ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    ESX Appliance?

    IT Discussion
    7
    93
    16.9k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • coliverC
      coliver @thanksajdotcom
      last edited by coliver

      @thanksaj said:

      @milnesy said:

      @thanksaj At my second job, they moved from VMWare to Hyper-V 3.0 ... They are completely hyper-v now... but they also have Cisco servers ... so they might be a little odd.

      Cisco...servers? Odd doesn't even begin to describe it...

      I played with the Cisco UCS servers at a previous job. I didn't find anything wrong or different about them... just seemed like regular server with the maximum RAM bumped up... I think they purchased the company who originally was making these servers I don't remember what it was originally called though.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • thanksajdotcomT
        thanksajdotcom @coliver
        last edited by

        @coliver said:

        @thanksaj said:

        @coliver said:

        @thanksaj said:

        @milnesy said:

        Hyper-V 3.0 is so much more polished than the previous versions of Hyper-V. I also think it's a lot easier to manage than VMWare. (Mind you I have 2 clusters of VMWare running with over 100 servers on each.) It's what I'm recommending to smaller customers, especially because of the price. And the new features in 3.0 put it extremely close to being on par with VMWare ... well, that was until VMWare when on a huge acquisition party and gobbled up some very nice companies.

        Oh I'm not denying that Hyper-V is much more cost effective. I just don't hear about major enterprise networks running Hyper-V as their hypervisor. It's ESXi or Xen.

        Hyper-V is still relatively new and it may be awhile before some really big shops start to deploy it, although the price comparison when you get big enough is pretty even (some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level).

        Isn't Xen free?

        Open-source and free yes... also my preferred platform (I run it for my personal lab).

        Ok, then what did you mean by the fact that "some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level"? Wouldn't it be more expensive that way?

        coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • coliverC
          coliver @thanksajdotcom
          last edited by

          @thanksaj said:

          @coliver said:

          @thanksaj said:

          @coliver said:

          @thanksaj said:

          @milnesy said:

          Hyper-V 3.0 is so much more polished than the previous versions of Hyper-V. I also think it's a lot easier to manage than VMWare. (Mind you I have 2 clusters of VMWare running with over 100 servers on each.) It's what I'm recommending to smaller customers, especially because of the price. And the new features in 3.0 put it extremely close to being on par with VMWare ... well, that was until VMWare when on a huge acquisition party and gobbled up some very nice companies.

          Oh I'm not denying that Hyper-V is much more cost effective. I just don't hear about major enterprise networks running Hyper-V as their hypervisor. It's ESXi or Xen.

          Hyper-V is still relatively new and it may be awhile before some really big shops start to deploy it, although the price comparison when you get big enough is pretty even (some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level).

          Isn't Xen free?

          Open-source and free yes... also my preferred platform (I run it for my personal lab).

          Ok, then what did you mean by the fact that "some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level"? Wouldn't it be more expensive that way?

          Oh... I meant in comparison to Hyper-V not in comparison to Xen. A couple of the blog posts I've read on the cost to the enterprise has Hyper-V as the more expensive solution at that scale when compared with a similar VMWare solution.

          thanksajdotcomT scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • thanksajdotcomT
            thanksajdotcom @coliver
            last edited by

            @coliver said:

            @thanksaj said:

            @coliver said:

            @thanksaj said:

            @coliver said:

            @thanksaj said:

            @milnesy said:

            Hyper-V 3.0 is so much more polished than the previous versions of Hyper-V. I also think it's a lot easier to manage than VMWare. (Mind you I have 2 clusters of VMWare running with over 100 servers on each.) It's what I'm recommending to smaller customers, especially because of the price. And the new features in 3.0 put it extremely close to being on par with VMWare ... well, that was until VMWare when on a huge acquisition party and gobbled up some very nice companies.

            Oh I'm not denying that Hyper-V is much more cost effective. I just don't hear about major enterprise networks running Hyper-V as their hypervisor. It's ESXi or Xen.

            Hyper-V is still relatively new and it may be awhile before some really big shops start to deploy it, although the price comparison when you get big enough is pretty even (some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level).

            Isn't Xen free?

            Open-source and free yes... also my preferred platform (I run it for my personal lab).

            Ok, then what did you mean by the fact that "some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level"? Wouldn't it be more expensive that way?

            Oh... I meant in comparison to Hyper-V not in comparison to Xen. A couple of the blog posts I've read on the cost to the enterprise has Hyper-V as the more expensive solution at that scale when compared with a similar VMWare solution.

            Really? Even though a lot of the enterprises that I've seen have VERY high level VMware licensing, it's still cheaper?

            coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • coliverC
              coliver @thanksajdotcom
              last edited by

              @thanksaj said:

              @coliver said:

              @thanksaj said:

              @coliver said:

              @thanksaj said:

              @coliver said:

              @thanksaj said:

              @milnesy said:

              Hyper-V 3.0 is so much more polished than the previous versions of Hyper-V. I also think it's a lot easier to manage than VMWare. (Mind you I have 2 clusters of VMWare running with over 100 servers on each.) It's what I'm recommending to smaller customers, especially because of the price. And the new features in 3.0 put it extremely close to being on par with VMWare ... well, that was until VMWare when on a huge acquisition party and gobbled up some very nice companies.

              Oh I'm not denying that Hyper-V is much more cost effective. I just don't hear about major enterprise networks running Hyper-V as their hypervisor. It's ESXi or Xen.

              Hyper-V is still relatively new and it may be awhile before some really big shops start to deploy it, although the price comparison when you get big enough is pretty even (some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level).

              Isn't Xen free?

              Open-source and free yes... also my preferred platform (I run it for my personal lab).

              Ok, then what did you mean by the fact that "some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level"? Wouldn't it be more expensive that way?

              Oh... I meant in comparison to Hyper-V not in comparison to Xen. A couple of the blog posts I've read on the cost to the enterprise has Hyper-V as the more expensive solution at that scale when compared with a similar VMWare solution.

              Really? Even though a lot of the enterprises that I've seen have VERY high level VMware licensing, it's still cheaper?

              I'll see if I can't dig up the blog posts.

              thanksajdotcomT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • thanksajdotcomT
                thanksajdotcom @coliver
                last edited by

                @coliver said:

                @thanksaj said:

                @coliver said:

                @thanksaj said:

                @coliver said:

                @thanksaj said:

                @coliver said:

                @thanksaj said:

                @milnesy said:

                Hyper-V 3.0 is so much more polished than the previous versions of Hyper-V. I also think it's a lot easier to manage than VMWare. (Mind you I have 2 clusters of VMWare running with over 100 servers on each.) It's what I'm recommending to smaller customers, especially because of the price. And the new features in 3.0 put it extremely close to being on par with VMWare ... well, that was until VMWare when on a huge acquisition party and gobbled up some very nice companies.

                Oh I'm not denying that Hyper-V is much more cost effective. I just don't hear about major enterprise networks running Hyper-V as their hypervisor. It's ESXi or Xen.

                Hyper-V is still relatively new and it may be awhile before some really big shops start to deploy it, although the price comparison when you get big enough is pretty even (some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level).

                Isn't Xen free?

                Open-source and free yes... also my preferred platform (I run it for my personal lab).

                Ok, then what did you mean by the fact that "some have VMware as the cheaper alternative at the enterprise level"? Wouldn't it be more expensive that way?

                Oh... I meant in comparison to Hyper-V not in comparison to Xen. A couple of the blog posts I've read on the cost to the enterprise has Hyper-V as the more expensive solution at that scale when compared with a similar VMWare solution.

                Really? Even though a lot of the enterprises that I've seen have VERY high level VMware licensing, it's still cheaper?

                I'll see if I can't dig up the blog posts.

                I would appreciate that. That's just really surprising is all.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • thanksajdotcomT
                  thanksajdotcom
                  last edited by

                  I feel like we need @scottalanmiller in on the OP discussion and this one.

                  coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • coliverC
                    coliver @thanksajdotcom
                    last edited by

                    @thanksaj Haha sadly agreed I can't seem to find the one I am looking for and the other ones are Microsoft or VMware sponsored...

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • coliverC
                      coliver
                      last edited by coliver

                      It was an infoworld article but I can't for the life of me find it.

                      The basic gist was that ESXi can host more VMs per physical server then Hyper-V so you would need fewer Datacenter licenses and physical machines then you would if the datacenter were run on Hyper-V.

                      http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/news/2240158342/VMware-vSphere-vs-Microsoft-Hyper-V-Which-is-cheaper

                      This is one of them but it is two years old now. I'm surprised that no one has done a more up-to-date version.

                      thanksajdotcomT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • thanksajdotcomT
                        thanksajdotcom @coliver
                        last edited by

                        @coliver said:

                        It was an infoworld article but I can't for the life of me find it.

                        The basic gist was that ESXi can host more VMs per physical server then Hyper-V so you would need fewer Datacenter licenses and physical machines then you would if the datacenter were run on Hyper-V.

                        http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/news/2240158342/VMware-vSphere-vs-Microsoft-Hyper-V-Which-is-cheaper

                        This is one of them but it is two years old now. I'm surprised that no one has done a more up-to-date version.

                        That makes sense. Considering you'd have to buy more physical servers, and a datacenter license is several thousand for EACH license, yeah...I guess I can see that.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • thanksajdotcomT
                          thanksajdotcom
                          last edited by

                          That has always irked me about Hyper-V. It's not a true hypervisor. It's basically a hypervisor-esque application running inside Windows.

                          coliverC milnesyM scottalanmillerS 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • coliverC
                            coliver @thanksajdotcom
                            last edited by

                            @thanksaj said:

                            That has always irked me about Hyper-V. It's not a true hypervisor. It's basically a hypervisor-esque application running inside Windows.

                            No, it is a true hypervisor, it runs underneath the Windows Server. It is basically the same as how Xen does it with Dom0.

                            thanksajdotcomT scottalanmillerS 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • thanksajdotcomT
                              thanksajdotcom @coliver
                              last edited by

                              @coliver said:

                              @thanksaj said:

                              That has always irked me about Hyper-V. It's not a true hypervisor. It's basically a hypervisor-esque application running inside Windows.

                              No, it is a true hypervisor, it runs underneath the Windows Server. It is basically the same as how Xen does it with Dom0.

                              Never touched Xen in my life, so I can't say one way or another with that.

                              scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • thanksajdotcomT
                                thanksajdotcom @coliver
                                last edited by

                                @coliver said:

                                @thanksaj said:

                                That has always irked me about Hyper-V. It's not a true hypervisor. It's basically a hypervisor-esque application running inside Windows.

                                No, it is a true hypervisor, it runs underneath the Windows Server. It is basically the same as how Xen does it with Dom0.

                                You still install it to the device though, right? You don't/can't run Hyper-V from a flash drive or SD card like ESXi, right?

                                coliverC scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • milnesyM
                                  milnesy @thanksajdotcom
                                  last edited by

                                  @thanksaj the new core is a hypevisor... it's just running a windows core rather than a linux core.

                                  scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • coliverC
                                    coliver @thanksajdotcom
                                    last edited by

                                    @thanksaj said:

                                    @coliver said:

                                    @thanksaj said:

                                    That has always irked me about Hyper-V. It's not a true hypervisor. It's basically a hypervisor-esque application running inside Windows.

                                    No, it is a true hypervisor, it runs underneath the Windows Server. It is basically the same as how Xen does it with Dom0.

                                    You still install it to the device though, right? You don't/can't run Hyper-V from a flash drive or SD card like ESXi, right?

                                    Sure you can. I was told by a Microsoft rep that they recommend running Hyper-V Server off of a very fast SD card.

                                    milnesyM thanksajdotcomT scottalanmillerS 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • milnesyM
                                      milnesy @coliver
                                      last edited by

                                      @coliver I think I found my friday project.

                                      coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • coliverC
                                        coliver @milnesy
                                        last edited by

                                        @milnesy said:

                                        @coliver I think I found my friday project.

                                        Running it off of a SD card? I've heard that you need a high-end card to make it usable... I've tried running it off a regular USB stick but it was abysmally slow.

                                        thanksajdotcomT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • thanksajdotcomT
                                          thanksajdotcom @coliver
                                          last edited by

                                          @coliver said:

                                          @milnesy said:

                                          @coliver I think I found my friday project.

                                          Running it off of a SD card? I've heard that you need a high-end card to make it usable... I've tried running it off a regular USB stick but it was abysmally slow.

                                          So you need a Class 10 SDHC card I assume, right?

                                          coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • thanksajdotcomT
                                            thanksajdotcom @coliver
                                            last edited by

                                            @coliver said:

                                            @thanksaj said:

                                            @coliver said:

                                            @thanksaj said:

                                            That has always irked me about Hyper-V. It's not a true hypervisor. It's basically a hypervisor-esque application running inside Windows.

                                            No, it is a true hypervisor, it runs underneath the Windows Server. It is basically the same as how Xen does it with Dom0.

                                            You still install it to the device though, right? You don't/can't run Hyper-V from a flash drive or SD card like ESXi, right?

                                            Sure you can. I was told by a Microsoft rep that they recommend running Hyper-V Server off of a very fast SD card.

                                            Interesting...that is news to me. Sounds like MS is playing catch-up to get to VMware's level in a lot of ways...just my 2ยข.

                                            scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 5
                                            • 2 / 5
                                            • First post
                                              Last post