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

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#71

Post by diziet »

cultureulterior wrote: post #68
mst wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That really depends how much of the additional "IT guy" hours are going into desktop support of the (presumably) more complex configuration. I'd say a 1:3 ratio of sysadmins to servers is actually pretty common -if- the sysadmins also do desktop support for the organization. At one of my ISP jobs the customer/production servers had a 1:50 or so ratio (but a lot of time was spent on new products/features, maintenance…

Depends on how large that organization is, and how much IT junk, like mail, etc.. is outsourced. (I'm sole sysadmin for a search engine, and I handle 200 servers.)

What search engine?

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#72

Post by jlawer »

wmf wrote: post #30
chaostheory wrote: post #20

A strong open source alternative is sure to come now.

Red Hat's been working on it for years and they're still years behind VMware. I don't think they could go any faster.

Yeah, but its not surprising that converting from a .net codebase to a java code base takes a few years.... they should have just re-written from scratch.... Once RHEV-3.0 is released though RHAT will open source it, so watch the product grow at that point, just like KVM has been growing in leaps and bounds recently.

I say that as someone who was part of the RHEV support team at launch.... RHEV 2 was a mistake. Red Hat should never have sold a product that depends on windows. They just don't know how to support it.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#73

Post by wmf »

jlawer wrote: post #72
wmf wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Red Hat's been working on it for years and they're still years behind VMware. I don't think they could go any faster.

Yeah, but its not surprising that converting from a .net codebase to a java code base takes a few years.... they should have just re-written from scratch.... Once RHEV-3.0 is released though RHAT will open source it, so watch the product grow at that point, just like KVM has been growing in leaps and bounds recently. I say that as someone who was part of the RHEV support team at launch.... RHEV 2 was a mistake. Red H…

Is that what they're doing? I thought maybe the new RHEV manager would be built on oVirt.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#74

Post by ciupicri »

lsc wrote: post #63
rednaught wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libvirt is not needed to use KVM but the purpose has been to provide stability (and an abstraction as you mentioned) over the changes QEMU has had in various releases. Update: Here's a blog related to your very question that was written just a few days ago: http://berrange.com/posts/2011/06/07/what-benefits-does-libv...

now, the version of KVM I'm using is really, really old, but as far as I can tell, KVM, by itself, does not do any locking. It's pretty easy to start a single guest twice when using kvm by itself, which will irreparably corrupt your instance. So yeah, I'd strongly recommend that you use libvirt (or some other wrapper that handles things like locking the block devices) if you use KVM. With xen, on the other hand, it h…

Regarding KVM locking, this is going to be fixed in the next version of Fedora - Fedora 16 [1].

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/VirtLockManager

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#75

Post by schiptsov »

Why use proprietary (less tested, less stable) solutions while there is community-tested and community-supported ones? ^_^

People still stuck with a stereotype that most brilliant programmers work for corporations. This is, obviously, not true. Most of corporations outsource their R&D and QA and spend for marketing instead. That is a very common strategy.

Now tell me - how this strategy correlates with a quality of a code or services? ^_^

Oracle vs. MySQL is a very good example - high quality community code is usually much better and well tested. (hint: it is about comparing the code quality, not a feature lists)

Being attached and depended (that is exactly what their marketing department is for) or not is your own choice. In some cases, like SAP, there is no community-supported alternatives, but it this case there is more than one.

Some people could say that we really need all those modern features, such as iscsi per lun mirroring, etc. But it is exactly this code is less tested and lower quality.

One cannot compete with Linux (Ubuntu/RHEL/CentOS) communities in matters of testing and code quality. No code is better tested than those included in mainstream kernel or a polular distribution.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#76

Post by newman314 »

bdunbar wrote: post #36
sc68cal wrote: post #16

Red Hat and Oracle should start making some sales calls, right about now. They should capitalize on this opportunity to convert some disaffected VMWare customers, and fund software development for migrating off the VMWare stack.

Oracle is just as bad, in it's way, with respect to licensing.

Actually, worse.

I've been involved in a project where we have actually had to change the direction of technology as well as deployment schedule to avoid incurring a massive (think over $100 million) license upcharge.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#77

Post by dave1010uk »

hillad wrote: post #58

VMware Customer here. Lots of FUD coming from the community- at first glance it sounds bad, but a lot of us should do the math before getting the pitchfork ready. ( Script to help "do the math" http://www.lucd.info/2011/07/13/query-vram/ ) We will actually be saving money with the vRAM licensing changes.

It looks like by changing the pricing to reflect more of the provisioning they're encouraging people to stick more CPUs per guest. I guess the more people are overloading their hardware at the moment, the bigger the license price jump.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#78

Post by dave1010uk »

schiptsov wrote: post #75

Why use proprietary (less tested, less stable) solutions while there is community-tested and community-supported ones? ^_^ People still stuck with a stereotype that most brilliant programmers work for corporations. This is, obviously, not true. Most of corporations outsource their R&D and QA and spend for marketing instead. That is a very common strategy. Now tell me - how this strategy correlates with a quality of a…

Has anyone had any experience with VMware's products being untested or unstable? I've heard annectodally that VMware's hypervisor is miles ahead of the others in terms of performance and useful features. Does anyone have any info on this?

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#79

Post by bostonvaulter2 »

dave1010uk wrote: post #78
schiptsov wrote: post #75

Why use proprietary (less tested, less stable) solutions while there is community-tested and community-supported ones? ^_^ People still stuck with a stereotype that most brilliant programmers work for corporations. This is, obviously, not true. Most of corporations outsource their R&D and QA and spend for marketing instead. That is a very common strategy. Now tell me - how this strategy correlates with a quality of a…

Has anyone had any experience with VMware's products being untested or unstable? I've heard annectodally that VMware's hypervisor is miles ahead of the others in terms of performance and useful features. Does anyone have any info on this?

I've found that vmware's vsphere is much better than KVM. I'm not sure about the performance but in terms of useful features and a nice interface vmware is much better.

I still need to try Eucalptys sometime.

Re: VMWare Screw Customers

#80

Post by bostonvaulter2 »

SnowLprd wrote: post #45
wazoox wrote: post #23

I know this is getting old, but here's another nice example of why you should be using Free Software for everything that's really important. KVM works very well; I know it misses some of the nice, pretty interfaces but at least it won't stab you in the back at the next upgrade.

We were faced with a very similar dilemma when we set up our virtualized cluster... Do we go with a free open-source solution like KVM, forgoing an easy-to-use GUI, or do we go with a more expensive solution such as VMware? We eventually decided to build a KVM-based cluster, and while we were already extremely glad we did before the vSphere 5 licensing change, this latest development only serves to confirm the wisdom…

What do you use to manage your KVM cluster? I'm not aware of any package that does that, although I haven't looked that deeply. I have been meaning to try out Eucalyptys/Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud (which sounds like similar functionality to a KVM cloud) but haven't done so yet.
Post reply on HN