For years I’ve been saying that “VDI is a solution looking for a problem.” A problem that is solved for the most part by Terminal Services (RDS) for many use cases (some special cases such as a requirement for local administrative rights still lend themselves to a VDI solution).
Now it appears that the world’s largest proponent of VDI is starting to see it that way too.
Last week VMware announced Horizon 6. The first question I have for VMware is what happened to versions 1 through 5? IT seems to me like Horizon 6 is emulating what Citrix (and Microsoft have being doing for decades) with a combined instance and session based solution. There’s not much I can tell you about Horizon 6 as it was only announced last week. Apparently you can download a 60 day evaluation. I suggest caution before doing that.
In the past, VMware has been able to get customers to forget that they may already have a solution available to them and get them to look at VDI/View as a potential solution to a problem. My suggestion is to learn what you can currently accomplish with Windows Server 2012R@ and Citrix to help you better understand what VMware is bringing to the party with Horizon 6.
I’m looking forward to seeing how Microsoft and Citrix are going to respond to this. IT will be an interesting TechEd for sure.
For a more in depth perspective on this, see my friend Claudio Rodrigues post here.
I often get asked why I like Hyper-V or why I don’t like VMware. The answer, strangely, isn’t about technology. Anybody that knows me well, knows that I’m not a technology bigot. Meaning I don’t get fanatical about particular companies or pieces of technology. In my house we have six tablets. A Surface RT, a Surface Pro (soon to be replaced by a Pro 2), 3 Android tablets, and an iPad. They all get used on a regular basis. There is no favourite. Just a preference for one device over the other based on the particular use case in question and the strengths of each device at addressing that use case. I’ve used VMware products for years and I like them. They have met many of the requirements I’ve had for a long time.
So how does this relate to Microsoft vs. VMware? Well, I see a lot of fanaticism over VMware. A large percentage IT Pros really love it and many are fanatical about it. They are quick to criticize alternatives (like Hyper-V) without having all of the facts. Another issue is that most people see the results of past consumption and mistake it for current market trends. Let me explain that with an example. Currently Android phones outsell iPhones however, most people see more iPhone sin use that Android phones because iPhones have been around longer have had past sales success. What is being seen is phones that were purchased over the last several years still in use.
Enough digressions. Back to Microsoft and VMware. Historically, VMware has had the edge over Microsoft in the hypervisor market. With Hyper-V 3, most experts would agree that the gap has narrowed enough that for most organizations, the differences are insignificant from a pure technical capabilities perspective. It’s like choosing between a Honda and a Toyota. Both vendors have offerings in every major segment. Most consumers would be equally well served by a Camry or an Accord but preferences still abound. In the virtualization world, there are many other factors to consider such as migration costs, retraining, new licensing, etc. VMware has had very strong technical offerings for a long time and the investments made by many organizations can’t easily be shifted. Of course, historically, there are many examples of a technically superior product being eclipsed (BetaMax vs. VHS, Amiga vs. PC, FLAC vs. MP3). It also isn’t about first or early movers in a market. Consider Blackberry losing 33% market share in 2012 while Android now has nearly 80% market share in the smartphone market. Of course, depending on when you read this the current market share may be very different.
So back to my previous statement “It isn’t about technology”. I’ve shown examples of a superior product losing out as well as examples of an early mover with a dominant market position being eclipsed by a relative newcomer. If not technology, what’s it about then?
Well, I’m an IT Pro. Any IT Pro worth his salt will tell you that the three key elements of a successful IT rollout of any system are People, Process, and Technology. Not necessarily in that order, but all three ingredients are required for success.
As I’ve mentioned previously, VMware has great technology and Microsoft is no slouch either. We can remove people from the equation since both Microsoft and VMware have access to the pretty much the same talent pool and really, the people that matter most aren’t the vendor’s staff but the enterprise customers’ datacenter staff. So a talented VMware administrator could easily be a talented Microsoft administrator. Using the same logic, you might conclude that the processes that are used in enterprise datacenters would also be a wash between VMware and Microsoft implementations and for the most part you’d be right. However I believe Microsoft has an edge. Here’s why:
Microsoft has a long history of supporting cloud/online services that process billions of transactions a year. Consider Hotmail/Outlook.com, XBOX Live, Office 365, Azure, as a few examples with revenue Microsoft has had to develop some fairly robust processes for managing their datacenters. This isn’t new for Microsoft. Consider the ITIL based Microsoft Operations Framework (MOF) currently at version 4.0 has been around since 2000. VMware doesn’t have an online services history to learn the hard lessons of datacenter management or the history of helping customers manage their datacenters from a process perspective. Microsoft has taken the battlefield tested processes they’ve used for over a decade and incorporated many of them into one of the newer and lesser known products in the System Center suite, Service Manager.
Service Manager helps organizations align business processes with technology delivery to create efficiencies in service delivery. The product is tightly integrated with the rest of the system Center suite (especially products like Operations Manager, and Configuration Manager) as well as Active Directory. The rich CMDB provided by Service Manager helps to manage the inevitable VM sprawl that accompanies virtualization. It is also a great platform to bolt on a SAM/ITAM solution like the one from Provance (Full disclosure: Provance is headquartered a few kilometres from my homeand I know many of their staff professionally – We’ve worked on joint projects and I’ve had more than a few drinks with them over the years.).
Until VMware has a similar offering, organizations that want to enable IT Service Management (ITSM) best practices, will find it much easier with a Microsoft private cloud solution than with a VMware solution.
BTW – Market share numbers for last year shows an interesting trend in the hypervisor adoption rates:
Source – Wall street Journal / IDC
Are we in the midst of a Blackberry like decline for VMware?
Lately I’m getting asked to explain the difference between virtualization and cloud computing. I like answering this question because it shows that the person asking the question has at least enough knowledge to identify that there are similarities but that they are probably not the same. Explaining the difference to this type of questioner is not usually a problem.
What bothers me a little more is when so called IT professionals use the terms VM and cloud interchangeably and then claim that they are pretty much the same thing or that if it works in one it should work in another. It is easy to get into a debate and find specific examples to bolster most claims on either side. Reality is not quite so simple. The right answer will usually start with “it depends”
With the rest of this post I’ll try to explain some of what it depends on and why there aren’t any simple answers. I’ll also give some examples of the beginnings of some more complicated answers without getting too technical.
The question worded a little differently: Aren’t Virtualization and Cloud Computing the same thing?
Before we begin, let’s get a couple of things straight:
- Remember that Cloud Computing is a delivery model and that Virtualization is a technology. Virtualization as a technology may be used at the back end of a service that is delivered with a Cloud Computing service offering but not necessarily.
- Virtualization is only one of the building blocks for cloud computing and there are many types of virtualization (server, desktop, application, storage, network, etc.) so categorical statements about virtualization and cloud computing is risky. It really depends on what is being virtualized an how it is made available by the cloud provider.
- There are different Cloud styles (fabric based, instance based, etc.), service models (Saas, PaaS, IaaS) and deployment models (private, public, hybrid, community). Thus, an answer with any significant depth that is correct when describing a fabric based community PaaS will most likely be incorrect when applied to an instance based private IaaS.
At the risk of oversimplifying let’s just consider a simple VM running on a bare metal hypervisor based virtualization platform. Although the hypervisor abstracts the hardware and makes it available to the VM, the VM is still bounded by the physical server itself. What I mean by this is that although you may be able to move a live VM from one physical server to another, the entire VM (memory and processor resources) must reside on one physical server and a single virtual LUN is required for storage.
Something very similar is the instance based cloud (in fact Amazon’s EC2 uses Xen based VMs at it’s core). This one-to-many relationship between physical resources and user containers (call them VMs if you like but technically they should be referred to as instances) obviously puts limits on the linear scalability and redundancy of this cloud approach. For many, this scalability limitation is offset by the ease of porting an application to an instance based cloud.
Fabric based clouds achieve higher scalability through the use of a fabric controller that keeps track all of the computing resources (memory, processor, storage, network, etc.) and allocates them as services to applications. The physical resources can be distributed among many physical systems. Again, at the risk of oversimplifying, the fabric controller is like an operating system kernel and the fabric itself acts similarly to a traditional OS as far as its relationship to a specific application. Fabric based clouds have a Many-to-Many relationship that allows a many applications to use resources on many physical resources. This model results in superior scalability and theoretically less downtime. However, this comes at the cost of application compatibility as applications must be designed to run in a fabric.
So yes, in some instances (pun intended) cloud computing is just large scale server virtualization but cloud computing is not necessarily the same as virtualization and there are many examples of cloud computing that are significantly different from traditional virtualization.
- Is Virtualization the Same as Cloud Computing? (informationweek.com)
- The Inevitable Eventual Consistency of Cloud Computing (devcentral.f5.com)