The Virtualization Practice

420 search results for "citrix"

There have been several interesting posts in the blogosphere about virtualization security and how to measure it. Specifically, the discussions are really about the size of the hypervisor footprint or about the size of patches. But hypervisor footprints from a security perspective are neither of these. The concern when dealing with hypervisor security is about Risk not about the size of the hypervisor or the size of a patch it is purely about the Risks associated with the hypervisor in terms if confidentiality, availability, and integrity.

It was only a matter of time before VMware decided that if it was going to be an applications platform company, and really take on Microsoft, that it would need a presence in the business of building applications, and in providing the run-time infrastructure for applications. Acquiring SpringSource is a brilliant move because it leverages the open source community to devalue and dilute Microsoft standing in the applications tools and platform markets.

VMware, Microsoft and Citrix all include management tools with their offerings. Every enterprise customer of VMware, Microsoft and Citrix virtualization platforms typically uses the default management tools provided by the virtualization platform vendor. However, there are strong reasons to look beyond these tools, and consider offerings from vendors like Dynamic Ops, Embotics, Fastscale, Fortisphere, Hyper9, ManageIQ, Platform Computing, Reflex Systems, Tripware, Surgient, Veeam, and VizionCore.

While VMware is being lead by two executives, Paul Maritz and Todd Nielson who were instrumental in the establishment of Windows as a dominant platform, VMware is today still not acting like a true platform company. Windows became a dominant platform because Microsoft structured its business model around making the platform a success. This included a laser like focus upon the success of the platform, and an approach to partnering that is still unmatched in the industry. VMware can make vSphere into a dominant platform, but only if VMware adopts some plays from Microsoft’s book.

There has been quite a bit of debate about SMB virtualization and what they want. However, no one has really looked into whether or not the SMB can afford virtualization. There is quite a bit of talk that says that the SMB wants everything for free, or that they will get immediate benefits from virtualization, but can they actually afford VMware, HyperV, XenServer, or KVM?