Windows servers could face problems running clouds built on OpenStack if the Linux-for-the-cloud project follows the suggestion of one lead developer. Code for Microsoft's Hyper-V should be removed from the up-coming Essex release of OpenStack because it's essentially been forgotten about, according to OpenStack release manager …
Re: 'trimming the "dead wood" from Essex'
Does he mean Basildon, Southend and the parts of Brentwood frequented by (coughw*ankers) TOWIE charachters.
Buckhurst Hill, Loughton and Chigwell.
Fair do's mate, fair do's.
"Carrez floated the idea of trimming the "dead wood""
Aren't most of Microsoft's offerings "dead wood" anyway?
They literally can't pull this cloud thing together right now. Azure is the industry dawg and for anyone that has tried to download their current System Center "Private Cloud", you can quickly see it is a jumbled mess of sh*t in various stages of completeness. Yet, their press makes it sound like it is done and ready to use. Abominable and they should be very ashamed. The only silver lining for them is that, in reality, everybodies Private Cloud code is crap too. The entire private cloud industry is one big stretch of the truth where vendor claims rarely intersect with reality. It is a battle of "ity's" and "aas's" where vendors essentially claim, "our ity's and aas's are better than their ity's and aas's" . Totally techie porn and they have no idea they are even doing it.
"you can quickly see it is a jumbled mess of sh*t in various stages of completeness. Yet, their press makes it sound like it is done and ready to use."
Yes that's the usual state of play for many a MS "innovation." PenWindows anyone?
No doubt they will do what they have done before and if they start to feel threatened they will buy something in (Remember even Visual BASIC is not all their own work) and launch a series of moves to undermine their opponents with the massive war chest of the Office monopoly.
Monopoly. Did I say monopoly? I meant of course free and fair competition in an open market.
VB was from Cooper Software (they got quite a few things from there I recall) and SQL Server is/was Sybase (and even after a major rewrite that still shows).
"VB was from Cooper Software (they got quite a few things from there I recall) and SQL Server is/was Sybase (and even after a major rewrite that still shows)."
Exactly. I think my biggest surprise was they bought in Sybase (running for *years* on Unix) and they didn't get it to do record level locking for years afterward.
"didn't get it to do record level locking for years afterward"
Oh don't. Don't even go there.
The only people who have something together and vaguely ready for production are VMware, XEN, and MS.
Everything else that sits on top is a jumbled mass of buzzwords and loose ends.
I don't follow...
Ok, Windows operating systems can run on top of 64-bit XEN and KVM hypervisors, no? And OpenStack can manage these hypervisors, correct? So what's to prevent me from running Windows servers in an OpenStack cloud with either of those?
Hyper-V is certainly important to MS's ambitions but I fail to see how losing support for it keeps MS out of OpenStack clouds...
Missed a step
Initiated 'Extinguish' before fully engaging 'Extend'.
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- 20 Freescale staff on vanished Malaysia Airlines flight MH370
- Did Apple's iOS literally make you SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Neil Young touts MP3 player that's no Piece of Crap
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked