VMware

« Virtual Appliances Update | Main | Virtual Appliances – 2007 Year in Review »

December 24, 2007

The value of a mature platform: Hyper-V vs VMware Infrastructure

Reza Posted by Réza Malekzadeh
Sr. Director, Product Marketing & Alliances

A lot of people have been talking about Microsoft's recent announcements regarding their Hyper-V hypervisor product, which was somewhat surprisingly announced ahead of schedule (although in truth, Microsoft had previously put this announcement back, so maybe the two timeline changes cancel each other out). Since VMware is the leader in virtualisation many people in the industry have been keen to hear what we think about Hyper-V.

This announcement (which, it should be reiterated, is just the availability of the beta version) is not altogether surprising. Microsoft was always going to attempt to get into this industry in earnest, but it is an industry which we have created. Don't forget, a few years ago x86 virtualisation as pioneered by VMware was still faced with its doubters and sceptics who thought this was a doomed attempt to breathe life into an old mainframe computing concept. Over the last few years many of these nay-sayers have dropped by the wayside as they have seen virtualisation truly become a mainstream technology. We have now been doing virtualisation - and only virtualisation - for 10 years.

Of course, then there are the inevitable questions about how VMware's technology compares with Hyper-V in terms of features and pricing. As with any comparison, this is about comparing apples with apples. On the features side, we truly believe that customers are now looking well beyond server consolidation as the main driver for going virtual. It is the advanced management features built around the hypervisor which will be key factors in what customers decide to purchase. If a customer is just interested in partitioning server hardware we offer a great product - VMware Server - for free!

With the VMware Infrastructure 3 platform, VMware has a wealth of advanced features which turn virtualized servers into pools of highly available and flexible computing resources. An example of one of the key features (and one which our customers love) is VMotion which allows you to move a live running VM between physical hosts without service interruption or downtime. For our customers VMotion has become an almost indispensable tool and has transformed the way many of them approach business continuity and disaster recovery since we started shipping four years ago. Hyper-V doesn't include a comparable feature - in fact, the scrapping of a live migration feature was well documented - so on this front Hyper-V cannot compare with VMware Infrastructure 3. In fact, the closest feature to VMotion that Microsoft can deliver in Hyper-V - Quick Migration - is just a rebranding of Host Clustering technology which has been around for a while. The same is true for a whole host of other features which we have been offering customers for some time.

This is not to dismiss Microsoft from the virtualisation landscape altogether - far from it. They will eventually come out with a product. Microsoft has announced pricing, which will allow customers to get Hyper-V bundled with Server 2008, but whether this works remains to be seen. As far as VMware is concerned, customers don't see virtualisation as a nice little add-on to server operating systems; it's a technology they are using to architect entire data centers, and for these kind of implementations they want software which is robust, stable, proven in production environments and provides the management tools and levels of automation which takes the pain out of IT management.

As far as the cost debate goes, this really centers on whether you look at just the straight up acquisition costs or whether you look at the long term cap-ex and op-ex cost benefits a virtualisation platform delivers. For the great majority of adopters, virtualisation is a strategic move rather than a tactical point solution, so the longer term view would seem to make more sense when evaluating the true costs associated with one platform versus another. Acquisition costs are a small piece of the overall solution cost.  VMware customers typically experience a return on investment within six to nine months of deployment and huge cost savings thereafter. Our support for increased amounts of physical hardware per host means VMware Infrastructure 3 can support far greater numbers of workloads on each physical machine - reducing costs for OS licenses, hardware acquisition, power and cooling and maintenance.

It is very exciting to see the virtualisation industry maturing so rapidly. Microsoft's announcements have added to the excitement around virtualisation which has been a theme throughout the year and which was highlighted by VMworld 2007. Increased competition or not, VMware will continue on its path, delivering amazing innovation to stay ahead of the curve and keep on bringing to market the solutions that customers require.

However, at the end of the day virtualisation is not really about cool technology; it is about allowing customers to run applications in the best possible way and delivering value to their organisations. Our recent announcement with SAP, announcing full support for SAP in VMware environments, demonstrates just this fact. Customers are buying our virtualization technology to have the best platform to run their applications.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c328153ef00e54fb04fe88833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The value of a mature platform: Hyper-V vs VMware Infrastructure:

Comments

So when can we hope to fully manage our ESX infrastructure from Firefox, and not just IE?

I agree upon IE/Firefox comment (and I would add, why VC server is in a mandatory way Windows?).
Technology exists and standards should be employed to avoid some people having a single Microsoft machine to administrate the whole datacenter!

When will we see better true DX support? 9+?

I've already been asked to review it for at least one customer so even though it is beta and missing a slew of features I consider mandatory for a virtualization platform (btw, virtualiz* should be spelled with a z). I'm hoping that VMware will continue to move their pricing downwards to counter the CFO-type thinking where they only look at pricing of a product as it is an uphill battle to get some customers to spend thousands of dollars when they read so-called experts in the CIO-type of rags talk about Xen or the $28 Hyper-V. I know it is stepping over dollars to pick up pennies but I still see it.

hi,

Lately we have been spending quite good amount of time evaluating the Windows 2008 Hyper-V as we are getting many requests of our site visitors for a comparison with VMware VI3. We have posted a comprehensive comparison of our finding at http://itcomparison.com/Virtualization/MShypervvsvi35/HyperVvsvmware35esx.htm
We are hoping this comparing grow and cover all aspects of the two products. I hope that comparison will be helpful for every one.

Enjoy,
VMguru007

@VMguru007
I believe for every job there is an appropriate tool.

I also think the comparison on your web site is somewhat... skewed.

You say that the primary usage for hyper-v is test/dev because it is still in beta. How about comparing apples with apples? Compare the final product when it arrives, nobody is going to deploy beta product in production.


VMware: bear metal vs. windows for hyper-v...

Ouch... talking about misleading and biased statement:

Hoe exactly is Stripped down, modified Redhat Linux running VMware ESX is different from no-interface windows installation, come on - this is downright insulting.

Management tools, -lets wait for final product to compare apples with... apples.

Microsoft has forgotten that many companies don’t have x64 systems? Methinks that if you are migrating systems onto a virtual environment you are very likely to employ NEW hardware.

As for supported OS and such, you might be right; I didn't dig into it yet...


VMware or Hyper-V is a tool. One tool has a price attached to it, the other comes virtually free. An older tool offers more features than the one in Beta.
I would not be surprised if in a year timeframe Microsoft supports all features VMware does and more - after all, I seriously doubt anyone other than Intel can beat Microsoft's R&D dollars.

If you are comparing the two products - be fair, otherwise you sound like loons from FSF.

Arthur, do you work for microsoft?

In Hyper V, please check the Disk I/O performance and related network I/O performance (especially as win 2003 running as a virtual machine)

Plus see how many virtual disks you can attach- upto 1 Petabyte
............

So those who are wasting time criticizing Hyper V with all VMware cosmetics be aware .... what may be about to be happen to VMware in the near future.

I started a VMUG in the tri-state about a year ago and genuinely appreciate and believe in Vmware's products. Currently I am running over 150 Lab VMs on 7 physicals servers spanning two storage arrays. My first ESX cluster was installed the day of the release of 3.0. I have not had one issue related to the software since the deployment. This being said... I work for a Financial company and the big hurdle for the logical progression to Production deployments using VMWARE has been what I would characterize as the calculating, tactical and unwarranted grayness concerning Microsoft support. Unless Microsoft will say "your VM is supported 100%" (which they are for Hyper-v) the Vmware Virtual Machine deployment for my company, and I am guessing others, will be limited to the lab and development with a handfull of tier3 production servers.

Mr. Malekzadeh,

We have side by side benchmarks comparing HYPER-V and VMWARE ESX 3.5 Update 2 running SQL Server 2008/Oracle JD Edwards Enterprise One 3 Tier ECOSYSTEM exactly on the same hardware HP ML350.

We did a 48 Hour burn test and pushed 60,000 discrete Transactions ranging MRP, DRP, Procurement, SALES and financial posting.

Officially, as a partner of oracle we cannot post this in a public forum because of legality.

I was in for a rude shock when I saw the numbers related to performance. We are seeing HYPER-V in strip down windows 2008 install mode out beating VMWARE.

I am a big fan of VMWARE and hence I am providing this heads up.

I know you have my email address, please look us up and we are more than happy to provide off the record metrics what we are seeing.

All we care is to have no monopoly and better products for our customers and we want this to become a cut-throat competition that benefits us and clients.

Bala Sundaram
CTO, The I Consortium Inc.


Thanks and I think it's a worthwhile topic. I enjoy reading but being overwhelmed with business management, I would love to see a tabular comparison addressing the various aspects of virtualization, product features, winning criterion for each and finally price and support.

Thanks you.

See the cases where vmware workstation 6 can be useful and its wonderful we have got experience of vmware and hyper both are good product but vmware is something that it rocks.
sumit

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In