Comments on: Microsoft giving away Virtual Server 2005 R2 for free http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free chaos is the score upon which reality is written Thu, 15 Jul 2010 19:15:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Computerworld Blogs http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free/comment-page-1#comment-312 Computerworld Blogs Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:21:34 +0000 http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free/#comment-312 <strong>Hey, Microsoft! Virtualize this! (and no need to whistle)...</strong> Why not goof off for five minutes and read IT Blogwatch, in which Microsoft drops a virtual bomb at LinuxWorld. Not to mention a man who'll never need to whistle to find his car key, because it's implanted in his hand... ... Hey, Microsoft! Virtualize this! (and no need to whistle)…

Why not goof off for five minutes and read IT Blogwatch, in which Microsoft drops a virtual bomb at LinuxWorld. Not to mention a man who’ll never need to whistle to find his car key, because it’s implanted in his hand…
…

]]> By: Hisham http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free/comment-page-1#comment-311 Hisham Tue, 04 Apr 2006 15:57:29 +0000 http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free/#comment-311 Chad, I very much agree with your comment. I forgot to mention VMWare Server was available as a free download. I haven't tried it out yet but do you know the differences between Workstation and Server varieties off the top of your head? It seems obvious that VMWare has better coverage of their marketplace, more features and a more robust package. However, if I'm not mistake, corporations with MSDN subscriptions and site licenses already had access to Virtual Server. So who does this really benefit? Another area where Microsoft is falling behind in the virtualization space is their lack of hypervisor support until Longhorn Server's first service pack in 2008 or 2009. By that time, VMWare and XenSource will have extremely mature products supporting hardware virtualization and Microsoft will be late to the party again. I know news for this has release has drawn some comparison by me and others of the Netscape versus Internet Explorer wars. However, I've rethought my position. Unlike web browsers, currently virtualization is not usable by the average home computer user. Even if Microsoft happens to bundle its VM software into its server products, corporate buyers will still look to solutions that best address their requirements instead of using whatever was included in the box. As long as VMWare maintains its edge, they have nothing to worry about. Chad, I very much agree with your comment. I forgot to mention VMWare Server was available as a free download. I haven’t tried it out yet but do you know the differences between Workstation and Server varieties off the top of your head? It seems obvious that VMWare has better coverage of their marketplace, more features and a more robust package. However, if I’m not mistake, corporations with MSDN subscriptions and site licenses already had access to Virtual Server. So who does this really benefit?

Another area where Microsoft is falling behind in the virtualization space is their lack of hypervisor support until Longhorn Server’s first service pack in 2008 or 2009. By that time, VMWare and XenSource will have extremely mature products supporting hardware virtualization and Microsoft will be late to the party again.

I know news for this has release has drawn some comparison by me and others of the Netscape versus Internet Explorer wars. However, I’ve rethought my position. Unlike web browsers, currently virtualization is not usable by the average home computer user. Even if Microsoft happens to bundle its VM software into its server products, corporate buyers will still look to solutions that best address their requirements instead of using whatever was included in the box. As long as VMWare maintains its edge, they have nothing to worry about.

]]> By: Chad Kitching http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free/comment-page-1#comment-310 Chad Kitching Tue, 04 Apr 2006 15:33:20 +0000 http://blog.hishamrana.com/2006/04/03/microsoft-giving-away-virtual-server-2005-r2-for-free/#comment-310 Well, if VMware Player isn't enough, there's always the VMware Server. The server product has many of the VMware Workstation features, and a few of the VMware ESX/GSX features. And it's free, too. Only problem is that it's still in beta, so debugging is still enabled and that slows it down a bit (but you can disable most of the debugging if you want). One notable thing VMware still has that Microsoft is lacking is virtual SMP support. Even the VMware Server product lets you expose SMP support to the virtual machine, whereas you're limited to a single processor for each Virtual Server VM. VMware's big limitation is that Microsoft will provide you virtually no support for any of their products unless you can prove the problem happens on a non-virtualised platform (which seems a bit petty to me - why not treat it as just another hardware platform). Microsoft's Virtual Server also integrates with many of Microsoft's other products (like SMS, MOM, etc), which might be a benefit if you're running an all Microsoft platform. Well, if VMware Player isn’t enough, there’s always the VMware Server. The server product has many of the VMware Workstation features, and a few of the VMware ESX/GSX features. And it’s free, too. Only problem is that it’s still in beta, so debugging is still enabled and that slows it down a bit (but you can disable most of the debugging if you want).

One notable thing VMware still has that Microsoft is lacking is virtual SMP support. Even the VMware Server product lets you expose SMP support to the virtual machine, whereas you’re limited to a single processor for each Virtual Server VM. VMware’s big limitation is that Microsoft will provide you virtually no support for any of their products unless you can prove the problem happens on a non-virtualised platform (which seems a bit petty to me – why not treat it as just another hardware platform). Microsoft’s Virtual Server also integrates with many of Microsoft’s other products (like SMS, MOM, etc), which might be a benefit if you’re running an all Microsoft platform.

]]>