I just spent a whole day, yesterday in a Core I/O Virtualization course, including Hyper-v and, and, and the overall virtual scenario for Enterprise. Certainly, Winows 7 & Windows Sever 2008, as well all the "Virtual Fmily", factored into the day. There was, indeed, some time devoted to the Microsoft Virtual Suite & VMWare.
If you are talking about ROI (Return on Investment), Citrix, ESXI, and VMWARE Server are all free alternatives with compatibility with nearly every operating system. In almost every instance the performance is better than Hyper-V.
Simultaneous Live Migration – why is this even important, it’s typically faster to queue live migrations rather than to do them all at the same time
Distributed Resource Scheduler – Yes, with SCVMM and SCOM
Storage Live Migration – They fail to mention Quick Migration for Hyper-V with VMM
Saleem Kanji, Enterprise Technical Specialist on Virtualization
If you are talking about ROI (Return on Investment), Citrix, ESXI, and VMWARE Server are all free alternatives with compatibility with nearly every operating system. In almost every instance the performance is better than Hyper-V.
Of what I have used,Link Removed - Invalid URL is certainly great. And it also looks to me better than Hyper-V.
- It allows one to power on virtual machines at system boot. For example, it is possible to turn on a Windows machine with VMware Server installed and have the NST Virtual Machine automatically started (you don't need to touch anything but the power button - logging into Windows is not required).
- It allows one to start/stop/use virtual machines from remote computers. For example, one can run the vmware-server-console on a Linux system and manage (or access) virtual machines running on a remote Windows box.
- It allows one to enable dual CPUs on SMP systems (the VMware Playerâ„¢ only allows one to use a single CPU)
- It provides a full GUI VMX editor whereas one needs to edit their VMX files in a text editor when using VMware Player