Between the two choices, what would you recommend? If you have any experience with one or the other, any stories or pitfalls to watch out for?
Poll
best virtualization product
| Microsoft Hyper-V | 50% | 50% - 2 | ||||
| VMware's ESX server | 50% | 50% - 2 | ||||
| Total: 4 | ||||||
I'm gonna have to null as I have no fucking idea what you're talking about.
we're currently running VMware's ESX server (another admin is, i just access it) but i've no experience with the Microsoft. VMware has been very reliable for us, i've not heard any wailing or gnashing of teeth from the other office, and the uptime has been about 100.
yeah i hear good things about vmware. they are pretty much the industry leader in virtualization, but you can't beat the pricing from microsoft. it's way cheaper, especially good for a school.
I don't have any experience with either of the products, but I'd choose VMWare over Microsoft any day. What I've seen of the 'enterprise' MS products isn't very convincing. If it's going in the tracks of their server operating systems, it isn't good.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
VMware has always worked great for me.
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
No Citrix in the poll?
That really depends on what you're going to do. Hyper-V isn't nearly as established as ESXi. If you're going to maintain Linux guests, or use sound or USB connectivity in your VMs, you don't want Hyper-V. If you're doing this commercially and have redundancy in mind, Hyper-V is flaky on live migration, if it's at all possible, whereas VMWare will peddle VMotion to you in exchange for a generous cash payment.
Hyper-V is for very specific, Microsoft-oriented virtualisation tasks. ESXi is for everything else.
Hyper-V is for very specific, Microsoft-oriented virtualisation tasks. ESXi is for everything else.
we checked them out... they were decent, but every bit as pricey as vmware, and they seemed to be targeted towards larger businesses.Bertster7 wrote:
No Citrix in the poll?
all things being equal, cost is the driving factor. i'll keep you observations in mind mikkel. i don't like the no linux support, but failover redundancy is not necessary. it'll be a tough choice.
thanks for your input bf2s.
Hyper-V does support Linux guests in PowerPoint presentations, but in the real world it's unstable and undesirable. Make sure to test Hyper-V thoroughly with the operating systems that you plan to run, should you choose to drink the Microsoft Kool-Aid.steelie34 wrote:
we checked them out... they were decent, but every bit as pricey as vmware, and they seemed to be targeted towards larger businesses.Bertster7 wrote:
No Citrix in the poll?
all things being equal, cost is the driving factor. i'll keep you observations in mind mikkel. i don't like the no linux support, but failover redundancy is not necessary. it'll be a tough choice.
thanks for your input bf2s.