nstalls and dozens of lab and test installs all with two to 5 servers in a pool. XEN is stable fast and straight forward, the free product is full featured and a real bargain, upgrades are a license upgrade right to the top level. Will XEN alone knock VMware off their perch, maybe maybe not, will VMWare maintain their current market share, not i suspect not. I believe the market is growing fast and Citrtix XEN Server with have a respectable share. XEN is Dead! Long live XEN!
Add Comment