So far, after 27 votes, it appears that HP is leading the polls for the x86 hardware poll.

Technorati Tags: x86 hardware

CA just released a report that states “44 percent of respondents who said they had deployed server virtualization technology were unable to declare their deployment a success”

To quote the article:

According to the study—which surveyed 800 organizations around the world—44 percent of respondents who said they had deployed server virtualization technology were unable to declare their deployment a success. Inability to quantify ROI was a key factor in their reticence to definitively claim positive results.

The study also revealed that 71 percent of organizations that have moved ahead with virtualization have deployed, or plan to deploy, multiple server virtualization technologies—including operating system and hardware virtualization, operating system partitioning, para-virtualization, and/or clustering. In fact, 60 percent of organizations consider clustering a type of server virtualization, adding to the heterogeneity of virtualized environments.

I have to agree in part with Alessandro Perilli. The reason that this is such a high number is because too many companies underestimate virtualization projects. They also do not invest enough time learning about how virtualization changes your environment. There are some “best practices” that just don’t work right in a virutalized world.

I think as more and more companies virtualize, and virtualization best practices become more developed, this will change.

Thanks to http://www.virtualization.info/ for this article.  You can read the full CA report here.

Big thanks to RJB at http://www.gotitsolutions.com/

I was checking my site statistics and noticed that the Microsoft Virtualization Calculator has been downloaded 110 times so far this month!  This is pretty cool.  I’m glad people are finding it useful.

You can find it here.

Also - if you download it and like it, leave a comment.

Thanks!

Here’s a couple of follow up items to yesterday’s post:

Graklaw’s thoughts on the Microsoft/Novell deal titled “Novell Sells Out“. Personally, I’d think Novell would have learned from the last time Microsoft burned them. Remember back in the day when the default network operating system was Netware? I guess if you can’t beat ‘em, sell out to ‘em. Sadly, SuSE USED to be my favorite flavor of Linux. Now, I wouldn’t install it if you paid me.

If you’re interested, here’s the FUD released by Microsoft and Novell regarding their deal.

Technorati Tags: Microsoft Novell Deal, SuSE Linux, Netware

I’m posting a great article I just read on technorat.net posted on 11/2/2006. It’s in regards to the deal that Novell and Microsoft struck up last year. Apparently this deal is an attempt to give Microsoft control over commercial users of Open Source software.

Today Novell and Microsoft announced a partnership in which Microsoft has made some unlikely-seeming promises regarding Linux. What aren’t they telling you? First, you can be sure that Microsoft’s not out to help a competitor. This announcement paves the way for Microsoft to implement significant control over commercial customer’s use of Free Software. And it has significant negative implications for Open Source in general.

There are two significant announcements. First, that Novell and Microsoft are entering into a patent cross-license, and second, that Microsoft is promising not to assert its patents against individual non-commercial developers. The bad part is that this sets Mirosoft up to assert its patents against all commercial Open Source users. There are also some little bonuses for Microsoft, like Novell will help Microsoft turn back the Open Document Format and substitute something Microsoft controls.When we say “commercial”, it’s interesting to note that there are really few non-commercial users: people who only use their computer for a hobby. Buying something on a web site, for example, is a commercial use. Most individuals use their computers in some aspect of making their livelihood. There will now be a Microsoft-approved path for such people to make use of Open Source, an expensive subscription to Novell SuSe Linux that costs as much or more than Microsoft Windows and that comes with a patent license.

So, the protection of non-commercial individual contributors means that you can make Open Source, but if anyone actually uses it for something other than a hobby or a non-profit organization, there is an implicit threat that Microsoft can bring a software patent lawsuit against them - unless they are a customer of Novell.

One of the questions yet to be settled is whether Novell will violate the GPL, the license of the Linux kernel and other important software, by offering patent protection that is exclusive to Novell customers. The press release pretty much stated that. On that topic, the preamble of the GPL says it best:

We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone’s free use or not licensed at all.

Novell has clearly accepted that license. But it appears that they are now out to make patent protection a business differentiator.Even if everyone were to be protected regarding software that Novell distributes, there’s the tremendous collection of Free Software that they don’t distribute. A logical next move for Microsoft could be to crack down on “unlicensed Linux”, and “unlicensed Free Software”, now that it can tell the courts that there is a Microsoft-licensed path. Or they can just passively let that threat stay there as a deterrent to anyone who would use Open Source without going through the Microsoft-approved Novell path.

With this agreement, Microsoft also secures Novell’s assistance in pushing a pro-Software-patenting agenda in Europe and elsewhere. On a panel that I led at the AlwaysOn conference this summer, Novell’s president made clear their support for software patenting - a policy that works to the detriment of any Open Source developer who wants to have users without Novell’s blessing. You can be sure they’ll be at Microsoft’s elbow now in meeting with legislators and asking for increases in patent protection.

The timing of this agreement is significant. Microsoft and Novell are said to have been working on this agreement for some time, and sped up its announcement to take attention away from Oracle’s recent announcement and to further depress Red Hat in the stock market. The timing of the SCO case is also significant. Recent testimony in that case revealed that Microsoft offered to “backstop” VC firm Baystar’s investment in SCO, essentially asking Baystar to be a front through which Microsoft funded SCO’s attempt to… charge a royalty to users of Linux. SCO’s case is foundering, so here’s Microsoft’s next scheme to charge a royalty to users of Linux, and to make Novell into the next SCO. Groklaw, a widely-respected journal of technology law, probably said it best with their headline on this story: Novell Sells Out.

This entire agreement hinges around software patenting - monopolies on ideas that are burying the software industry in litigation - rather than innovation. If we’ve learned one thing from the rapid rise of Open Source, it’s that intellectual property protection - the thing that Open Source dispenses with - actually impedes innovation. And the Novell-Microsoft agremeent stands as an additional impediment.

I was catching up on some blogs I read when I came upon this post over at TarryBlogging. He was responding to an article on ZDnet written by Dana Blankenhorn.

This article (found here) is regarding Xen, Open Source, and virtualization. Apparently Mr Blankenhorn recently interviewed Xensource’s Simon Crosby and wasn’t impressed.

Like Tarry, I don’t get Dana’s point. In fact, I’m not even sure why ZDnet published this. It really lacks any point. I think he’s trying to make a point without really understanding the technology. Or any technology for that matter. I read some of his other articles, and he doesn’t seem to get any where. It’s like he’s writing inside jokes that only he understands. In his articles, he starts to go somewhere but never goes there.

I know this seems kinda harsh, and in all fairness I found some articles written by him that are very interesting:

Like this one on former Open Source Initiatives general counsel Larry Rosen’s stand on the GPL.

Or this one discussing wether GPL v2 or GPL v3 will emerge as the open source standard.

All I can say is edit your work and make sure you are making the point you want to make.  (Good advise I should probably take myself.)

Technorati Tags: ZDnet, Dana Blankenhorn, Xensource, virtualization

VMware just released 3 new whitepapers:

SAN System Design and Deployment Guide

VirtualCenter Monitoring and Performance Statistics

VirtualCenter 2.X: Using Database Views 

Technorati Tags: VirtualCenter, VirtualCenter Database Views, VMware Whitepapers

VMware Consolidated Backup from the VI 3 launch.

Tags: Consolidated Backup, Virtualization, VMware

Just for the record, I really love Sun servers. I have an 8-way 4600 running ESX 3.0.1 here in my lab and it smokes! I also think that Solaris is a great OS.

I know my last post seemed a little “anti-Sun”. I just found that HP article interesting. However, it’s nothing new in the industry to flip-flop. Technology moves fast and business has to move with it. This is especially for companies that sell technologies.

Therefore, I open the doors to all competitive papers! HP, IBM, Dell, & Sun, send me your competitive FUD… err, marketing material for all to read.

I’ve also decided to take a poll.  Who makes the best x86 based server?  Dell, HP, IBM, or SUN.   Vote now!