Comments on: Microsoft to offer standalone hypervisor

Backing off earlier plans, company says customers will be able to buy the virtualization technology without committing to Windows Server.

[Penguinisto]

$28? I can do it for free.

I can just install Xen - total cost: $0.00

If I want VMWare that bad, I can use a tiny Linux distro, stick in the free VMWare Server, and I'm all set again for $0.00

No need to spend $28 and agree to that horrendous EULA just to get some VM action... blecch.

/P

[rapier1]

Not sure its the same thing...

I think they're positioning the MSHV as a competitor to the the Virtual Center Management Server - which is assuredly not free. These are both Type 1 'bare metal' hypervisors.

I believe, but cannot say for sure, that the free solutions are Type 2 or host OS layer solutions. MS has a free version of this as well with VPC.

[benjwah]

Besides which...

In the time it takes you to do it, the rest of us will be out there earning $100.

[Andy kaufman]

You have good points

but most people use Windows instead of Linux.

[timber2005]

You say...

You talk as if you aren't running a server at a large company, so to me, your comment is null. If you were, and you needed virtualization, you'd already be using it if it was free (to you).
However, I'm fairly sure you're just running a home server, web server, or a server for no more than 10 connected computers... am I right?

$28 might be more than free, but less than other alternatives too. Consider the best option of the person managing the equipment, and people soon to "get their feet wet" with virtualization. (Getting your feet wet... in a server room. Not a good idea probably).

[timber2005]

You talk...

You talk as if you aren't running a server at a large company, so to me, your comment is null. If you were, and you needed virtualization, you'd already be using it if it was free (to you).
However, I'm fairly sure you're just running a home server, web server, or a server for no more than 10 connected computers... am I right?

$28 might be more than free, but less than other alternatives too.

[timber2005]

meh

This was a reply to someone else... not the author. If someone is kind enough to delete?

[ColdMast]

run with not windows?

what is next: MSoffice on linux?
DX10 on XP
DX10 on Linux?

MARKETING MARKETING MARKETING - making people pay for betaware for years to come.

looking forward to all the praise from the Microsoft Fanboys: they always make me laugh.


"but also can handle physical servers as well as applications running within a virtual machine"

Is the competition even allowed to do this, or is this another example of an illegal monopoly at work?

[AliciaSimpson]

Runing MS Office on Linux

This is a simple thing to do. Using Wine you can install MS Office on any Linux distro. Why you would WANT to is beyond me, Open Office is perfectly usable and, if a bit behind MS Office, it is much cheaper.

[ralfthedog]

Easy way for Microsoft to make lots of money.

I may be wrong, but I would bet that each virtualization of windows will require its own license.

[AliciaSimpson]

Well Duh!!

as in Of Course! However, it can't be Windows Vista Home edition, they only want experienced users to try virtualization with their products. Actually, they don't want anyone to do Vista virtualization on the cheap. You must pay extra to get more than you need to do virtualization.

[AliciaSimpson]

Why do they need to do everything

Microsoft's insistence to be everything to everybody is ultimately going to be their downfall.

There are already several excellent virtualization products on the market, Microsoft really has no pressing need to get into this market. All it will do is direct resources away from their OS.

All companies that try to do everything fail in the end.

Flee the sinking ship, install Linux today!