Calgary Here I Come!

Even before joining Microsoft Canada’s DPE team as a Virtual Evangelist (the Virtual part means I am a contractor in case you were curious, but I also specialize in Virtualization so it works in my favour!) I have had the opportunity to crisscross our great nation talking to audiences of all sorts and sizes – communities and user groups, enterprise customers, internal and external audiences, and more.  I have the greatest position I could imagine!

It continues today… I am heading to Calgary Alberta – a city that I have now visited a half dozen times in as many months, and one that I consider to be an important city for many reasons.  In October I had the opportunity to host a Windows 8 Launch Party for Calgary at Bottlescrew Bill’s, and have been back since for Windows 8, Office 365, Windows Server 2012, System Center 2012, and of course Hyper-V.  Every time I am there I am greeted by some of the greatest and most engaged and enthusiastic audiences.  Ever since I first spoke to the Calgary IT Community (CIC) in January of 2007, I have always been glad to go back to them.

While the CIC is going strong even today, a number of other user groups have popped up in that time.  The Calgary Systems Management User Group was founded in 2009 by Microsoft MVP Kevin Kaminski, and focuses on System Center, Desktop Deployment, and other topics of interest. 

The latest group to come about in Calgary is the Calgary Virtualization User Group (CVUG).  Founded by Marcos Noguiera, the group is one of the new breed of user groups that is technology agnostic and instead focuses on all topics related to virtualization.  The CVUG held their first meeting in February of this year, and they are building and growing, and from what I can tell all in the right direction.

Tonight (Monday April 15th) I will be speaking at CVUG for the first time.  For the first part of the meeting I will be comparing and contrasting VMware’s vSphere and Microsoft’s Virtualization & Private Cloud, and for the second part I will be discussing how to manage a heterogeneous virtualization environment using Microsoft’s System Center 2012.  Needless to say it should be an interesting meeting, hopefully evoking a lot of great conversation and debate between the members.

The event is free for all; all you have to do is register on their website.  I hope to see you there tonight and remember… make sure you say hi! –MDG

System Center VMM Supported Hosts

When I was asked in class recently what type of virtualization hosts are supported by System Center 2012 though Virtual Machine Manager I readily answered off the top of my head.  Unfortunately one of my students went on-line to search for confirmation of this, and came up with a TechNet article that gave a conflicting answer (http://technet.microsoft.com/library/gg697603.aspx).

While it does conflict with my answer, I have tried all of the environments that I listed and they all work just fine.  So here is my list of supported hosts in System Center 2012 SP1.

Hyper-V:

  • Windows Server 2012 (full installation, Server Core, or MinShell)
  • Windows Server 2008 R2 (full installation or Server Core)

vSphere:

  • ESXi 5.1
  • ESXi 5.0
  • ESX 4.1
  • ESXi 4.1
  • ESX 4.0
  • ESXi 4.0

Citrix:

  • XenServer 6.1
  • XenServer 6.0
  • Citrix XenServer – Microsoft System Center Integration Pack
    I hope this clears the air…

In interesting survey from VMworld…

I have a lot of conversations with people about virtualization… it’s what I do (well, among other things).  While most people agree that I am technically knowledgeable on both Microsoft and vSphere virtualization, sometimes my analysis and commentary strike people as skewed and unrealistic based on my relationship with Microsoft. 

For the past couple of years I have been talking about the advancements that Microsoft has made with regard to virtualization with Hyper-V and the associated technologies, not only from a technological standpoint, but also with regard to market share.  A lot of people have told me that I am dead wrong,and that I am living a fantasy if I think that Microsoft could ever make a dent in VMware’s market share. 

That is one of the reasons I am so happy to read an article posted yesterday in NetworkWorld (www.networkworld.com) called VMware, the bell tolls for thee, and Microsoft is ringing itThe writer (Zeus Kerravala) writes about a survey conducted recently at VMworld, which for those of you unfamiliar is VMware’s large yearly event, equivalent to Microsoft’s TechEd events.

NetworkWorld surveyed attendees about their Hyper-V usage, and got some very encouraging (for Microsoft) answers.  Read what he has to say here, and feel free to start a local discussion here… I would love to know (especially from traditionally VMware shops) if you are running Hyper-V – in test? production?  Are you discussing it?  Let me know! -M

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/81559

It’s Coming… Can we now compare Hyper-V with vSphere as both new products prepare for launch?

On July 5th I published an article titled A Response to VMware’s ‘Get the Facts’ page comparing vSphere to Hyper-V & System Center. In the seven weeks since it went live it has become the 4th most read article I have ever published (in seven years as a blogger), as well as being by far the most commented on, discussed, and shared article I have ever written.

André Andriolli, a former VMware field engineer and now a Systems Engineer Manager with VMware in Brazil, responded very well.  One of the first points he made was:

we should start by comparing what’s in the market TODAY with what’s in the market today: I mean vSphere 5 versus Hyper-V 2, or vSphere 5.1 with Hyper-V 3. Since vSphere 5.1 news are not in the street yet, we should go with the first. Comparing a future MSFT release with what VMware customers are running for over 1 year now is simply not fair, to me at least.

While I did not entirely agree with this at the time, I accept that it is a valid point.  I am looking forward to hearing comments in the next few weeks though… as Windows Server 2012 (with Hyper-V 3.0) becomes generally available on September 4th, and vSphere 5.1 becomes available on September 11th.

My opinion is simple… VMware still makes a great product, but so does Microsoft; the benefits of the former, in my opinion (and that of many VMware customers I have spoken with), simply are not worth the the difference in cost over the latter.  While it will be a relief that VMware is abandoning their Virtual Memory Entitlements (commonly referred to as the Memory Tax), I think the last year will have left a sour note with a lot of their customers, and given them an opportunity to see for themselves just how good Hyper-V really is.

I do like the fact that both platforms are being released at the same time though; I once made a comment that I regretted right away that of course one would always be ahead of the other because one would come out with a new feature, and the other would take that feature and include it in their next release, along with whatever else they were planning, and that would continue on.  For the next year the two will be compared as equals.

Now, this is one place where VMware has a slight advantage… insofar as they have a one-year product cycle, and Windows Server has a 3-year product cycle.  This was adjusted last year when they took the rare step of adding new (and major) functionality into Service Pack 1 of Windows Server 2008 R2.  For now, frankly I am not sure that pound for pound Hyper-V (with System Center) is not already the better product.  I guess we will find out what the market says though…

If you are in Toronto, we would love for you to join us for the Windows Server 2012 Launch Event on September 5th, or if you are in another city across Canada, later in the month.  Check out Ruth Morton’s blog to see the dates, and to click to register.  We hope to see you there!

Is it true? The Memory Tax is gone!

CRN is reporting that next week at VMworld VMware will be announcing that they are doing away with Virtual Memory Entitlements, which you have probably heard me refer to as the Memory Tax.

According to the article (http://www.crn.com/news/cloud/240005840/vmware-kills-vram-licensing-will-focus-on-vsphere-cloud-bundles.htm?cid=nl_alert) VMware is trying to regain its competitive edge over Microsoft’s Hyper-V, which has over the past couple of years soared to nearly 30% market share, making it the fastest growing virtualization platform in the industry.

This is the first time I can remember that VMware is showing any signs that they are trying to compete against the scrappy and powerful competitor.  I heard from a source at VMware that they have heard from a great many clients that they are either testing Hyper-V out on a few servers or, in some cases, switching completely.  This comes as no surprise in a year when VMware introduced the hated Virtual Memory Requirements, and when Microsoft has made such incredible strides to make Hyper-V 3 as good or better than its larger competitor.

It will come as no surprise to readers of this blog that I was shocked by the Memory Tax, and predicted a year ago it would badly hurt VMware’s market share.  In a day and age when competition is getting better, giving their hypervisor away with the operating system, and bundling the management tools with the System Center suite (which the vast majority of companies already own) it simply made no sense for VMware to make virtualization more expensive than they already had.

VMware will be launching vSphere 5.1 at VMworld next week, and the worst of times will be over for their fans.  I wonder however if they can turn the ship around… you cannot unring a bell, and the companies who have tried Hyper-V for the first time in the past year have seen what their alternatives are.  IT managers have to consider costs, and if the less expensive product is just as good (and is supported by the largest software company in the world) then it will be interesting to see how many of them make the switch over the first twelve months of Hyper-V 3.0 with Server 2012, which RTMed August first and is set to become publically available in early September.

In other News:

Several VMware customers have told me they have received an e-mail that looks like this one:

“… I am your renewals representative from VMware.  I wanted to reach out to you regarding a Renewals promotion that we are running through September 30, 2012.

VMware is making an extended effort this year to bring current any expired customers to allow for reinstated SnS and the ability to upgrade to the newest version of vSphere (VS5). Throughout this one-time promotion, we will be offering two separate options with 100% waiver of reinstatement on your expired licenses and up to 100% waiver of your back-dated maintenance; saving you at least 20% on your renewal cost.

By reinstating your support via this promotion, you could save thousands of dollars and regain access to technical support and the most current releases.  While supported, you will be eligible for upgrades and updates as well as technical support, both online and via our Customer Support Technicians.

I would be happy to discuss the promotion and answer any questions you may have.  Again, this offer is only valid through September 30, 2012; therefore, please let me know if you would like to see pricing options and I will have those generated.  If you have further questions about this promotion, please feel free to contact me directly at the information below, or contact RenewalsHotlineAMER@vmware.com

If you are interested in quotes to see how much getting your products back on support would be please let me know and I am happy to get these for you.”

I am not surprised.  For the first time in its history VMware will have seen decreased sales in the past year, especially when it comes to renewing SnS contracts.  When they launched vSphere 5 (and the hated Memory Tax) they gave existing clients a ridiculously short window to make the commitment to upgrading their licenses… something like 30 days.  A great many companies decided to either stick with vSphere 4.1, which meant that they would avoid the Memory Tax, or better yet, begin the process of migrating their existing vSphere servers onto Hyper-V.

It does not surprise me at all that the company is now looking for ways to get that lost business back, even taking the unprecedented steps of lowering the costs AND waiving the penalties.  Unfortunately for them, as I wrote earlier in this article, you cannot unring a bell.  For the die-hard fans who stayed with vSphere 4.1 this might be enticing, but for companies that dipped their toes into the waters of Hyper-V, and were anxiously awaiting the public release of Hyper-V 3.0, there is no going back.

I have been and will continue to teach those professionals and companies how to best leverage their Microsoft virtualization platform… Welcome aboard!

A Response to VMware’s ‘Get the Facts’ page comparing vSphere to Hyper-V & System Center

For the sake of full disclosure, in case you did not know, I am not only a Microsoft MVP, I am also a Virtual Partner Technology Advisor for Microsoft Canada, and work very closely with that company’s Evangelism Team.  I hold most major IT-Pro focused certifications from Microsoft Learning that come close to pertaining to virtualization.  I am also a VMware Guru, am a VMware Certified Professional (4 and 5), and have been teaching a third-party vSphere course for a company called VMTraining since 2009.

Recently a colleague of mine – an IT Manager for the Toronto office of a Fortune 100 company – had a sales call from VMware recently.  His company is a Microsoft shop and as such runs Hyper-V, but he was in the mood to pick an argument, so he said ‘I’ll be glad to switch to VMware… as soon as you can prove to me that it is a better value for my company that Windows Server 2012 and Hyper-V 3.0.’

I would imagine that this poor salesman’s life was a hell of a lot easier five or even two years ago, when VMware was the clear leader in its market, the only player in Gartner’s Magic Quadrant.  In the days when companies paid the high cost for VMware because there simply wasn’t another enterprise-ready solution in the server virtualization space, questions like this one would have been easy to answer.

Today it is not so simple for them, but of course they have an answer prepared.  VMware’s Get the Facts page hopes to clear the air… claiming ‘Not the Microsoft Hyper-Bole’  Catchy, huh?  It lists five reasons with links:

Fact #1: VMware is the proven, undisputed leader. This is absolutely true: VMware is the leader in the virtualization space.  Remember ‘Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.’  IBM nearly disappeared because first they did not see the competition such as Digital as a threat in the mainframe market, and then again by thinking that nobody else could make an Intel x86-based PC that would run Microsoft DOS and applications, and that people would continue to pay a 40% premium for the privilege of those three coveted letters.  If VMware continues to ignore Hyper-V as a threat, their future at the top of the heap is far from guaranteed.

The link makes a number of points:

  • [‘VMware vSphere’s architecture is purpose-built with the industry’s smallest disk footprint; Microsoft Hyper-V R3 will still have a large disk footprint, burdened with general-purpose Windows code that has nothing to do with virtualization.’] This may be true… but who is that disk footprint (still under 10GB) hurting?
  • [‘Analysts estimate that over 80% of all virtual machines in the world run on VMware.’'] Again, who cares? Budweiser is one of the top selling beers in the world, but that doesn’t make it better than Labatt.  Nobody is denying that VMware makes an excellent product.  They just make it expensive.
  • [‘VMware VMotion performs 5 times faster than today’s Microsoft Live Migration.’] So what? The end user doesn’t notice or care that the VM is migrating!
  • [‘VMware HA (High Availability) works even when half or more hosts in a cluster go down; Microsoft "HA" doesn’t.’]  Sure, the more hosts you buy, the fewer hosts your VMs can run on…  The bottom line is that vSphere 5 supports up to 512 VMs running on a host, and when ‘half or more hosts’ in a cluster go down you had better be sure that you aren’t over capacity.  Conversely, Windows Server 2012 supports up to 64 nodes in a failover cluster (as compared to 32 nodes in a vSphere 5 cluster) and 1024 running virtual machines per host (as compared to 512 running VMs in ESXi 5), so not only can you have more running virtual machines, you can have a higher host failure tolerance before a cluster goes down.
  • [‘Hyper-V R3 will still fall short of vSphere 5 in critical areas like virtual security, storage management and business continuity.’]  All of these are questionable claims at best, but there is no question that VMware makes a good product… I just question if the product is worth the price.  I think Rolls Royce makes an incredible car that is absolutely better than my Toyota… but I drive a Toyota because it does everything I need… and is affordable.

Fact #2: VMware delivers greater value and lower TCO.  This may have been true once, but no longer, and certainly not in Hyper-V 3.  Let’s look at their points:

  • [‘VMware offers lower capital and operational costs than Microsoft due to VMware’s higher scalability and greater levels of administrative automation.’]  This is a complete falsehood if comparing apples to apples – ESXi 5.1 and vCenter Server versus Hyper-V 3.0 and System Center 2012.  With Hyper-V 3 you can put double the number of running virtual machines per host, and double the number of  hosts per cluster.  With these numbers I would ask who really offers greater scalability?
  • [‘VMware uniquely solves customers’ business issues leading to greater business value, especially when moving to a private cloud, built on top of a proven foundation.’] I do not question that VMware offers business value, but whether that value holds up when compared to Server 2012 and System Center 2012? I doubt it.

Fact #3: VMware is proven to support business critical apps.  This is absolutely true, and if you read the points in the link you will notice that at the very beginning they sate that over 80% of virtual machines run on VMware… then talk about the rate of virtualization of application servers such as SQL, Exchange, and SharePoint.  It does not say a word to the effect that these can all be virtualized just as well on Hyper-V as on ESX (See my article and Netanel Ben-Shushan’s whitepaper on P2V Migration for Microsoft Exchange Servers).

Again, nobody is denying that VMware is an excellent virtualization platform.  As the link clearly states, ‘…VMware is part of Microsoft’s Server Virtualization Validation Program (SVVP), which clearly defines and provides support for Microsoft applications on non-Microsoft virtualization platforms.’  Microsoft would not certify VMware in the SVVP if it wasn’t… but that does not mean that it is better or worse than Hyper-V, which is also SVVP certified.

Fact #4: System Center falls short for managing vSphere.  I do not know if System Center actually falls short, but it is true – there are a number of tasks in ESXi that cannot be managed by System Center Virtual Machine Manager.  The current claim is that System Center 2012 now supports all of the functionality of ESXi 3.5, 4.0, and 4.1, as well as vCenter Server 2.5, 4.0, and 4.1.  That is still short of what I am expecting of them – and I hope that in Service Pack 1 they will extend support and functionality to include ESXi 5.  And yes, it is true that in order for System Center to manage ESX/ESXi it still requires vCenter Server in place.

With all of that being said, the heterogeneous hypervisor scenario in which VMM would be managing ESX/ESXi is part of a greater migration plan, where a company has decided to migrate off VMware and onto Microsoft virtualization.  This process would be a lot more painful if VMM could not do both, and a rip-and-replace was required.  Being able to manage VMware from VMM allows companies the luxury of migrating at a leisurely pace… a lot less painful than the alternative, while also answering the argument of ‘Yes, VMware is more expensive, but we’ve already invested and don’t want to spend the money to migrate onto Hyper-V.’

It is also worth mentioning that while System Center does not do absolutely everything that you might occasionally need to do in ESX/ESXi, it is leaps and bounds ahead of the alternative, since vCenter Server will not even recognize the existence of Hyper-V, let alone manage it.  The only exception to this is that VMware does provide a utility to perform V2V migrations of Hyper-V virtual machines to ESX/ESXi… in case a company decides that the free product that does 99% of what the really expensive alternative does, and wants to go the other way.

Fact #5: VMware delivers application-aware solutions.  Again, Nobody is denying the capabilities of VMware… Unfortunately they continue to spread misleading information about Hyper-V and the Private Cloud.  Their points:

  • [‘VMware delivers and enables solutions that provide extensive application insight, to enable IT to deliver on business-level SLAs.’]  This is true.  So does System Center 2012 (and previous versions, for that matter)
  • [‘Supporting both Microsoft and non-Microsoft applications, VMware vFabric Hyperic provides out-of-the-box support for more than 75 different application technologies, with a breadth of application-specific metrics.’] Again, no question.  On the flip side, System Center 2012 provides Management Packs (MPs) for every Microsoft product available for the enterprise.  For non-Microsoft products the majority of them have third-party MPs available, and if the application that you are interested in does not, no problem!  You can create one (or more likely hire a consultant to do that… there are companies that do it for a living).
  • [‘VMware vCenter Operations has access to any application data that Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM) has access to by leveraging adapters to collect performance, topology, and events data.’]  It is nice to see the page conceding that System Center Operations Manager is the gold standard that they should be comparing themselves to.
  • [‘VMware vSphere provides APIs that enable VMware technology partners to deliver application-aware solutions, such as Symantec’s ApplicationHA, which provides high availability for business-critical applications like Microsoft Exchange and SQL, Oracle, SAP, and WebLogic’] So does Microsoft!

Conclusion:

I asked my colleague to read the points, and if he was convinced.  He said he was.  I then had him read this article, and asked if he was still convinced.  He was not.  He told me that his was a Microsoft shop, and would remain so until someone proved to him that another solution was better.  Proof does not mean marketing fud, it means real numbers, side by side, from independent consultants.  Unfortunately this is still not possible, due to VMware’s end-user license agreement (EULA) which strictly forbids anyone from publishing comparative benchmarks.

I have been saying for two years that if I was VMware, and I was so convinced that ESXi and vCenter Server were so much better than Hyper-V, I would be asking people to compare them side by side and then make the decision.  I would be asking technology bloggers and journalists to publish comparisons, and would even be enabling them to do so… rather than forbidding it under penalty of legal action.

The feud between Microsoft and VMware will continue to heat up, and each technology giant will continue to make improvements to its respective product offerings.  However it is time that VMware starts respecting Hyper-V and the System Center 2012 offerings, and if they do not they are destined to find themselves in a very precarious state somewhere in the next couple of years.  Companies simply do not want to pay out huge sums of money annually if they don’t have to.  ESXi is free… until you want to do anything with it, at which point you need the vCenter Server.  System Center 2012 is certainly not free, but most companies have System Center and will be upgrading to the newer platform in the near future.  The same holds true with Windows Server 2012, although the reality is that Hyper-V 2008 R2 SP1 still holds up pretty nicely.

Is Microsoft better than VMware? No, at least not when it comes to server virtualization.  Is Microsoft close enough to VMware that the huge price difference is not worth the money? Yes.  Does VMware offer features that Microsoft does not? Yes.  Does Microsoft offer features that VMware does not?  Yes.  Do both solutions in their latest versions (Server 2012 RC is currently being tested by companies around the world, as is vSphere 5.1) offer customer the same base features that the vast majority of companies want and need?  Yes.

Should you take my word for it?  No.  Nor should you take VMware’s word for it.  Install both in a test environment and run your own comparative tests, and then decide!

TrainSignal: Tooting the horn a little

I was a VMware Certified Professional for nearly a year when it was announced that current VCPs would have a six month window to upgrade their certification to VCP5 without having to take the required class.

I took the class once, and it was a great one, but I had no interest in doing it again.  The problem was, in order for me to take the exam I would have to know the material.  In order for that to happen, I would usually simply install it and use it for a few months, and then be ready.

Problem: The six months following the release of vSphere 5 I was otherwise occupied with projects, including System Center, Windows, Hyper-V, and all sorts of other things that meant a) a lot of travel, and b) my primary server environment needed to be running Microsoft.  I had to make a living of course.

On the other hand, the living I make is sometimes enhanced by and even reliant on my being certified in the latest technologies, including VMware.

ROCK ——-> ME <——- HARD PLACE

That was about the size of it, and the Catch-22 was easy to see.  I had to find another way to prepare for the exam.

Now here’s the thing… I have said many times that I do not generally study for certification exams.  I prefer to know the material (Skills Measured- Improving your chances of passing certification exams).  Unfortunately in some cases (as was the case here) I would have to ‘hit the books’ as it were.

Ed… Ed Liberman… why was Ed Liberman’s name coming to mind?  He works for TrainSignal, and I met him a couple of years ago on an airport shuttle in (I believe) New Orleans as we were both arriving for TechEd 2010.  He had made his pitch – he creates content for TrainSignal – e-learning material type stuff.  I had used their material once before (in 2005 I needed to learn Microsoft’s ISA Server, and that was how I did it) and remembered that I appreciated the quality of the content.  I pinged Ed, and a few days later the VMware vSphere 5 Training kit arrived. 

It was three discs – two Video discs and one ‘additional content disc’ which included the appropriate files for iPod, mp3, and wmv files (should I want to learn how to architect and manage my enterprise-level datacentre from my Zune or iPod).  I appreciated the thought that went into that.

Right on the case the two instructors are named and their credentials are listed.  I really appreciated that, because it is easy to read words off a script (the instructors voices are heard throughout, but their faces are never seen).  David Davis and Elias Khnaser are both VMware Experts, VCPs, and have a host of other certs which are especially important in a course like this, because managing a VMware environment necessarily requires heterogeneous skillsets – David is a CCIE and CISSP and Linux+, while Elias is an MCSE, CCA, CCEA, and CCNA.  All relevant to the course.

The style and format of the course were demonstrative of a company that did not want to simply deliver a run of the mill product.  The quality of the videos, instruction, and format was all top notch, matching that of the instructors.  As well the .wmv files that I initially mocked came in handy when I started traveling (ok, when I resumed traveling) and realized that my primary laptop doesn’t have a DVD player.  I was able to copy the appropriate files onto my hard drive and continue my learning in hotel rooms and on airplanes without any concern.

While I wouldn’t say that I am a VCP5 because of TrainSignal, it is a safe bet that earning that credential would have been tough for me had I tried to do it without them.  The books I have are nice (and quite helpful!), as is the material from VMraining (for whom I have been teaching for several years), but those videos on the road really helped me pass the exam before (if only three days) the deadline.

Thanks Ed!

Free Backup Utility for Virtualization Environments

I just got a notification e-mail from Veeam that they now have a free edition of their backup tool: Veeam Backup Free Edition for both VMware and Hyper-V.  This is exciting news because backing up your virtual environment is so important.  They are also including VeeamZIP, instant file-level recovery, and Quick Migration for VMware.  This is really exciting and I urge you to give it a try!

Here is the text of the e-mail, along with the link:

It is HERE! Veeam Backup Free Edition for VMware and Hyper-V

This exciting new free product includes the functionality from FastSCP—the essential tool for managing VM and host files, plus:

  • VeeamZIP™: Ad-hoc backup of a live VM
  • Instant File-Level Recovery: Restore individual guest files directly from a backup
  • Quick Migration for VMware: Migrate a live VM to any host or datastore

Download

Download Veeam Backup Free Edition

My Certification History, and the Importance of Multi-Vendor Certifications

In 2001 I had an intern working for me at IGS Security whose name I cannot recall, but she was a student at LaSalle College, and was working toward earning her Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) certification. She and I did not get along very well, and she left early with a bad attitude… although some of it was justified.

One of the conversations that we had was around certifications, and she was working on hers, but didn’t have any yet. I told her (stupidly) that I could get my MCSE if I wanted to, but didn’t have the time nor see the value in it. When she quit she wrote a letter to my boss and among other accusations (which were not true) she brought this one up (which was). I felt bad about it, but never contacted her to apologize. I did, however, make the decision to start working toward that credential, and with a little help from friends and family embarked upon an incredible journey that has changed my life.

clip_image001Since I earned my first certification on March 31, 2003 I have been extremely proud to hold industry certifications. It was on that day that I passed exam 70-210 and was officially (and still am) a Microsoft Certified Professional (MCP). That afternoon I went out and downloaded the MCP logo (I may have had to wait a few days until I got the confirmation e-mail from Microsoft Learning), and went into the company where I worked and resigned my position as Director of M.I.S. I knew that I could now demand a much higher salary… and I was right, to a point.

clip_image002I needed to pass a number of other exams in order to achieve my next certification, which was the Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator. I earned the one on Windows 2000 on May 27, 2005, and a year later (June 30, 2006) I passed the upgrade exam to be an MCSA on Windows Server 2003. I now had a senior certification, and was as proud as a peacock. Within the Microsoft world I was on my way!

clip_image003With my senior certification under my belt, it did not take long before I was able to qualify as a Microsoft Certified Trainer (MCT). This took a little more work, because in those days I didn’t have a credit card, and unlike regular certifications, there is a $400/year fee to being an MCT. As well I had not taken the Train the Trainer class, so I had to get proof from a Certified Partner for Learning Solutions (CPLS) that they wanted me to train for them. Versalys in Montreal provided the letter, and in August, 2006 I earned that right.

clip_image004In the same month – August 29, 2006 to be exact – I earned my Microsoft Certified Desktop Support Technician (MCDST) cert. It was, to date, the easiest senior cert that I had achieved, but that is probably because it was two exams on Windows XP, a platform that I had been using and supporting for five years. That was the first time that I had passed two exams on consecutive days… the truth was I thought about taking one in the morning and the next in the afternoon, and do not remember why I didn’t… it was probably either because I was busy in the afternoon (or did not want to schedule a full day away from clients) or because I was simply afraid that if I failed the first exam I would never be able to pass the next. That achievement – multiple exams passed in a single day – would have to wait a little while longer!

clip_image005I knew that that with Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista that Microsoft was evolving their certifications model… there would no longer be an MCSE, MCSA, or MCP… rather most exams would earn the candidate an MCTS (Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist), and the PRO exams, in conjunction with the TS exams, would earn a senior cert. My first MCTS was on Windows Vista (Configuration). I believe that was the first exam that I ever took in beta (pre-release) and I took it the first morning that it was available, which was October 31, 2006. I would not get confirmation that I passed it until January of 2007, but according to my certification transcript I earned it on the day I took the test, making it the first (of many) certifications to which I had the honour of being a Charter Member. I don’t know how many become charter, but it means I was one of the first.

clip_image006

The only two certifications I would earn in 2007 were my first two senior certifications of the new model… My first Microsoft Certified IT Professional (MCITP) was MCITP: Consumer Support Technician, which I earned April 2, 2007. For reasons that I cannot recall it took two more months to be accredited as an MCITP: Enterprise Support Technician, which I was awarded on June 18th of that year. However I actually passed the qualifying exam for it several times – including once dating back to the first beta – December 22, 2006 – but I was never able to get Microsoft to change the date of the award on the transcript. I am, however, still a Charter Member of that cert.

clip_image007Over the course of the next few years I earned several other Microsoft certifications – several MCTSes and a handful of MCITPs – but in December, 2010 I decided that I had put off my original goal for too long. I had always said that I wanted to be an MCSE, and despite that being an older certification on legacy technology, I think I knew deep down that it meant something, because it was my original goal. I think that it is important to set goals, and although there is nothing wrong with modifying them along the way, sometimes our goals have a significance other than the obvious.

I know that over the years I have lost contracts and jobs because I didn’t have the MCSE… even though by a certain point I DID know the material… at least most of it! I can think of two companies where I was told ‘Sorry, we really do need someone with the MCSE after their name.’ I mean, in 2010? Really? Ok, so be it. It may have been meaningless going forward as people started to understand that MCITP was the new MCSE, but I decided in December of 2010 to do it. I looked at my transcript, used the Certification Planner (which is a great tool on the MCP site that lets you know what requirements are left for any given certification), and realized I was short two exams… both of which I had failed once before.

I wouldn’t say that 70-293 (Planning and Maintaining a Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Network Infrastructure) was the hardest exam I had even taken, but it was the one I struggled with most. I had failed it not once but three times, twice dating back to 2008, and once earlier (February) of 2010. I decided to really dedicate myself to passing this time. I studied my butt off, and when the final screen showed ‘Congratulations you passed’ and that my score was 866, I was thrilled! Now all I had to do was…

I had failed 70-297 (Designing a Microsoft Server 2003 Active Directory and Network Infrastructure) before, in 2008. It was then that I learned about testlets… and how much I did not like them. I was worried because the format of the exam was so different, but again, I was a lot more experienced than I had been in 2008, and I wrote the exam the day after I passed the previous one… and for the first time in a very long time I took nearly all of the allowed time. I am generally a fast test writer, but I made sure I left nothing on the field for this one. When the screen said that I passed I was relieved… but when the score report showed that I scored a perfect 1000, I gasped! I had never done that before, and was shocked, thrilled, elated… and surprised! On December 15, 2010 I was finally able to proudly call myself a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE).

it would take a few more months for me to earn the last Microsoft certifications that I wanted… MCITP on Windows Server 2008 (there are two – Server Administrator and Enterprise Administrator). I had already earned the MCITP: Virtualization Administrator, but that was a specialty cert, while the SA and EA were essentially the 2008 versions of MCSA and MCSE. I wrote the three requisite MCTS exams in one day – the first and last time that I will ever try that again! I passed them all, but it was nerve wracking. The following month I went into the testing center prepared for exam 70-696 PRO: Windows Server 2008, Server Administrator. It was another bear – a testlet-type exam like the 297 Design exam, and although I was not prepared for that, I did know the material, and was glad that I was able to pass it. The following day I went back confidently to pass 70-697… and failed.

clip_image008You should never underestimate or take a certification exam lightly… it is a recipe for failure, as I discovered that day. It was, in my humble opinion, one of the toughest exams I had ever written. As I wrote recently in an article Wow that certification exam was TOUGH! exams are not meant to be easy, and the more valued the certification the tougher the exam should be. It took me a few more months to both find the time and the energy to prepare for and re-take the exam, but on December 20, 2011 – a year after finally earning my MCSE, I became an MCITP: Enterprise Administrator on Windows Server 2008. Not since my early days of certifications had I been as proud of a credential as this one.

clip_image010clip_image012Of course, I have discussed my journey to Microsoft certifications, but I have not discussed the others… I am also certified in VMware – both by VMware themselves, and by VMTraining, a third party training company that has their own course called the vSphere Ultimate Bootcamp. Both of these companies have their own certification exams, and I am proud to have passed both of them for both vSphere 4 and the current vSphere 5. I have said for years that IT should never be about religion, it should be about the best tool for the job. Until recently Microsoft was a bit-player in the server virtualization space, and while that has changed and will change more with the release of Hyper-V 3.0 with Windows Server 8, VMware is still the industry leader in that space, and I could never represent and discuss Microsoft Virtualization properly without knowing the competition, and besides, the certification has helped me get a number of consulting gigs in VMware shops!

The point is I have never been hurt by certifications, and when people ask me if they are still relevant or important I point to both the gigs I have gotten because of them… and the ones I have not gotten. I tell them that when I am asked to consult on a hire (which I do from time to time) one of my first qualifiers is always ‘What certifications does the candidate have?’ I consider certifications proof that the professional has the respect for their field to not only do things the right way, but to prove it. So if you are not certified, I think it is time to seriously consider getting so… your career will thank me for it!

Windows Server 8: Busting the limits in Hyper-V, and comparing the numbers to VMware vSphere 5.0

It’s here! Ok, what I should say is that it’s BETA edition is here! Windows Server 8 is going to be a game changer for all sorts of reasons. However for those people who have been saying that Hyper-V is not ready for prime-time (it has been for a while) the new limits are going to make a lot of people reevaluate that position.

1Terabyte of RAM per Virtual Machine

The previous limitation of 64 gigabytes per virtual machine did not limit most workloads, but there are certainly cases for some servers that do need it. I don’t think you are going to see a lot of virtual machines running the full terabyte anytime soon… but being able to break the 64GB barrier is nice! VMware went the same way in vSphere 5, whereas their previous limit was 255GB (nearly 4 times that of Hyper-V) they quadrupled that. (vSphere 5.0: same)

160 Logical Processors per Host

The 160 LPs (includes cores, hyper-threads) is going to keep coming up as long as Intel and AMD keep putting more cores onto a CPU, and more CPUs onto the board. VMware went the same way, up to 160 LPs. (vSphere 5: same)

1024 Virtual Machines per Host

With a previous limitation of 384 VMs per host I used to wonder who really needed that. However when taking into account how much RAM can go into a host (2TBs) that is a lot of room for a lot of workloads. Add to that the fact that CPUs are more powerful than ever (Thanks to Moore’s Law) and any respectable datacentre stores their virtual machines on external storage, we are in a place where it makes sense to put more and more. With that being said, it is not likely that companies are going to run that high density under normal conditions, but when planning a failover environment you can now plan for fewer failover hosts (if necessary). VMware also boosted their limitations, previously at 320 VMs per host, they increased their limit: (vSphere 5: 512 VMs per host)

64 Nodes per Cluster

For all of those who have badmouthed Microsoft clustering over the years (I am one of them) Failover Cluster Services in Windows Server 2008 / R2 was a breath of fresh air. What was previously daunting and scary was made friendly and useable, and now it is not uncommon to see small business customers implementing failover clustering (see Busting the Myth: You cannot cluster Windows Small Business Server) in environments that were previously too small for it to be cost efficient. In Server 8 Microsoft has increased the maximum number of nodes in a cluster from 16 to 64, which is huge for datacentre environments that really need that scale. VMware has also increased their number, but not to the same level. (vSphere 5: 32 nodes per cluster)

4000 Virtual Machines per Cluster

by my math, if you can have up to 1024 virtual machines per host, and up to 64 nodes in a cluster, the theory should be that you could support up to 32,768 virtual machines in the cluster that would support up to half of the hosts failing simultaneously before you max out your resources. Obviously someone on the product team knows something that I don’t (probably several somethings) and caps it to 4000 VMs per cluster, a 75% increase over the previous iteration, which was capped at 1000. This is a huge lead over VMware, whose limits have not been increased over vSphere 4.1 (vSphere 5: 1000 virtual machines per cluster)

32 virtual CPUs per Virtual Machine

Here is where Microsoft has really hit a home run. previous versions of Hyper-V limited your virtual CPUs to four. kicking this up to 32 shoots way past VMware’s previous version, and matches their current limits. If you have virtual machines that require huge processing capacity you can go as high as you want… with the limiting factor being your physical hardware (you cannot assign more virtual CPUs than you have physical cores, including hyper-threading). This will be another game changer and will go a long way to proving the enterprise-readiness of Hyper-V. (vSphere 5 limit: same)

64 Terabytes per Virtual Hard Drive

Advantage: Microsoft… in a huge way. With the previous limit of two terabytes per VHD file, the new and improved VHDX file format shoots through the ceiling and will support much larger volumes. While most of us have no need for volumes this large, there are customers who have been using either pass-through disks (or RDMs or extents in VMware) to support large database files. VMware’s VMDK files will still be limited to 2TB, but can be expanded to 64TB using extents (which I am not a fan of). As well, they also offer support for 64TB volumes in Raw Device Maps, but in Physical Compatibility Mode only. (vSphere 5: 2TB)

Other Features

There are too many new features to mention, and over the next few months I will be writing about these and more in more detail. Both Microsoft and VMware have added support for UEFI boot systems; VMware is offering a better graphical experience in your virtual machines that now support Aero graphic capabilities in Windows 7; Microsoft’s RemoteFX is going to be huge… but there isn’t much I am currently allowed to say about it, except for the fact that you are going to like your VDI experience going forward with Windows Server 8!

There is a lot more to say, but I do not want to flirt with my NDA. If you are an IT Pro it is time for you to download the bits for Windows 8 beta, install it, play with it, and get used to it. You are going to noticed a huge difference over 2008, and if you don’t fall in love with it, I will give you a money-back guarantee (yes, the beta is free).

The future of Windows Server Virtualization is BRIGHT… and for the proponents of VMware who feel that nobody will ever touch them, I look forward to seeing the two sides push each other to make the experience better and more powerful, because that way it is the IT shops – the administrators, the IT Pros – who really win!

The Great Debate: Virtualization Experts Butt Heads

On March 5th ZDNet hosted an on-line debate between two industry experts on server virtualization (http://www.zdnet.com/debate/hyper-v-or-vmware/6348000). Jason Perlow (cleanly on the Hyper-V side) and Ken Hess (squarely and religiously in the VMware corner) are both recognized industry experts for whom I have a great deal of respect.  I did not watch the debate live, but I have read the transcript (available at the link listed) and am surprised by a few of the responses, which I would like to address here.

While most of you know, I would like to clarify my position for the sake of transparency: While I am certified in both Hyper-V and VMware technologies, my bread and butter is Microsoft; I have lived in that space for most of my career, and am a Virtual Partner Technology Advisor (Core I/O) with Microsoft Canada.  With that being said, all of my virtualization certifications are up to date (MCITP: Virtualization Administrator 2008 R2, VMware Certified Professional 5) on both technologies. 

I do not have a bad word to say about vSphere 5.  VMware has another winning technology on their hands in my opinion.  Where I feel they have fallen short is in their pricing model.  As Hyper-V Server and the System Center suite keep closing the gap technologically, I would have expected VMware to take the threat seriously, sharpen their pencils, and lower the costs of licensing (and supporting) their solutions.  Instead in July they announced their new Memory Allocation pricing model, which is costing companies more and not less without deploying any new solutions.  A colleague was telling me recently that their customer had been advised by VMware (not by a Partner, but by VMware proper) to build servers with more and more memory, and to build their VM environment based on that model because of course the CPUs were the only cost.  Three months later the new pricing model was announced, and their licensing jumped from $18,000 per year to $96,000.  It is stories like these that are making many VMware shops reevaluate their positions, and start to consider Hyper-V as a real alternative.

Having read the debate transcript through and through a number of times, as well as the comments, My position on one thing has been reaffirmed: Having the debate with proponents of VMware is akin to trying to debate religion with a zealot.  I have the greatest respect for Ken, who has proven himself a superior IT professional.  However many of his arguments are telling that he is so vehemently pro-VMware that he has not bothered to do his homework on Microsoft, and does not seem to have done his homework for this debate.  To wit:

“Microsoft has a chance to claim a small percentage of the market’s growth over the next few years but will never encroach on VMware’s pole position.”

It sounds to me like Ken is drinking the VMware Kool-Aid… “We are the best, always will be, and nobody could ever catch us.” Oh Hare, I would like to introduce you to the turtle.

“Microsoft’s Hyper-V is basically an attempt to enter a committed market.”

I am sure that Microsoft hopes that VMware continues to think this way… if they continue to jack up their prices as if their customers just don’t have a choice, they will eventually realize that customers (and yes Ken, even the CxOs who make the decision and measure potential downtime in the cost of a product) that Hyper-V is as good as we have been saying, and that they are already paying for it with their license for Windows Server… and most of these companies also have System Center running, so why wouldn’t they look at a more cost-effective solution to do the same thing?

“if you’re a Microsoft fan, you have to admit that you’ll probably wait until the Windows Server 8 R2 version and a couple of service packs before you take the plunge for anything production-oriented. If you don’t, then you haven’t learned any lessons in the past two decades.”

While I understand that older versions of the operating system did release with some bugs (notice vSphere U1, U2) the legacy mindset that you still have to wait until R2 SP1 is just folly.  Windows Server 2008 was as solid as any OS on the market, and the services packs and R2 releases have just made t better.  If VMware is banking on people holding out for another eighteen months after RTM of Windows Server 8 then I would remind them that hey… even if that were true (it isn’t) Server 2008 R2 SP1 is out now, and has been for a year – and is considered the most stable operating system on the planet.  If people are not going to Server 8 then watch out for the ones who VMware is angering with their Memory Tax who will go to that platform.

“I know that Microsoft touts their new Hyper-V as a "free" solution but it isn’t free. You still have to buy the license for the base operating system from Microsoft.”

Aside from the fact that VMware shops that use Windows Server in their environments also have to buy the license for the base operating system, I would point out (as Jason did) that Hyper-V Server 2008 R2 is a free platform (equivalent to ESXi) that does more for free… For the features that VMware touts as necessary (vMotion, High Availability, monitoring, DRS, DPM) you have to buy the appropriate license of vCenter Server, PLUS the vMotion (etc…) licenses per ESXi host.  All of those are available for free with Hyper-V Server (Live Migration, Failover Clustering, monitoring, CPU Core Parking).

(In response to the question: How easy is it to migrate from a Vmware infrastructure to a Hyper-V infrastructure? “I’ve never done it nor do I know anyone who has. My guess is that currently, you’d have to reconstruct all of your virtual machines in Hyper-V. “

Here’s why you should never come to a debate unprepared.  System Center Virtual Machine Manager (current version as well as the soon to be released VMM 2012) has the ability to easily and seamlessly manage ESX and ESXi hosts through vCenter Server allowing a company who wishes to begin the migration process to do so without ripping and replacing existing infrastructure, and without having to manage and monitor two separate environments during the transition (which can take several years if necessary).  While the old VMware hosts are retired, rather than purchasing licenses for new servers they can deploy new Hyper-V Servers, and the heterogeneous environment can be fully managed from the single VMM console. 

While VMM does offer the option to perform V2V (virtual to virtual) conversions and migrations from VMware to Hyper-V seamlessly and easily (and without standalone tools, as is required in vCenter Server), it is not necessary to do so – you can use the single console to manage your complete environment until all of your ESX hosts are retired.

“from a hardware point-of-view, you’ll probably have to upgrade your hardware to run Hyper-V. Yes, even Server Core. Think of the Celsius to Fahrenheit temperature conversion formula when you think of converting from VMware to Hyper-V; double your current hardware requirements and add 32.”

Ken is sure that to migrate a host from ESXi to Hyper-V you would have to upgrade the hardware, and in most cases that is simply not true – the Hyper-V hypervisor may use slightly more resources than ESXi, but not nearly enough to require new hardware.  In fact, one of the advantages of Hyper-V is that it is based on the Windows kernel… in other words, if your hardware works with Windows, it will almost certainly support Hyper-V.  For datacentre admins that may not be a big issue – like most IT Pros I am a huge proponent of deploying server-grade hardware that is tested and approved… but how does a novice get started out learning Hyper-V? They install it on a workstation or a laptop, play with it, break it, and fix it.  VMware simply does not allow you to do this, and novices – even seasoned IT Pros who want to learn the product – have a great deal of trouble starting out.

I have been saying for years that IT should not be a religion… it should be about using the best tool for the job, and that means being willing to listen to alternatives and keeping an open mind that sometimes the solution you have been using for years may no longer be the smartest one.  That is why I bought a Macbook Pro a couple of years ago… it is why I learned Active Directory when Novell Netware was still the world leader… and it is why I started learning Hyper-V, after so many years working with VMware.  Don’t get me wrong… For three years after I started playing with Active Directory I still ran both AD and Netware… and to this day I am still consulting on and teaching both vCenter and Hyper-V (as well as maintaining my certifications).  The world changes – now people can get fired for buying IBM… I no longer adore my 64, and Hyper-V is a player in the Server Virtualization market… if you don’t believe me, check out the Gartner Magic Quadrant.  Those who embrace it will be well equipped to give their customers the proper balanced advice.  Those who deny it will be like all of my friends who collected CNE (Certified Novell Engineer) ribbons because Windows networking would never take off.

Under the Wire Revisited… Another exam deadline leads to success!

I don’t mind deadlines; they are great for enforcing discipline for tasks that I have to get done in order to get paid. However when it comes to taking certification exams I hate them.  I do not like studying, and even though I have taken myriad of exams they are usually on technologies that I work with on a regular basis.

When VMware released vSphere 5 last year they announced that current VCPs (VMware Certified Professionals) would have a grace period during which they could take the VCP5 exam without having to take their course.  The deadline would be February 29th.  On the one hand that was plenty of time for a VMware administrator who works with the products day in and out to be ready.  On the other hand for someone like myself, who spends most of my life working in (and teaching and writing about) Microsoft virtualization solutions, and who maintains bid VCP for credibility when talking to VMware enthusiasts, the deadline was not a comfortable one.  I would have to spend a week building and implementing the products… when I had the time.

Two weeks ago I realized that the deadline was fast approaching, and I decided to jump in and schedule the exam for Saturday, February 25th.  That would leave me with two weeks to prepare… if you took into account that I also work more than 75 hours per week it was an ambitious goal, but the alternative was letting the deadline pass, and I would have to take a full Instructor-Led Class in order to qualify for the cert.

Several years ago (June, 2006) I had another exam deadline, and I wrote about it in this blog’s predecessor (the article has been reposted at this link: Under the Wire Sometimes Brings Unexpected Success.  I remembered that deadlines can force you to take a leap.  I knew that if I failed the exam then I would not get the certification, but I also knew that if I did not take the exam I would not get it either.  Besides… if I spent even a day or two studying there was a slight chance that I might pass!

The exam got off to an ominous start when I got up early on Friday (a snow storm had been forecast) and got to the testing centre to find out that my exam was actually scheduled for Saturday.  Under normal circumstances this would have really thrown me for a loop… but since it meant I had an extra day to prepare, I was not all that upset.

Saturday morning was clear and dry, so I got up at 7:00am, got ready, answered my e-mails, and was about to pick up my study notes for review when I decided to follow my own advice: I had 30 minutes left before the test, and the chances of my learning any nugget in the 5 minutes I had (it is a 25 minute drive to the centre) that would actually mean the difference between passing and failing the exam were between slim and none.  VMware exams are scored out of 500, and a 300 is a pass.  If I got a 298 I would kick myself Winking smile

For certification integrity VMware candidates must have their photo taken before they go into the testing room.  That picture is actually included on your score report.  I think this is a great idea, that Microsoft Learning should consider adopting.  With that being said, I would much prefer that they take the picture after the exam… I smile a lot more when I pass!  However it is what it is, and I tried to smile for the camera.

This was the third VMware exam that I have taken, and while I will not comment on the content or the questions, I will say that having taken far more Microsoft exams, I am always surprised by the difference between the questions.  I have also been involved in creating Microsoft exams,and I know the level of diligence that goes into them.  Having now seen three VMware exams, I cannot imagine that the same amount of work goes into them.  They also do not seem to require the same amount of reading – and just like the previous exams, they give you little over a minute per question (timed over the entire exam of course).  That made me nervous at first… but pass or fail, I am almost always a very fast exam taker, so after I got through the first twenty questions or so I stopped worrying about it.

Just like Microsoft exams, once you have answered the last question you have a review screen where you can make sure you answered every question, and go back to any that you felt uncomfortable with.  I NEVER do that, but that is a personal thing.  I pressed End Review, and waited for my results.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

CONGRATULATIONS! You passed!

Phew… I was glad for every bit of preparing that I did, and realized that the perfectionist in me does not allow me to prepare for anything less than perfect… which lead me to the feeling that I was not going to pass.  I took my score report (I did not score a 300… but did not get over 400 either) and walked out of the centre with a big smile on my face.

The exam was a success, and although I was not thrilled by the deadline, I have to admit that without it I might have waited and waited until… I don’t know when.  It forced my hand, and as my previous article title stated: Under the wire sometimes brings unexpected success!  I am now a VMware Certified Professional on vSphere 5.

By the way… the one tip I will give in case you do plan on writing this exam: Remember, if one of the answers is Hyper-V, it is a wrong answer… even if it would be right!

NEXT WEEK: I will be in Redmond, Washington for the week at the 2012 Microsoft MVP Summit and then at MVP Nation… Expect me to be tweeting a lot, and hopefully blogging a bit!

Virtualization Infrastructure: Which platform is right for you?

Over the past year as a Virtual Partner Technology Advisor for Microsoft Canada I have heard a lot of people say a lot of things about Hyper-V, and not all of it has been from people who work for (or are otherwise strongly invested in) VMware.  Some of those arguments are reasoned, others emotional, but there are still a lot of people who argue that  because Hyper-V is free, it cannot be as good a product as vSphere.

While I understand the thinking, I feel it is a misconception to state that Hyper-V is completely free.  For most instances it is a role that comes with Microsoft Windows Server.  Just like you do not pay for DNS Server or Internet Information Systems (IIS), Hyper-V is included with the product that you use to install it.

Of course, there is also the free hypervisor, Microsoft Hyper-V Server.  It is a free download from Microsoft, which can be installed directly onto the hardware.  However once you install that, you are still going to install operating systems that you have paid for (or will pay for) into the virtual partitions.  Statistically a vast majority of those will be Microsoft Windows operating systems… either modern or legacy versions.

What we obtain too cheap we esteem too lightly.  Tis dearness only that gives everything its value. –Thomas Paine

A Layer 1 Hypervisor (virtualization host platform) is, by definition, an operating system.  It is installed directly on the hardware (Ring –1).  However without another operating system – usually Windows – it does not do anything else.  So why should you pay for both the host operating system and the guest operating systems?  Microsoft does not believe you should have to, and so they give the hypervisor away for free.  In fact VMware does the same thing – ESXi is a free product as well.

In both the case of Microsoft’s Hyper-V and VMware’s ESXi the hypervisor is free, and it is only the management tools that you would pay for, and even that is not an entirely true statement.  You can download the vSphere client for free from vmware.com, just as you can download the Hyper-V Manager as part of the Remote Server Administration Tools (RSAT) from microsoft.com, and both of these can be installed on any Windows-based server or client operating system.  So really it is only the infrastructure tools – the tools that manage features such as Failover Clustering (Microsoft) and High Availability (VMware), intelligent placement, load balancing, and others that cost, and it is true that these are going to cost less with Microsoft Virtualization than with VMware’s vSphere.

Does this argument make one better than the other?  Maybe… but exactly which is better may depend on who you ask.  There are many IT Pros who have been using VMware for years and swear by it, and even at a higher cost than Microsoft it is worth the money.  There are others who feel that in this day and age of trimming budgets and cutting costs the so-called ‘free’ Hyper-V is a better solution.  However a lot of the answer of ‘which is better’ will come down to the Universal Consultants’ Answer (UCA)… It depends.

When comparing the technologies side by side there are a number of factors we have to compare to determine the technological superiority of one over the other.

1. Performance

The first factor we have to consider is performance.  If Hyper-V does not work as well as ESXi then the comparison is irrelevant, just like it would be folly to compare a Porsche to a Fiat solely based on price.  The question will come down to this: on similar hardware will the platforms perform similarly?  In my tests (performed on both HP ProLiant and Dell PowerEdge server hardware) the performance of a virtual workload is similar – one or the other may perform up to 3-5% better depending on the actual workload type.  This is my experience, and unfortunately VMware’s End User License Agreement prohibits me from publishing comparative benchmarks.

2. Management Tools

If we can assume parity on training and competence on each platform (I hold both the VMware Certified Professional 4 and the Microsoft Certified IT Professional: Virtualization Administrator 2008 R2 certifications) then manageability will be divided into two compartments: 1) Do both platforms do everything that I need, and 2) How comfortable am I with the management tools available.

In my case, there is clear parity on features.  All of the components that I need and would use are in Hyper-V (taking into account that I have in all of my environments either System Center Virtual Machine Manager and System Center Operations Manager installed as management and monitoring components, or in the case of smaller networks the equivalent System Center Essentials (in the case of SWMI Consulting Group it is actually the HP Insight with Microsoft System Center Essentials 2010 offering).  With that being said, there are two components of VMware that I could see some organizations needing or, as is more often the case, wanting.  Those are Storage vMotion and Virtual Network Switches.

While I understand the theoretical desire for Storage vMotion, I am still always hesitant to use it in a production environment during busy times.  I admit I may be suffering from the same type of legacy mindset that I so often accuse others of falling into, but I just cannot see it as a good idea to move a .vmdk file from one SAN device to another while the virtual machine that is attached to that .vmdk file is operational.  I understand that the capability will be delivered with the next version of Hyper-V, and while I look forward to seeing it, I still do not think it is something I will do very often.

Of course Hyper-V has virtual networking as well, but there is no comparison between the two – VMware’s offering is much more robust than Microsoft’s.  With that being said, most companies don’t have a need for that robustness in their virtual networking – they have already invested in it in their physical networking, and have the CCNEs on staff to manage it.  While there are some companies that do have the need for features such as distributed virtual network switches (which I am told will be included in the next version of Hyper-V), I still suspect that most companies do not have such complex requirements.

As for the management console itself (vSphere Client versus Hyper-V Manager or System Center VMM) the jury is out… and irrelevant.  I may prefer chocolate ice cream, but that does not mean that someone else does not prefer vanilla nor that they would be wrong to.  I spend so much time in the System Center and MMC consoles that I was actually surprised to hear one of my students tell me recently that ‘I can’t get used to Microsoft’s management tools… vSphere is so much simpler!’  Just like that I was reminded that personal preference is so closely tied to our experience… someone who knows vSphere will absolutely prefer it, while someone looking at it for the first time might consider it difficult to navigate.

3. Support

VMware wants your vSphere environment to be managed by a VMware Certified Professional (VCP).  Likewise, Microsoft would prefer that your Hyper-V environment be managed by someone who at least holds a Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist: Windows Server 2008 R2, Server Virtualization (MCTS).  Of course, if your IT guy is more of a generalist then nearly every Windows Server certification will cover the basics of Hyper-V, so most of the MCTS certs will do, or at least act as a foundation for Hyper-V.  That does not mean that VCPs are not extremely qualified.  Frankly, I believe that the VCP process was harder than the MCTS process, and suspect that most of the VCPs out there have a collection of other certifications including the odd MCSE and MCTS.

All of this to say that it is easier to learn Microsoft virtualization as a subset of other skills you already need in your environment than it is to invest in training on new (to them) technology for an IT Pro.  <shameless plug> The certification process can be as easy as spending a few hours with the e-learning course Collection 10215- Implementing and Managing Microsoft Server Virtualization (see Hyper-V Training–10215AE is now available in E-Learning! on The World According to Mitch) which will prepare you for the exam 70-659, and then scheduling (and sitting) the exam. </shameless plug> There is no requirement to sit the class before being allowed to take it.

4. Cost

So with all of these factors being equal, the decision for many will come down to cost… and this is one factor where Microsoft wins hands down.  According to price lists provided by Hewlett-Packard, VMware’s pricing for an 8-node cluster built on vSphere 5 Enterprise on servers with two CPUs (before we encounter the vMemory vTax) is USD$45,363.  Building the same environment on Microsoft technologies with System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2008 R2 would cost $6,960 – less than one sixth the cost.  Expanding it out to the same configuration but four CPUs the VMware solution doubles in cost while the Microsoft solution remains the same.  In other words, as your environment grows arithmetically your costs on VMware grow exponentially.

Conclusion

As the technologies get closer in functionality it becomes more and more important to find a way to stay ahead, whether that be with innovation or with pricing.  Which is right for you?  That is for you to decide.  Which is right for me?  Check out the blog posts on the infrastructure at SWMI Consulting Group for your answer.

A brief response to the vSphere 5 vs. Hyper-V question…

I know, I’m slow to react on this issue… especially knowing my background; I should have been out of the gate and all over this issue a month ago.  With that being said, I expect that the Virtualization team at Microsoft has been dancing with glee for the past two months, ever since VMware announced their new Memory Tax in vSphere 5, which of course replaced their CPU Core Tax from vSphere 4.

As a Virtualization Evangelist (not my actual title, but pretty accurate) for Microsoft Canada I have been asked what I think about some of the new features in vSphere 5, and if I can continue to claim that Hyper-V is as good as ESXi is. 

VMware has been the leading virtualization platform in the industry for several years… there is no doubt that they have good products that work well and are reliable.  With that being said Microsoft has gotten into the game, and over the last three years have made a huge dent in what was once a near-monopoly in the virtualization space; so much so that the Gartner Group has placed Hyper-V into the Leaders Square of their Magic Quadrant (see Gartner agrees with me… Hyper-V is for real!).  Hyper-V R2 SP1 competed very nicely with vSphere 4, so now VMware releases vSphere 5 and for some reason people think that Microsoft is going to throw in the towel.  Of course not, they are hard at work on the next version of Windows Server, which will have the next version of Hyper-V.

In the automobile industry there is a show every year – I don’t know which one – where all of the auto makers showcase their new models.  They have been doing this for longer than I have been alive, and it seems like none of them ever stray too far… the 2012 models come out in the fall of 2011, and that is how it is.  The computer industry is not like that… if Company A and Company B compete for market share, they are not going to coordinate the release of new products and announce all of the new features together.  When Company A releases their new version they will have an advantage for a little while, until Company B releases their new version giving them the advantage… for a while.

That’s how it is in the computer industry, and I expect that is the best way to ensure fair competition… absolutely no collusion between competitors.  So when I look at the new version of vSphere I do not compare it to the current version of Hyper-V… to be fair I have to compare it to the next version, which Microsoft started to showcase recently at WPC.

If you review the transcripts of every speech, presentation, class, and article I have ever written or given you will not hear me bad-mouth VMware’s products anywhere… whatever I might have to say about one or two of the people I know at the company, I think their products are excellent.  What I do say is that if Hyper-V is as good (or almost) as ESX, and if System Center Virtual Machine Manager is as good (or almost) as vCenter Server then it should really come down to cost… and there is no math that I have come across that makes VMware less expensive – or even cost-competitive – than Microsoft.

Of course, this is just my opinion.  If you are interested in reading more about what Microsoft – and specifically, the Virtualization team at Microsoft – have to say about it, check out their blog… especially these two posts:

BEWARE THE VMWARE MEMORY VTAX; PLUS–GOOD NEWS FOR HYPER-V

Beware the VMware Memory vTax Part 2…

These articles put into perspective how Microsoft views the competitive space, and hopefully tries to deal with some of the FUD.  Read it, and then let’s have a chat about Hyper-V… I’ll be delighted to show it to you!

Gartner agrees with me… Hyper-V is for real!

In September Microsoft Canada contracted me as a Virtual Partner Technology Advisor, tasking me with evangelizing Microsoft virtualization solutions.  One of the reasons I was such a good fit for the role is that I am very familiar with both Microsoft’s and VMware’s server virtualization solutions – I teach and consult on both platforms.  I am a VMware Certified Professional (VCP 4) as well as a Microsoft Certified IT Professional (MCITP) Virtualization Administrator.

For the past ten months I have (in an official capacity) espoused the benefits of Hyper-V and the Microsoft Server Virtualization Solutions.  I have visited over thirty partners and given a dozen or more presentations to user groups; I have taught at least five full classes of 10215A to partners and end users alike, and I continually hear the same question from IT Pros and users alike: ‘What you are telling us and showing us is nice, but can Microsoft really compete head to head with VMware for market dominance?  Are they really a legitimate player in the virtualization space that has for so many years been dominated by a single player?

My answer has been yes every time, and each time Microsoft releases new versions of Hyper-V – first 2008 R2, then this past winter Service Pack 1 – they come closer to technological parity.  The closer they come to being an equivalent technology (and they are now closer than ever!) the more the deciding factor is going to start coming down to price… and man, does Microsoft ever win in that category!

Of course it is easy to see me as biased, but I’m sure we all agree that Gartner is unbiased.  According to their latest (June 30, 2011) Magic Quadrant for x86 Server Virtualization Infrastructure, Microsoft has firmly taken a position in the Leaders square.  For years VMware alone occupied that coveted position (based on rankings along the X-axis of completeness of vision, and the Y-axis of ability to execute).  VMware (who it should be noted are still the leaders)  has Microsoft and then Citrix nipping at its heels.

According to the report:

Citrix and Microsoft have joined VMware in the Leaders Quadrant by increasing vision and execution respectively. Although market share leader VMware continues to set the standard in products and the pace in terms of strategy, Microsoft has increased its market share (especially among midmarket customers new to virtualization), and Citrix is leveraging its desktop virtualization strengths and its free XenServer offering to expand its server virtualization share. The road map from virtualization to cloud computing is rapidly evolving, and executing will be very important during the next year as this market continues to rapidly evolve and grow.

Interestingly one of the factors that many of the companies I have spoken to with regard to this choice – price, and the ability to make a profit off the solution – is called out in the report as both a key strength and a weakness ‘…when it comes to influencing the channel to promote its product, rather than its competition.’  Because Hyper-V is a free product (or, more accurately, is a component of a product that the client is already buying), there is nothing more to sell… the partners cannot mark up another product. 

One of the points listed in the Gartner report under ‘Cautions’ is the ‘Hypervisor dependence on a running copy of Windows as a parent operating system’ can also be viewed as a strength, because of the sheer amount of different hardware types supported, ranging from high-end server farms used in the enterprise to laptops and white-boxes that IT Pros, enthusiasts, and students may have in their basement as learning platforms.  For a recent presentation I was forced to downgrade my VMware hypervisor to an older version simply because ESX 4.1 was not supported and would not even install on my demo box. To quote the report:

The most significant hypervisor difference continues to be Microsoft’s reliance on a parent operating system on each virtualization host — which carries the benefit of a proven driver architecture, but the burden of potentially more planned downtime for patching and maintenance (however, Microsoft’s patch record to date for its parent operating system has been good).

All in all, I think it is going to be hard for VMware to remain the industry leader for long.  Let me be clear: they make great products.  Whatever my beef may be with the company, I don’t have a bad word to say against their server virtualization technology.  However with Microsoft catching up as fast as they are (System Center Virtual Machine Manager (VMM) 2012 is currently in beta) it is hard to see VMware remaining the industry leader for too much longer without coming up with something so dramatically new and unique as to vault them once again ahead of all other players.

I look forward to seeing vSphere 5 (possibly being released as early as July 12th); from what I have read mostly through unsanctioned sites it will be VERY interesting to see.  However I still don’t see it being worth the price difference. 

One thing’s for sure… it will be an interesting couple of years in the virtualization space!

%d bloggers like this: