Hyper-V or VMware?

Moderated by Jason Hiner | March 5, 2012 -- 07:00 GMT (23:00 PST)

Summary: Can Windows Server 8's Hyper-V finally make inroads against VMWare?

Jason Perlow

Jason Perlow

Hyper-V

or

VMWare

Ken Hess

Ken Hess

Best Argument: VMWare

The moderator has delivered a final verdict.

Opening Statements

The disruption of virtualization hegemony

Jason Perlow: For the first time in four years, Windows Server and Hyper-V are not only at parity in terms of basic enterprise virtualization functionality with VMware vSphere, but in a number of respects actually exceeds it in terms of features offered and encompasses the functionality of a number of other VMware products that would be considered expensive add-ons, as well as 3rd-party enhancements for VMware that you’d have to go to other vendors and spend big bucks for
as well.

The obvious manageability, scalability, ease of deployment and significantly reduced total cost of ownership advantage of Windows 8 Server and Hyper-V  will finally force VMware into a corner as CIOs examine the licensing bottom line and the value to that Windows Server 8 and Hyper-V brings to their environments as a complete end-to-end virtual infrastructure and private cloud solution in a box, for a fraction of a cost of the industry leading enterprise virtualization stack.

For those of you who still feel that VMWare's position is safe, I ask that you remember in the mid-1990's when Novell Netware was network operating system king and the newcomer, Windows NT seemed unfit for the enterprise. It's going to happen again, folks. Get your affairs in order, VMware. 2013 is going to be remembered as the year that the virtualization hegemony was disrupted.


 

Microsoft a minority player

Ken Hess: VMware has the clear advantage in the x86 virtualization market, since it began the market in 1999. Prior to this breakthrough, virtualization was something that IBM did on mainframe computers. VMware brought virtualization to the desktop and to the data center for everyone.

Microsoft is a late arrival in the virtualization market. Although, tardiness doesn't imply failure, I believe that Microsoft hopes that Microsoft shops and SMBs will embrace Hyper-V as their virtualization solution. Microsoft has a chance to claim a small percentage of the market's growth over the next few years but will never encroach on VMware's pole position.

Even if you take VMware out of the picture, Microsoft is still a minority player in the x86 virtualization space. Red Hat's KVM and Citrix's XenServer are two compelling and capable alternatives. Hyper-V has little chance of market penetration in light of its well-established competition.

For my money, there's VMware and then there's everyone else.

 


Talkback

103 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • IT religion vs. hard truths about strategic advantage

    IT shops that choose their "religious" idols of technology and don't consider the full ramifications of their choices (costs!), will eventually pay another high price - their jobs. You always have to be looking to do more with less (budget). Hyper-V was the choice a few years ago because it did 80+% of what you needed it to do, but the anti-MS mindset helped to keep the Vmware machine humming. Now, the writing is on the wall. Do the math. Don't be silly. If you are a manager and you are listening to your IT staff that got all their cert's in VMware and don't want to move b/c "Vmware rules!". You better start teaching your staff about being a bit more agnostic and doing what is right. If not, your company will lose strategic advantage because others will do more with less, better then you.. Now that functionality/features/performance has parity, it is about cost.
    dlarrison@...
    Reply 8 Votes I'm for Hyper-V
    • Well Said

      We started out with VMWare but moved to Hyper-V a few years ago primarily due to cost. We too found that Hyper-V did just about everything our organization needed to do when it came to virtualizing servers and a substantially lower cost.
      bobiroc
      Reply 3 Votes I'm for Hyper-V
    • Deja vu? IT religion vs. hard truths about strategic advantage

      Wow, for a pro Microsoft argument to make those points it feels like the shoe is on the other foot! Microsoft is on the thin end of the market for virtualisation, I know a lot of engineers in London working with virtualised environments and whereas Hyper-V might do well enough for consolidation with general management features, not one of them would touch Microsoft for hard core virtualisation, things like grouped and subgrouped and granular resource based prioritisation, or SAN functionality like automatic storage Vmotion.

      But it feels like the shoe is on the other foot even more because I have heard arguments such as:

      IT shops that choose their "religious" idols of technology and don't consider the full ramifications of their choices (costs!), will eventually pay another high price - their jobs. You always have to be looking to do more with less (budget). Windows was the choice a few years ago because it did 80+% of what you needed it to do, but the anti-Linux mindset helped to keep the Microsoft machine humming. Now, the writing is on the wall. Do the math. Don't be silly. If you are a manager and you are listening to your IT staff that got all their cert's in Server 2008 and don't want to move b/c "Microsoft rules!". You better start teaching your staff about being a bit more agnostic and doing what is right. If not, your company will lose strategic advantage because others will do more with less, better then you.. Now that Linux functionality/features/performance has parity, it is about cost.
      jamfuse
      Reply 4 Votes I'm for VMWare
    • MS is Huge

      NONE can COMPLETE aginst MS...DONT DARE.

      They have huge cash and they will catch up with any BLODDY innovation out there...
      Innovation starts and ends with MS...VMWARE does not even exist....
      gurjarn@...
      Reply 1 Vote I'm Undecided
  • The cost of Vmware training is extremely expensive...

    What's the cost comparison for certification Hyper-V vs. Vmware?
    jmonzon@...
    Reply 1 Vote I'm Undecided
    • MCSE

      The MCSE is your "Hyper-V" certification. And unlike VMware, which requires official courseware from a VMware educational partner, there are a lot of inexpensive training materials and study aids and courses to take for it.
      jperlow
      Reply 3 Votes I'm for Hyper-V
      • Certification = Money Racket

        For the most part, certs are just a money racket and only exist because it's pure profit and propaganda for a technology. Here is some inexpensive VMware training: http://viadmin.com/
        khess
        Reply Vote I'm for VMWare
      • Certs

        I work for a VAR and we are forced by our partners to keep certifications up to date. So yes, they may be a racket, but a necessary evil!
        Frankmjr
        Reply Vote I'm for VMWare
      • Money Racket?

        Did the VMware side of the debator just put up a link to a "braindump" site. Awesome! Does that site qualify towards VMware certification? (The answer is no.) Because you can pass the test but until you pay $3000 for a certified VMware class you arent certified. While certification isnt the end all be all for proof of knowledge, but its a minimum bar to set. Again its VMware's ploy to make as much money as they can while they can before they are relegated to a "Novell" status.
        jcornel7
        Reply 3 Votes I'm for Hyper-V
      • MCSE is not the Hyper-V certification

        Actually MCSE is not the Hyper-V certification. Microsoft offers an MCITP Virtualization Administrator certification http://www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/certification/cert-virtualization.aspx.

        One of my main issues with Microsoft's certifications is they have produced many "paper" MCSE's and MCITP's throughout the years. Its an unfortunate fact that cheating on exams has not only persisted throughout the years but has increased despite vendors many attempts to prevent it.

        As opposed to the MCITP certification, if you hire a VMware Certified Professional, you know that the individual has gone through at least 30 hours of VMware Instructor led training and hands-on lab time with the product.
        Gr8VirtualScott
        Reply 1 Vote I'm Undecided