Why is Hyper-V More Confusing
-
@thwr said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
@scottalanmiller said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
@thwr said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
This can also been seen the other way around: "Hey, I'm using a non MS Type-1 Hypervisor, I probably don't need any licenses for my Windows guests now! Awesome!"
Could be except for two simple facts...
- That doesn't happen, ever. It just doesn't so this isn't applicable.
- Any risk of that happening would also carry over to Hyper-V so this isn't a unique risk, it's one that we would expect to be equal or worse for Hyper-V.
So I don't buy this one. If it did, we'd have this issue on VMware 100 times a day. And yet, I'm not aware of a single example of it ever happening on any platform while the Hyper-V issue is weekly or possibly daily within a much smaller subset of the same pool of IT pros.
I'm not saying that this case is unique to XS
I understand that, but you were implying that it was true to "all non-Hyper-V". But my points were based on that assumption. It still doesn't happen (notice I mentioned VMware as the example, not XS) at all, and it would have the same effect on Hyper-V many times more with this reaction: "hey I got an MS hypervisor so all MS licenses are now free."
-
@thwr said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
Same here. XS is a great product, for sure. But it has its own complexity: dom0 confuses alot of people and that thin provisioning thing may be something a lot of newcomers might run into. HyperV got its own problems for sure, the snapshot rollback/apply/delete wording they are using isn't great at all.
Dom0 isn't as confusing because... to newbies it does not exist. It just doesn't. It's "under the hood" and has no licensing concerns or impressions or confusion. XenServer is one product, it's not broken up like Hyper-V. Yes the thin provisioning thing is rough, no getting around that. But the Dom0 thing... newbies don't encounter that at all. They have to dig under the hood and try to figure out how it works to find out about that at all. XS, when installed by default, is a complete appliance that is super simple.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
in the real world, actual Windows admins are really, really unable to figure Hyper-V out. They are totally lost (at least in nearly all cases over the years that I've seen.. and it is a huge majority
Really? Wow. It's hardly rocket science. What is wrong with these people? Maybe I should become a Windows admin and blow these people away.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
in the real world, actual Windows admins are really, really unable to figure Hyper-V out. They are totally lost (at least in nearly all cases over the years that I've seen..
Now, that's an exaggeration, and I beg to differ ...
-
Here's a handy document from MS ... hoping this'll help reduce the confusion
-
TL;DR
The confusion comes in when you try to explain that with Standard Server licensing, you can install a physical copy, and 2 VMs so long as there are no services besides Hyper-V on the physical system.
They just don't understand it because "watch I can install other stuff here as well".
If you take away Hyper-V (specifically as a role on a Server OS rather than bare bones Hyper-V) "You're entitled to run 2 VMs with that single product key" Pretty simple right?
It all goes back to the "physical install for the Hyper-visor setup that seems to catch everyone who is confused about this.
-
@Veet said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
@scottalanmiller said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
in the real world, actual Windows admins are really, really unable to figure Hyper-V out. They are totally lost (at least in nearly all cases over the years that I've seen..
Now, that's an exaggeration, and I beg to differ ...
Follow the topic on SW. It's really bad. And has been for years. Hundreds and hundreds of topics of people having no idea why they are doing what they are doing and not knowing what the outcome will be or, worse, was.
-
@Carnival-Boy said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
@scottalanmiller said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
in the real world, actual Windows admins are really, really unable to figure Hyper-V out. They are totally lost (at least in nearly all cases over the years that I've seen.. and it is a huge majority
Really? Wow. It's hardly rocket science. What is wrong with these people? Maybe I should become a Windows admin and blow these people away.
I'm being serious, it's nearly that bad. It's improving a little, but only a little, but I don't think it is improving so much from understanding as just Hyper-V is "moving up the stack" as it gets to be a better product more higher end people are deploying it more often and there is more and more corpus of "hey, this is how this works" which eventually starts to help people here and there. But even today, I still see the problems of people being confused by the same basics nearly every time.
-
I will mention that when I took Windows Server classes in college, we were using Windows Server 2008 R2 and installing the Hyper-V role. It wasn't until after college that I realized there was an actual free version called "Hyper-V Server".
-
@Jstear said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
I will mention that when I took Windows Server classes in college, we were using Windows Server 2008 R2 and installing the Hyper-V role. It wasn't until after college that I realized there was an actual free version called "Hyper-V Server".
Because.... College.
-
@Reid-Cooper said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
@Jstear said in Why is Hyper-V More Confusing:
I will mention that when I took Windows Server classes in college, we were using Windows Server 2008 R2 and installing the Hyper-V role. It wasn't until after college that I realized there was an actual free version called "Hyper-V Server".
Because.... College.
Nah, I think that is pretty much the problem everyone has, and the root of a lot of this.