Microsoft doubles Azure Stack's footprint, embiggens Azure VMs Microsoft has doubled the number of countries in which its Azure Stack hybrid cloud kit will operate, effectively extending Azure's reach with minimal capital expenditure . Azure Stack is an in-a-box-and-on-premises Azure subset and was previewed in January 2016 and formally launched in July 2017. As of November 2017 Microsoft …
When I first entered IT in the mid-90s, the server vendors were making noise about reaching five 9s. 25 years later, we have better hardware, better OS, better deployment models, but we can only reach four 9s?
Are they more cautious in how they sell stuff or have we really gone backwards?
"It's also a fine way to be able to bring your VMs back on premises if public cloud is not adequate. Good luck doing that on other public clouds."
How about vmotion with VM Cloud on AWS - migrate without even powering off the VM. There are also native export tools in AWS or GCP
"How about vmotion with VM Cloud on AWS - migrate without even powering off the VM."
Sure, if you want to pay twice to use cloud! Zerto is a far cheaper and more cost effective way of doing that.
And any cloud can transfer VM images in and out. It's about the cloud services - If for instance you write stuff for AWS Lambda or say Dynamo DB - then good luck using that anywhere else. With Azure Stack you can run the entire cloud services on premises too.
"When I first entered IT in the mid-90s, the server vendors were making noise about reaching five 9s."
Only on mainframes or with very expensive system like Tandem. Fours 9s for a single instance server is outstanding reliability and equate to less than an hour of downtime a year.
Exactly
Four 9s
365 days x 24 hours = 8760 hours
0.01% of 8760 hours is 0.876 hours (approx 52.5 minutes of potential downtime)
You then have to work out what that would cost in money to your business.
Five 9s buys you an extra 47.25 minutes but I would imagine the additional cost dwarfs what most business would lose under four 9s.
That's not too bad
I dislike Microsoft as much as the next geek, but they certainly are pushing Azure hard, and have demonstrated their commitment to it.
What interests me is that they're no longer investing as much into Windows, which is now effectively in maintenance mode, and going to turned into a gateway for their new priority.
I'm now able to develop and serve a .NET + MSSQL application without purchasing a single Windows license, all from the official instructions from MSDN. When I last heard, 40% of their VMs where Linux.
They've done the right thing by reducing their reliance on Windows.
"40% of their VMs where Linux."
Because mostly public cloud is used for test, dev and web apps. Hardly any brick and mortar companies have put their mission critical apps into public cloud.
"They've done the right thing by reducing their reliance on Windows"
Azure runs 100% on Windows Server so they couldnt be more reliant on it!
Their business strategy has reduced reliance on Windows. If everyone stopped using Windows today, Microsoft will still progress.
And "100%" is a bit of a stretch.
- It's ran on a modified version of Windows Server (with Linux for the networking).
- They get free licenses, free+instant expert support, and custom work done on their Windows.
Slightly different what we have to endure.
"- It's ran on a modified version of Windows Server (with Linux for the networking)."
Nope. It uses Hyper-V / Windows Server for the Hypervisor networking. There is zero Linux in the OS / Hypervisor stack.
I think you are confused that some of Microsoft's core network switches uses embedded Linux.
Their "on-premises" option always makes me laugh.
Lets purchase a cloud service. And then access it from our own data centre, paying far more for a service we could buy far more cheaply to install and run ourselves.
They are always very quick to establish that Azure is not Hyper-V during any conversation about their in-house offerings.
I did once query a MS rep about it and he made up some mumbo jumbo about better APP compatibility.
"Lets purchase a cloud service. And then access it from our own data centre, paying far more for a service we could buy far more cheaply to install and run ourselves."
Have you looked at the pricing for Azure stack? Its way cheaper than say VMWare. Sure, there are freeware options but when you look at what you get, there is no comparison for most use cases. And If you really care about price, then Hyper-V Server is entirely free with all features enabled. The only cost is what you choose to manage it with - and it works perfectly with say OpenStack if you don't mind getting RSI configuring it!
I guess that equates to zero customer demand, hence no real need for it to be supported, it was always going to be a a long-shot, the growth of Azure is solely down to the office productivity suite, why on earth would you bring the garbage that caused you so much headache in the first place back in house, the recycle bin has been well and truely emptied of that crap.
'office has nothing to do with Azure'
LOL,behave yourself cherub, do you seriously think Office 365 and the rest of the legacy deal they've bundled in runs on vapourware?
It's not hate, it's a matter of fact!
There is no magic unicorn inside of Azure, it's made up of the same infrastructure components every body has access to.
"the growth of Azure is solely down to the office productivity suite"
Azure is almost completely separated from Office 365 - they are entirely different products. Azure Active Directory is pretty much the sole common product to both.
And the growth in Azure is largely because its a better product than AWS in numerous ways but without the public cloud lock in.
Hence why Microsoft overtook AWS in total cloud revenue a year ago.
This post has been deleted by its author
"Hence why Microsoft overtook AWS in total cloud revenue a year ago"
Yes, O365 is dominating email in the cloud - but Azure is a different story.Here is the link to a Gartner report published this May year which talks about the Revenue from Azure (4 Billion run rate) vs AWS (20 Billion Run Rate)
https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-50WJ5CK&ct=180525&st=sb
"AWS has been the dominant market leader and an IT thought leader for more than 10 years, not only in IaaS, but also in integrated IaaS+PaaS, with an end-of-2017 revenue run rate of more than $20 billion"
"Microsoft has sustained a very high growth rate over multiple years, and Gartner estimates its end-of-2017 revenue run rate for integrated IaaS+PaaS at more than $4 billion. "
"Yes, O365 is dominating email in the cloud - but Azure is a different story.Here is the link to a Gartner report published this May year which talks about the Revenue from Azure (4 Billion run rate) vs AWS (20 Billion Run Rate)"
Those numbers are already out of date - Azure is still growing consistently at roughly twice the rate of AWS. There is little doubt in the market that Microsoft will be the eventual king of the hill.
And overall in cloud revenue, Microsoft went past AWS in run rate a year ago.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobevans1/2018/04/27/microsoft-tops-amazon-in-q1-cloud-revenue-6-0-billion-to-5-44-billion-ibm-third-at-4-2-billion/
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
