Tool fixation

I'm always puzzled why the same issue come up time and again. Each time the "virtual machines solve every IT problem" comes up, I post something on the topic that virtual machines aren't a panecea.

Vendors and companies seem to be fixated on the use of virtual machine software to create virtual servers or virtual desktops to solve each and every computing problem. The vendors, of course, are trying the best to sell what they have. The company decision makers are working with incomplete information and often end up with a complex, unwieldy solution that works to some extent.

Each of the various types of virtualization technology referenced in the Kusnetzky Group model of virtualization (see Sorting out the different layers of virtualization) has its unique place. Although virtual machine technology is a good choice when workload isolation or system (client or server) optimization and consolidation are the goals, other technology is a better fit at many other times.

When should other virtualization technology be used instead of virtual machine software?

Here's a bit of a post from long ago.

• When the goal is allowing people to access applications and data from wherever they are, using whatever network-enabled device is handy and using a local network of some kind. This is when access virtualization is the best choice. By the way, the application and data being accessed could be hosted in a virtual machine on a local client, blade PC, blade computer or general purpose computer.
• When the goal is highly efficient application isolation, application performance application reliability/availability or making an application work in an environment that normally would create problems, application virtualization is the ticket.
• When the goal is workload isolation and optimization, but all of the applications are designed for the same operating system. In this case, operating system virtualization/partitioning is a better choice. The use of this technology means that the physical system doesn't have to haul the weight of multiple copies of the same operating system around while trying to support the organization's workloads.
• Clustering software might be a more efficient solution than using a combination of virtual machine software plus virtual machine movement software plus monitoring/orchestration software when availability is the goal
• Using a fault tolerant computer could be the best choice when continuous availability is required.

What about when there is a need for a unified management domain, for higher levels of application scalability or higher levels of application performance? Deploying virtual machine software just might get in the way.

I'd like to dredge back up a quote from Abraham Maslow. He said "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail."