This is Alberto Farronato's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Alberto Farronato's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Alberto Farronato
Recent Activity
Paul, I am not sure what you saw but I think you missed something. The online class "Transition to ESXi Essentials" that we talk about in the blog is absolutely free - no question about it. Please follow the link the in the blog to access it.
1 reply
Alen, HP and other hardware OEMs already distribute and support SLES based on their own separate agreements with Novell. At the moment, SLES for VMware is available only to customers that have active vSphere support contracts with VMware. If you purchased vSphere licenses from HP, I am pretty sure you also receive support for it from them.
1 reply
I am very happy to share some very exciting news for VMware vSphere customers: SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for VMware - VMware’s OEMed version of Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) - is now available for free to customers with qualifying VMware vSphere licenses regardless of when these licenses were purchased. As you may already know, since last September 1st we have provided SLES for VMware at no additional cost over vSphere to customers who purchased qualifying vSphere licenses on or after June 9th 2010. Since its release, SLES for VMware has attracted tremendous interest not only among those vSphere... Continue reading
Posted Feb 8, 2011 at VMware vSphere Blog
vSphere Hypervisor is not a 60 days trial, but a fully licensed product. It shouldn't be confused with a 60 days trial of vSphere. In fact, you can think of vSphere Hypervisor as the free version of vSphere that provides only the hypervisor capabilities of vSphere. Once installed you can use the vSphere Hypervisor with no time restrictions. To download vSphere Hypervisor you can use the "download" link at http://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere-hypervisor/ Once you are registered (you can use an existing VMware account if you have one) I recommend you leverage VMware GO to complete the installation process. VMware GO is a web based service that will guide you through the installation and automatically execute hardware compatibility checks. Makes it really simple and also provide other useful management features.
1 reply
Yes, you can manage a vSphere Hypervisor host remotely with the vSphere client by pointing the client to the host
1 reply
There is no hard limit. You can run as many as your server can handle.
1 reply
In addition to the general availability of VMware vSphere 4.1, today we also announced a new name for its free edition: VMware vSphere Hypervisor. VMware vSphere Hypervisor isn’t something new, but simply the new name of our freely downloadable product formerly known as VMware ESXi Single Server or “free ESXi” (often abbreviated to simply “VMware ESXi”). Just like its predecessor, VMware vSphere Hypervisor is free and provides basic server portioning for server consolidation. Why the name change? As the volume of downloads indicates, since its initial availability “Free ESXi” (I should say VMware vSphere Hypervisor) has been an extremely popular... Continue reading
Posted Jul 13, 2010 at VMware vSphere Blog
39
Julien, based on the PowerPoint you linked, it doesn’t look like SCE 2010 is cheaper than Essentials Plus. At $100 per VMs a 30 VMs configuration with SCE 2010 will cost about $3,000 (exactly the same license cost as vSphere Essentials Plus). At this price SCE 2010 still won’t include a backup solution which instead vSphere Essentials Plus offers (Data Recovery). If you add DPM to SCE 2010, the price per VM goes off the chart to $400 (always according to the PowerPoint you link to). For environments of 30 to 50 VMs (max limit for SCE 2010) vSphere Essentials Plus is ends up being cheaper on a per VM basis even of the $100 per VM edition of SCE 2010.
1 reply
Julien, thanks for commenting, but I have to disagree. Your conclusion seems quite out of context here, but in any case, the simple fact that Microsoft may have a certain feature set doesn't make it a better solution for those customers that are not interested in the many that Microsoft doesn't have. Technologies like VMware's implementation of technologies like VMotion and HA, not to mention the hypervisor itself, are still superior than what Microsoft offers.
1 reply
Moyer, I am not sure how familiar you are with good social media behavior, but when you work for a vendor you should qualify yourself. With respect to your comment, I am not sure I completely follow your logic. Are you saying that both SC Essentials and VMM Workrgoup Edition do not provide any value in addition to what Microsoft gives for free? Last I heard both solutions were designed to respond to the needs of small medium business. In a virtual infrastructure how many servers do you expect a small company to have? Are there free solutions available in the market that could be used? Sure. VMware ESXi and VMware GO are other examples in addition to the one you give. Clearly there are trade offs associated with choosing them over a solution with centralized management. PS Do you also use Google Search?
1 reply
Jake, Thanks for commenting. You bring up a good point. While System Center Essentials is not a mandatory component of the solution, it becomes one once you scratch the surface and realize that SC VMM on its own doesn't allow to monitor VM performance in useful way. Performance monitoring isn't something that even small business can leave without when running production apps in a virtual environment
1 reply
Of course! Plus today nobody needs that stuff anyway... isn't this what they always say of features they don't have? :-)
1 reply
Ian, thanks for reading and commenting. With "Cross Hypervisor" most likely Microsoft refers to heterogeneous hypervisor management. One of the supposed benefits that Microsoft always mentions about SCVMM is the ability to manage both Hyper-V and ESX. While it is true that vCenter currently allows to manage only ESX, the checkmark for System Center is very generous also in this case. SCVMM does a very poor job at managing ESX hosts and VM and the little it can do still requires vCenter. I did not discuss the “Cross Hypervisor” subject in this blog because there is enough to write for a whole new post. If you'd like to get additional insight on this topic, I suggest you take a look at Eric Gray’s VCritical blog where you’ll find interesting details. Ciao
1 reply
@ Tom – Yes, with Windows Server 2008 R2 Pro Tips allows you to use live migration to move VMs, provided as you say that you have appropriately licensed all your hosts with Windows Server 2008 R2 as you described. To leverage Pro Tips you will also have to purchase System Center Virtual Machine Manager and System Center Operations Manager. Once you look at prices you’ll find that the easier and cheaper way to buy SCVMM and SCOM is through Server Management Suite Datacenter ($744 per managed socket - min of 2 sockets per server - with rights to run unlimited number of VMs per managed host, per server) or Server Management Suite Enterprise ($1,198 per managed host with rights to run up to 4 VMs per managed host). You’ll also have to purchase a management license for each SCOM server ($1,321 w/SQL, $579 w/o SQL). Note that Microsoft has just announced a 75% price increase on SMSD/E starting from July 1st in reason of new added capabilities. With respect to the comparison between Pro and DRS there is a lot to say. Microsoft argues that they are equivalent, but in reality this is far from being true. The most fundamental difference is that Hyper-V has no concept of Resource Pools so it doesn’t really abstract and aggregate server resources into logical pools. Why is this important? It is very important actually, because it allows DRS to manage servers resources totally independently from the manufacturer brad. Once added to a DRS cluster a server because a contributor to the total amount of resources of that cluster and load balancing is totally abstracted from any hardware dependences. With Pro Tips, instead, you have to upload vendor specific “Pro Packs” into SCOM – for example HP Pro Packs for HP servers – which are built to monitor HP severs. What if you want to add an IBM or Dell server in the same cluster? You’ll have to manage multiple sets of Pro Packs that most likely don’t take each other in consideration. There are several other difference…this is a good topic for a new blog post :-). @ GG-Milan – I don’t think that moving a license every 90 days is a viable solution. Are you going to do load balancing every 90 days? I doesn’t seem to be acceptable even for the simplest of the environments. No disrespect for the Funanbol guys, but at this stage it seems to me there is quite a bit of difference between VMware and them. VMware is a $2B company with a very large customer base that has already made long term investments in our technology. Could this change if we sit around doing nothing? Sure, but our plan is to continue pushing the envelope.
1 reply
Peter, we didn't want to take that chance and so we actually did the calculations for XenServer as well. Check out our Cost Per Application Calculator at www.vmware.com/go/costperappcalc (assumptions and formulas are in the methodology doc linked from the calculator itself) After you go a step beyond Citrix marketing claims, you will find that XenServer is everything but free: 1) you still need to pay for support 2) you also need to purchase Citrix Essentials if you want to use basic functionalities such as HA or performance monitoring for your VMs Ultimately our goal is to continue to innovate and to deliver more value than our competitors. So far, we have been able to achieve this since way more people are willing to purchase our products than those of Microsoft or Citrix. Our plan is to keep this going and I think vSphere proves it very well.
1 reply
@ Jason H. - That's because we were waiting for Microsoft employees such as yourself to do it. Interesting that you didn't mention it.
1 reply
@ Shawn - Thanks for reading the blog and for the feedback. You are right: cost comparisons are never perfect because solutions aren’t the same from a feature stand point. I would argue that it is not just about features that are offered by one and not the other, but even those that on paper are considered “equivalent” most often than not are not actually the same. Following up on your example, there is a big difference between PRO Tips and DRS. Microsoft puts them on the same line when they make checklist comparison, but in practice the engine and capabilities of VMware DRS are far superior than those of PRO Tips. Cost comparisons don’t capture this kind of stuff also. There are many other examples like this. Our point here is that Microsoft’s blog just confirmed that even in the best case scenario for Hyper-V, the potential cost advantage that Hyper-V may have doesn’t compensate for the features and capabilities it misses when compared with vSphere.
1 reply