Microsoft has officially unveiled its new server virtualisation software which is intended to take market share away from rival VMware. Hyper-V has been launched six weeks ahead of schedule, a move which took many by surprise.Beta versions of the software have been available for download for some time, but Microsoft had said that it would launch the final code in August. The software will be available free to Windows Server 2008 users or as a standalone download for $28. This dramatically undercuts the prices charged by market leader VMware, and Microsoft is clearly betting that the low cost and full integration with Windows will be major selling points.
View: The full story @ vnunet
It's already bundled BUT 2008 comes in two forms... with Hyper-V and Without Hyper-V so they avoid lawsuits right off the bat because there is an option to pay the extra $28 to get it bundled... and yes the bundled version does cost about $28 more
I would rather run ESX (VMWare).
I would rather run ESX (VMWare).
In that sence VMWare on linux isn't free either as you need to purchase a PC to run it on.
I would rather run ESX (VMWare).
In that sence VMWare on linux isn't free either as you need to purchase a PC to run it on.
vmware on linux isn't free because it isn't free (you need to buy it)
hahaha, dhan ftw.
ESX costs thousands of dollars and just an fyi, the heart of ESX is a linux kernel. now if that isn't ironic...
hahaha, dhan ftw.
ESX costs thousands of dollars and just an fyi, the heart of ESX is a linux kernel. now if that isn't ironic...
No it's not, vmkernel is a proprietary kernel developed by VMWare. The maintenance console is Linux. ESX 3i is an embedded version of the vmkernel that does not have the maintenance console so it can fit on a small flash drive.
How in the world are you going to get the absolute most expensive version of windows for free?
arrrr matey
How in the world are you going to get the absolute most expensive version of windows for free?
I guess his school is giving it to him via MSDNAA like my school did.
I have 2 ESX servers here and am planning to keep them but the future virtualisation projects will be on Hyper V
1). Support for a version of Hypber-V on Vista
2). Virtual desktops... this has been the "default" in every other system for about a decade... well except for Mac which got it with 10.5
3). True free developer tools like X-code... just charge for the access to source samples. I don't think you can argue that Visual Studio Express is even in the ballpark.
1). Support for a version of Hypber-V on Vista
2). Virtual desktops... this has been the "default" in every other system for about a decade... well except for Mac which got it with 10.5
3). True free developer tools like X-code... just charge for the access to source samples. I don't think you can argue that Visual Studio Express is even in the ballpark.
what? first of all, server 2008 is vista sp1 with added server services. Anyone telling you otherwise is dead wrong. And what on earth do virtual desktops have to with virtualization?
hyper-v is certainly not good stable or powerful enough to match ESX (which i think ms are targeting), but it is certainly good enough to compete against workstation. however with ms charging for the privilege i find it difficult to understand what their game is..
i also believe this will be made available for vista, but not any time soon. the cost for a version of windows 2008 with hyper-v compared to without is only about �20 more, so it will likely be pretty cheep if they do!
in short hyper-v is pretty good, its not good enough to compare against esx, ms should not charge for it, and to increase market penetration they need to make it free
it needs a few more iterations to be a worthy esx substitute
hyper-v is certainly not good stable or powerful enough to match ESX (which i think ms are targeting), but it is certainly good enough to compete against workstation. however with ms charging for the privilege i find it difficult to understand what their game is..
i also believe this will be made available for vista, but not any time soon. the cost for a version of windows 2008 with hyper-v compared to without is only about �20 more, so it will likely be pretty cheep if they do!
in short hyper-v is pretty good, its not good enough to compare against esx, ms should not charge for it, and to increase market penetration they need to make it free
it needs a few more iterations to be a worthy esx substitute
Hyper-V will allow SMBs to get in on virtualization without having to invest in ESX. Not just the cost of the software but the possibility of haivng to purchase hardware certified to run ESX.
Windows with Hyper-V can run on any hardware with Windows drivers and doesn't involve much more investment if a company is upgrading to Windows Server 2008 anyway. They can get the benefit of virtualization without the added overhead.
By all means, Hyper-V is not a replacement for ESX. VMWare will continue to be the major player in virtualization and ESX will continue to be the virtualization platform for large companies. They can afford the expensive upfront costs and ESX would be cheaper support at that level long term.
The fact Hyper-V is in this good a shape at it's first release is a good sign. If anything MS can push ahead even more now to match up better with ESX and totally undercut them on price.
Microsoft are not going to be allowed to do that, it would be the browser wars all over again!
Personally I want the fastest and most compatible, and least expensive VM. Whoever has it, I will get it from them.
There are numerous alternatives to VMWare already. Some of them are free and open-source.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.