Microsoft: How we'll take on VMware

Microsoft: How we'll take on VMware

Summary: The software maker believes it has the tools and the right price point to beat VMware in the battle for the virtualisation market

SHARE:
TOPICS: Tech Industry
2

Microsoft has a three-pronged strategy to beat VMware in the virtualisation market, according to the company's senior director for virtualisation product management, Zane Adam.

A key part of that strategy is Hyper-V Server 2008, the hypervisor, which Microsoft made available for download last week. In any virtualisation strategy, the hypervisor is the core, and Microsoft sees it as so important that it is giving it away free to attract more customers.

But, as Adam explained, in order to beat VMware in virtualisation, Microsoft needs more than just a good hypervisor. Speaking at the VM08 conference in London last week, Adam told ZDNet.co.uk how Microsoft was approaching the battle. "We have a large portfolio of products and a combined physical-and-virtual infrastructure in one, that [is] offered at a price point which is an industry lead," he said.

But the main target for Microsoft, Adam made clear, was VMware. "Choice is always good for customers, [so] instead of playing 'my hypervisor versus VMware', we decided we're going to leapfrog VMware, and the way we are going to leapfrog them is through our management solutions."

This means that "instead of [using] the old model, you can manage the physical and virtual infrastructure", Adam said. The "old model", as he sees it, is to create an environment that has lock-in — once you start using the company's systems, you are commited to using those systems and perhaps paying higher prices as a result. In an open environment, the user is free to try systems and, if they want to, drop them and shift to other systems with no penalty. By offering the hypervisor and perhaps other software for free, users can try things out.

Read this

Q&A

Microsoft gears up for victory in the virtual battle

ZDNet talks to Zane Adam, Microsoft's senior director for virtualisation product management

Read more

"Our management products and our hypervisor are open, so that others can manage it and we can manage others", Adam said. "That way, you get heterogeneous interoperability, versus VMware's model, where they only manage themselves and keep it closed."

Tony Lock, programme director with analysts Freeform Dynamics, said that in the area of management, Microsoft has the right idea. "The key to virtualisation is management, management, management," he said. "They have got that right."

Microsoft knows virtualisation is at the very early stages, Lock said. He pointed out that server virtualisation often covers tens of virtualised systems in a company but, with desktop virtualisation, that amount could run into hundreds or thousands of machines being virtualised, which raises much bigger issues.

"Microsoft is very interested in getting its [virtualisation] tools out there… in heterogeneous, interoperable systems," Lock said. "It is not just about the hypervisor."

Topic: Tech Industry

About

Colin Barker is based in London and is Senior Reporter for ZDNet. He has been writing about the IT business for some 30-plus years. He still enjoys it.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

2 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Predatory monopoly abuse

    He forgot to mention MS's big guns in their effort to stop competition from VMWare. The primary methods being used are changing the licensing terms for use of MS products as well bundling features to existing monopoly products. Hopefully the next political administration will engage in appropriate enforcement of anti trust laws and try to help restore competition to the computer industry.
    Judge Jacksons comments at the end of the US anti trust case are as appropriate today as they were the day he wrote them "Most harmful of all is the message that Microsoft's actions have conveyed to every enterprise with the potential to innovate in the computer industry. Through its conduct toward Netscape, IBM, Compaq, Intel, and others, Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify competition against one of Microsoft's core products. Microsoft's past success in hurting such companies and stifling innovation deters investment in technologies and businesses that exhibit the potential to threaten Microsoft. The ultimate result is that some innovations that would truly benefit consumers never occur for the sole reason that they do not coincide with Microsoft's self-interest."
    dfolk2
  • innovation ..?

    Monopoly the only game than Microsoft could be play. Not innovation, no competition... lax rules in a Monopoly Market is the abuse from bigger.
    Denis Lopez