Windows 2012 Hyper-V is the hypervisor for the cloud, and VMware’s vSphere is a dead man walking. So declared Aidan Finn at a recent virtualization conference in Hamburg during an enlightening entertaining session which he tastefully entitled, “Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V & VSphere 5.1 – Death Match”.
A bold statement? Hyper-V has often been cited as a “nearly ran”; good enough for the SMB space and smaller Private Clouds, but lacking the muscle for a cloud-focused enterprise. Nice for a visit, wouldn’t want to live there.
A biased statement? Aidan Finn is highly regarded Hyper-v Microsoft Most Valuable Professional and regularly writes on his website about changes and features of the product. In Predicatably Irrational, Dan Ariely dedicates a chapter to the possibility of a fan’s judgement being clouded. And yet, the list of features now available in Windows Hyper-V is compelling. Indeed, back in March we discussed if Microsoft would drive a wedge between VMware and EMC with Windows Server 2012 and Hyper-V.
In terms of embedded services and experience, VMware’s vSphere has a significant place in many organisations’ data centres. Licensing alone is unlikely to change hearts and minds to convert, but what about features?
Can Microsoft claim that Hyper-V is the hypervisor for the cloud? What new features are available in the 2012 release, and how does it now compare to vSphere 5.1. More importantly, will these changes drive wider adoption?
In this first installment, we take a look at pricing, scalability, and performance, as well as storage.
Moving to the cloud! Let me be a little more precise and say moving to the public cloud. This concept has really been embraced and thrives in the consumer market, but will this concept really take off in the corporate world, and really, should it? One of the main concepts of virtualization, in the beginning, was the ability to consolidate physical systems into a virtual environment to shrink the overall footprint, as well as to be able to take advantage of and use all available compute resources in a physical server, and to have centralized control of the computer, storage, and networking resources.
Both Microsoft and VMware have revamped their product suites, and therefore their licensing, once more. As always, how you buy will dictate how you license. It has taken a bit of time for all the revamped information to percolate through to each corporate site and for all the issues to be addressed. As we did before, let us look at licensing. We will look first at the old model of Hyper-V vs VMware vSphere vs Citrix Xen vs RedHat KVM. Then, in a follow-on article, we will look at the new cloud suite models.
There is an ever-increasing number of data protection providers creating replication receiver clouds as they team up with cloud service providers. This could herald the end of on-premise tape use for some enterprises, leaving tape to be used primarily by cloud providers. There are major benefits for Quantum, Zerto, Veeam, and others to form replication receiver clouds, but these clouds are not just for storage anymore. They could be purely for storage, but this is not a big win for the cloud service providers. So why would cloud service providers be interested in being a storage endpoint for data protection? Why are they concerned with backup and offering it as a service?
VMworld 2012 San Francisco is over, and I have some time to reflect on my virtualization thoughts in general before getting ready for VMworld Barcelona. One thing I noticed is recent announcements about VMware vSphere 5.1 and Microsoft Hyper-V 2012. Microsoft and VMware both released a specific new feature to each respective platform at basically the same time. Is this a sign that Microsoft is really closing the gap on VMware? I think we are getting there, but I have also made some other personal observations on how I see virtualization in the future, and I foresee a completely different method and mindset for the future between these two companies.
While looking around the web for anything new with virtualization, I kept seeing more and more posts and articles about the new type of virtual hypervisor. Type 0, now this sounds interesting and I found these definitions for each type of hypervisor.