I learned Hyper-V inside and out when I was studying for my MCSA 2012. I have given up on Hyper-V. Other Hypervisors are so much better and have less issues. I tried using Hyper-V for about a year, it just isn't as good as other products out there.
In what ways? and at what scale?
For starters the compatibility with non-Windows Machines suck.
Apparently, when have they NOT? Where does this "first release" myth come from? Other than the unique case of Vista, which was a true first release of NT 6.
This is NOT a first release, this is the latest version of NT 6. If you have concern about lower releases, then that would make you install this as this is the latest update to NT 6.
On the desktop side, I typically have always felt the first releases (like the now defunct Windows to be shaky. I do not think that is a myth.
There was not a single functionality issue with Windows 8.
Honestly, there was not a single problem with Vista either as long as your hardware worked with it. Vista had a driver compatibility problem.
Well this is not entirely true. Vista also included a brand new network stack that they wrote that had TONS of holes in it. They dumped that stack with 8.1 though.
Yeah, the industry has put a lot of effort into all kinds of both software and hardware research based around a pricing model that has now changed.
The real lesson here is, as it has been many times in the past, that Windows is the wrong place to be making investments when you can help it.
I've been making money on tipping holes in MSFT product / licensing / marketing strategy since maybe 1998 but... You can make SOME money but it's very difficult to build a healthy growing company this way So SAM you're 200% right on this..........