
Unlikely to be worse than a native VMware solution
Given the overpriced buggy shite that VMware call a product I can't see the Azure flavour actually being any worse.
VMware has responded to Microsoft's plan to run its stack in Azure, by saying customers who choose that option will have to forego support. “This offering has been developed independent of VMware, and is neither certified nor supported by VMware,” wrote Virtzilla's senior veep for product development and cloud services Ajay …
> as had an order of magnitude fewer holes and fixes than vSphere
Probably true, but then with a much smaller customer base especially of those running it stand-alone, it's likely that there are less problems found, rather than their being less bugs.
Also don't forget the rest of the manage infrastructure such as System Center. Or don't you think they are part of the attack surface?
"Probably true, but then with a much smaller customer base"
Hyper-v has about 35% of on premise and then of course Azure so likely the total is similar. Certainty it's not much smaller.
System centre is optional. You can run hyper-v under open stack for instance. And anyway system centre has had far fewer holes than say Vcentre!
I don't see this as a major thorn in the side for anyone choosing Microsoft. If you were going to run virtualisation in the cloud, I can't see that many cases where you'd run VMWare machines in the cloud in much more than a disaster recovery scenario. If you were putting things in the cloud, then surely the point would be to re-architect the solution to work in the cloud... rather than just shift VMWare machines to it.
This just smells to me like a dumb play by VMWare and AWS... of course, I'm always open to more information and other points of view that educate me further.
Taken from the first line on this page:
https://www.vmware.com/uk/products/vsphere.html
vSphere helps you get the best performance, availability, and efficiency from your infrastructure and applications. It’s the ideal foundation for any cloud environment.*
*except when theres a competing product.
I seem to recall both Cisco and HPE having a mardy at Nutanix when they validated their software themselves. The fact that software designed to run on x86 hardware, couldn't be "validated" because they'd had no input is laughable.
I'm sure the guys at Azure built this as per best practices, along side the HCI and with N+1 in the design....
for their applications, how can people see this as anything but karma?
MSFT -loves- to be the bully. Satya didn't change that.
It could've worked with VMware on this (like it did with VDI) but didn't.
Azure is a DISTANT second to AWS and its absolutely desperate to get headlines ahead of re:Invent.
That's what this is really about. Me too! Me too!
Apart from AWS, I'm not sure the other VSPP's out there will be that happy to hear AWS bag Microsoft if this way. Pretty much every other hoster runs an environment that hasn't been "engineered by VMWARE". Are they saying all their other hosters are running piles of shit?
Who cares about VMware in the cloud (aside from VMware)? Companies who already have a lot invested in VMware-based infra. They, too, want to migrate to the cloud (because all the other lemmings say its the way to go?)
Start with IBM's product which is basically the VMware product line already stood up for you by IBM on their bare metal. Your current admins see it as another stack and it is a no-brainer integration. However while it has moved you to a cloud, you now get to pay both IBM and VMware for the privilege. Where do you go from here? Migrate to the IBM Cloud? Migrate to a cloud-independent solution? Who knows; neither VMware nor IBM have a well charted course beyond this point.
VMware on AWS is again the same product you already know, but stood up in an account owned by VMware on AWS and offered as a managed service. So you get to pay VMware to manage your new stacks. Of course you are still paying your admins to run your current stacks and you now get to set up an AWS account for all the other services you'll want to incorporate into your apps. And that's exactly what Amazon is expecting you'll do...along with refactoring your apps to reside in your own account shunting VMware onto the siding. Given AWS is the biggest and best, it isn't a bad path as long as you really understand what it will cost you in the long run.
So here comes Microsoft with a plan to help you start the transition off of VMware. Less subtle than the other two, but same end goal; get your workloads and data onto their cloud. Better suited to the CIO who has already been planning to get off the sinking ship perhaps. VMware says they won't support it, but let's guess who does? Microsoft. They have been growing their resources to handle exactly this kind of work and clearly feel ready to handle it. Maybe it's best to make a support deal with MSFT during the negotiation stage, take the discounts offered, and start the migration.