Posts by Robert Amleth 9 publicly visible posts • joined 17 Aug 2007
This would have been an interesting product 10 years ago. Today, who cares. You can buy an entry level two processor quad-core server or a very sizable four processor quad/hex core. In short, CPU is in abundance and however fast these interconnects are they pale into comparion two processors on the motherboard.
This is technology in search of a problem and hacky technology at that.
"Tucci said all three companies would continue to sell their menu of products, but the Vblock offerings were akin to a prix fixe menu without any substitutions. This is the definition of openness that these three companies are using. Openness does not mean running Hyper-V or XenServer hypervisors on Vblocks, it does not mean using NetApp or Hewlett-Packard storage on Vblocks, and so on."
So, in short, openness means nothing of the kind. It is a complete BS statement used to generate buzz.
Unfu$%ingveliable.
It appears VMware is trying to confuse the market by rebranding their products and creating more SKUs. This is crap. With Microsoft, Citrix, Xen, and Oracle offering free hypervisors, free high availability and free live migration, many of us were expecting a price drop. According to this article/press release, live migration is $2200+ per processor. WTF? Appears after years of gouging customers, VMware is responding with the finger.
Reg, you're getting lazy. Copy and paste of press releases is weak. Let eWeek do that. Next, the BS detector is ringing quite loudly. For example,
"Jeff Boles, a Tanaja analyst, says: 'We’ve validated in a number of tests that VMware virtualised servers can run twice as many applications than other hypervisors at equal or even greater performance levels.'"
Let me get this straight. VMware claims to be able to run twice as many vms at the same performance or FASTER than the competition. Let me guess, these VMs were idle at the desktop? Not buying this for a moment. Let me make a wild guess at who paid for this "analysis."
Clearly VMware is feeling the heat from Xen and Microsoft after price gouging for years.
Agree about Maritz. Seems to be a good fit for vmware and a better speaker than Greene.
Watching the keynotes this week was interesting. VMware stated subtly, but in no uncertain terms, that they want to own everything. And, much like the Oracle example in this article, VMware charges you through the nose and makes no bones about it. Yes, they provide value, but they still cost way too much.
Xen is giving away their hypervisor and live migration capabilities. Microsoft was showing off live migration and will also have load balancing and a whole bunch more in their R2 release. While all the cloud talk is interesting, it still seems like a vision that is many years away.
It's understandable and sensible that a company would tell its developers and support staff to not engage in legal arguments on blogs.
However, this is has been an open question for some time now that goes back to the ESX 2.x days. If VMware is going to go public, make a BILLION dollars, and subject its shareholders to potential risk about their flagship product that brings in that BILLION dollars, that is indeed irresponsible and I'm more than a little surprised that no one from Wall Street is asking for a public response on this issue.
This could be considered a form of "cooking the books" if there's any merit behind it. The REASONABLE and RESPONSIBLE things to do is for VMware to respond so we can decide for ourselves. If there is indeed "nothing to see here," then GREAT! lets agree and move on. Not responding is the equivalent of Alberto Gonzales stating "he couldn't recall" a few dozen times in front of the Senate. No one's buying this.
As for the FSF, WTF? Why aren't you pressing this? What exactly do the FSF guys do other than go online and whine about OSS religion? This is a PERFECT EXAMPLE of what the FSF should be investigating.
We need to get to the bottom of this.
This question has come up numerous times over the years now and everytime the answer is the same.
Deafening silence.
Enough is enough. It's time for VMware to answer the question. No more silence. VMware just had an IPO and made about a BILLION dollars and this is not how responsible companies act. If there was no issue here, they should have answered this question YEARS AGO, so we wouldn't be even having this debate. This is IRRESPONSIBLE.
As for Gordon Haff, he, once again, shows just how much an idiot he really is. He has zero credibility.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
