Microsoft and HP CEOs are making a big announcement today about a joint agreement and investment in business computing. We don't know what they are announcing, but we know what they should be. Mark Hurd and Steve Ballmer will take questions from invited journos at a teleconference later today abbout the two companies' preparing …
....unless you're purely virtualizing a set of recent-ish Windows releases, and even then...
From an OS support point of view we have, on one hand, a very well established player in virtualization, with excellent tools and support for Windows 95 to v7, Windows Server, Solaris 8-10, endless Linux variants including SuSE, RedHat and Ubuntu, a number of BSD flavours and similar including Apple OS-X Server and other Unices such as NetWare.
On the other hand, Hyper-V with support for Windows XP to v7, Windows Server 2000-2008, SuSE and RedHat.
Quite a difference, and one that might be relevant to potential customers....unless, of course, the announcement is support for HP-UX on Hyper-V !! Wohooooooooooo - that'll slay 'em ;)
Microsoft are doing they're typical thing of starting small through SME and then will go for the larger enterprise. (e.g. SQL, Windows Server, Exchange etc.)
We have over 80 servers and 900 users spread across 3 sites.... however we'd have no use for Solaris, Ubuntu or legacy Windows clients to be running in our virtual farms. (which is ESX 3.5)
Even when I worked at Thomas Cook they had a small cluster (4 I think - and included test and training boxes) of Solaris servers for their POS application - and EVERYTHING else was Windows.
In the modern world you'd probably find a handful of Linux servers in most large enterprises. Normally database, web or firewall roles.
SME's generally don't - they'll have Windows doing everything they need.
NetWare has never been a member of Unix family.
> Microsoft are doing they're typical thing of starting small through SME and then will go
> for the larger > enterprise. (e.g. SQL, Windows Server, Exchange etc.)
I totally agree - it was the point where they meet the large enterprise that could be a hard sell IMO.
> In the modern world you'd probably find a handful of Linux servers in most large enterprises.
> Normally database, web or firewall roles.
Perhaps the 'enterprises' you're familiar with are different to the ones I am, which is fair enough - and i'm not disagreeing with you on an easy sell in the cases you're talking about - but the folk we deal with, or have visibility of typically have large deployments of Unix/Linux AND Windows, some departments (e.g. CAD) will have little or no Windows usage at all and other almost exclusively so. Solaris usage seems to be declined from what we've seen, but most of the places I know of have some Sun boxes lurking around.
For small Windows shops I expect it to be a no brainer to use Hyper-V - but for large deployments i'm not convinced it represents the same easy proposition.
Virtualise this _|_
Are you on the payroll of some Virtualisation interest group, your massively over hyping the importance on Virtualisation.
its a tablet.
Title goes here.
Tablet? Like a pill, you mean? To give you colourful visions? I'm all for it!!!
I Agree... But!
I agree massively that announcing a new slate computer would not fit with the general subject area for today's announcement that they've announced ahead of time. Virtualization is important, it's a growing area, so it makes sense for Microsoft to make sure that its offerings in that area are competitive.
The way this article approaches the subject, though, it makes me think of a new Microsoft product that is more aimed at locking out the competition than providing improved capabilities. That only works when customers don't have alternatives. So if there is a Microsoft virtualization announcement today, it had better be a better one than the article's author is hoping for!
Maybe it's a virtualised tablet that you run on a normal computer? You could use the mouse to "touch" the screen. That would be pure win!
The Citrix Play?
If HP and Microsoft announce a major virtualization alliance, that could mean the death of Citrix's XenServer division as we know it.
Why should they be announcing anything to do with virtualisation? Just because you cream your paints at anything mentioning virtualisation? There's loads of things they could be announcing and probably lots of things far more interesting as well.
You're forgetting Hurd is Supertart.
Whilst hp spends a lot of time getting all kissy-kissy with Micro$haft, they also get kissy-kissy with just about everyone else! Hp have long played the role of industry tart, happy to hold hands with just about any software vendor if hp can flog some hardware and services to go with it. You can find hp salegrunts selling IBM software, Citrix, VMware, even saying nice things about Slowaris on ProLiants. The idea that hp may get an exclusive from M$ is possible, they are the leading x64 vendor, but the idea that hp will drop all other forms of x64 virtualisation is unlikely.
As an example, one our resellers showed me some of the Red Hat info on KVM they got at the recent hp Tech Summit. They said it was hard to turn round without falling over a RH staffer.
I'd say VMware is pretty safe in the enterprise from Hyper-V, but Hyper-V will sit very nicely with the SME and even some enterprises simply because it will come under the Windows banner and probably not require the expense of a VMware specialist/admin. I'd be more worried about much cheaper alternatives such as KVM - they don't need to do 100% of what VMware does to appeal to 90% of VMware customers. But then how much traction does RH have in the SME arena? Probably not much, not without Supertart!
Re: Virtualised tablet?
If you want that, download the Android SDK.
Let's hope to god this isn't another stupid touchscreen device or an iPhone killer. Ugh. They make feel like telling all the kids to run along and play while us grown-ups get some real work done.
Man, I was thinking that HP and MS were going to pick up HURD and build a clean OS. Ah, well, one can dream.
Mine's the one with the funny pages in the pocket.
...let's hope Microsoft trash that piece of junk (one of my customers was basically immobilized for over a month after a single, "highly critical" software update for Windows Server 2008 took out the entire virtualized machine workforce that was running under Hyper-V on the server in question. Microsoft support said the problem didn't exist, though there were hundreds of remarkably similar requests for help in the forum... my customer has since moved to XEN; everything works dandy except for some of the Windows VMs having occasional hiccoughs, though no more than physical machines would have).
As for the support of operating systems in a virtual environment, I was recently very pleasantly surprised by VirtualBox, which unlike the other big players will happily run even OS/2 (makes me happy because one of my customers needs it and so far had to rely on a worn-out piece of hardware with signs of an impending mainboard failure).
I do want more virtualisation solutions -- the more there are, the more all providers need to improve their offers. My experiences with Hyper-V (formerly known as VirtualPC, which at least worked), however, have completely turned me off that one.
What Hurd should announce...
...is that he is to perform seppuku, after what he has done to the businesses he is supposedly running, but actually ruining.
But he won't. He'll just cut more staff, and let projects be run into disaster by bullshitting idiots, just as long as his bonus goes up.