Microsoft coughs up Hyper-V - finally
Virtual ketchup
HAVING BEEN LEFT far behind in the vitrual world, mighty Microsoft finally released its virtualisation hypervisor, Hyper-V today. It's built for Windows Server 2008 and if you have a licence for that, the HyperVole-iser comes without cost. It's free!
Microsoft said it will deliver a stand-alone version by the end of the year which will cost less than $30.
The Vole is scampering up a path well trodden by Vmware, virtualisation market leader. It will also have to face of multiple firms now wooing big outfits running loads of idle servers. Virtualisation means dumping lazy servers, making the most of those you keep and bragging about how "green" you are.
Microsoft has dallied in getting into this market but since it's now worth billions, here it comes sniffing about, sticking an oar in and flexing its muscles.
The firm is focusing its Hyper-V on the SMB market since this is where Vmware isn't yet, quite. Expect it to be loudly banging a virtual drum until the cows come home. µ
Comments
Hooks OLD with NEW, Seamlessly.
One area NT6 has had trouble within, is compatibility over network with XP & other NT softwares. Its A sees b yet C dosn't like A & A refuses C,yet B&C are happy? etc.Nightmare of Messup.Hyper Visor Now has Solution to Hook Newham, Mass to someone in English Channel. Or was that ME?
You can see it dosn't take much to mess it up. Hyper V is Good. Hyper V is what Modem Mfgs have awaited to software new generation of high speed modems/routers/firewalls/....Ones that connect entire system, today, properly.
drashek
been there
ironic? mainframes, super-minis run 20-30 apps in a single box. World & dog embraced Vole OS as server for enterprise - require a building the size of several football fields.VMware, Hyper-V solves real estate problem by adding a layer to handle multiple OS instances - still a single app per OS but a handful of apps in a pee-cee server -hooray.
IBM (p-system), DEC/CPQ/HP (VMS Galaxy systems) still leads with less admins per total user population.
Clueless BAs/designers still demand standalone box per app as they cannot visuallise boundaries to assure that their apps are clearly (safely) bounded.
Football size building still in demand
virtualising bloatware
Over two years ago benchmarks passed over my desk, comparing an application running on Windows XP and Solaris 10 x86 using the same hardware. The upshot of this was that the application under Solaris 10 x86 was 40% - 80% faster, the time spend running the OS was over 2 minutes for Windows and less than 28 seconds for Solaris 10 x86.What is the point of virtualising using an OS that is a resource hog, running applications which are as equally as resource intensive?