Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VMWare Screw Customers

communities.vmware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 93 posts

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#3

Post by Andys »

jjm wrote: post #2

This is a mean price increase.

Its easy to do this when you have no strong competition, and don't care if you piss off your existing customers.

The irony is they want to ride the new wave of public cloud computing, going so far as to sponsor development of a memory database (Redis), and then go and do something regressive like slapping a 24GB-per-CPU memory limit on their core product without a price decrease.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#4

Post by jjm »

Andys wrote: post #3
jjm wrote: post #2

This is a mean price increase.

Its easy to do this when you have no strong competition, and don't care if you piss off your existing customers. The irony is they want to ride the new wave of public cloud computing, going so far as to sponsor development of a memory database (Redis), and then go and do something regressive like slapping a 24GB-per-CPU memory limit on their core product without a price decrease.

Wow, I never saw it that way. Brilliant move for the books though.

But I guess if your box needs 24GB then you probably have cash no?

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#5

Post by justincormack »

Andys wrote: post #3
jjm wrote: post #2

This is a mean price increase.

Its easy to do this when you have no strong competition, and don't care if you piss off your existing customers. The irony is they want to ride the new wave of public cloud computing, going so far as to sponsor development of a memory database (Redis), and then go and do something regressive like slapping a 24GB-per-CPU memory limit on their core product without a price decrease.

But the new wave of public cloud computing is not generally running VMWare's product, as it is too expensive; eg EC2 runs on Xen... they are doing better from the private cloud people who are less concerned about using commodity open source software.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#6

Post by wilhil »

jjm wrote: post #2

This is a mean price increase.

Agreed... Only real enterprise alternative is Hyper-V - I have used it quite a bit and do like it, but, I just don't feel as happy using it as I am ESX.

Like Windows is dominant on the desktop, ESX pretty much owns the (paid virtualisation) ecosystem through many third party programs.

Microsoft is getting there, it is just much slower, but, a price increase like this could be (but I doubt it) VMware's undoing.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#7

Post by bshep »

On the original page's comments some people mention it might even be cheaper to buy hardware instead of licenses, anyone have a take on that?

Example:

a) 1 x Large Server + VMware licenses

-or-

b) N x Small Servers

If b) is more cost-effective then VMWare definitely dropped the ball here...

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#8

Post by Despite »

jjm wrote: post #4
Andys wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its easy to do this when you have no strong competition, and don't care if you piss off your existing customers. The irony is they want to ride the new wave of public cloud computing, going so far as to sponsor development of a memory database (Redis), and then go and do something regressive like slapping a 24GB-per-CPU memory limit on their core product without a price decrease.

Wow, I never saw it that way. Brilliant move for the books though. But I guess if your box needs 24GB then you probably have cash no?

To me, 24GB per cpu seems very low for a VM host.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#10

Post by nodata »

Despite wrote: post #8
jjm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I never saw it that way. Brilliant move for the books though. But I guess if your box needs 24GB then you probably have cash no?

To me, 24GB per cpu seems very low for a VM host.

Really? Per 10-core cpu or per core?
Post reply on HN