Can't believe we aren't discussing the rumors here....
http://www.crn.com/news/cloud/24000...nsing-will-focus-on-vsphere-cloud-bundles.htm
http://www.crn.com/news/cloud/24000...nsing-will-focus-on-vsphere-cloud-bundles.htm
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm still a little worried... I'm more okay with the vRAM licensing then I would be of a per VM licensing model. But I also say this because like most, I wasn't hitting my vRAM limit right now but would of in another year or two.
The per VM model seems to be the direction they are going with everything else, I'm sure its only a matter of time before they move to that model with vSphere.
So are they going to license by CPU? How does that work, by socket or core?
VMware has always done socket, not core. I assume this will be the same.
VMware has always done socket, not core. I assume this will be the same.
Well that is only partly true, right? Wasn't 4.x licensed by socket with max core counts depending on the version you paid for? With 5.x they added the vRam entitlements and unrestricted the core counts... if I'm remembering correctly.
This kills me, I had had a customer today argue with me that he originally purchased core licensing..lol.
There was, but the limits were bonkers for the tech at the time so no one ever hit it - it was really a socket license
Unless you had unisys systems.
He was talking about core limits...not memory limits. There were core limits on the vSphere license levels before the vRAM stuff. When vRAM hit in vSphere 5 those core limits went away. Believe it was 6 cores per socket for Enterprise and 12 for Ent+.
For those of you running free versions -- What does esxi do that xensever (free version) or xcp (oss/free versoin) or kvm don't do? None of those have anywhere near 32G memory limits IIRC. The memory limits just seem silly to me. I'm asking honestly as I haven't used esxi. The last free vmware server version I used was vmware server 1.0 IIRC.
Yes but you at least get storage api license which you don't in free. So you can use backups.I will be annoyed if they raise the limits on the free version substantially. I just bought essentials for my home system last month to use my 48 GB (with plans to go higher). If 64 is suddenly the new 32 I'll have spent the $560 for nothing (today, anyway).
Viper GTS
I will be annoyed if they raise the limits on the free version substantially. I just bought essentials for my home system last month to use my 48 GB (with plans to go higher). If 64 is suddenly the new 32 I'll have spent the $560 for nothing (today, anyway).
Secrets don't last too long before they hit twitter and the blogosphere. It's sort of sad actually. The minute the email was sent out I saw a few people immediately jump to twitter saying that they know some super secret NDA information, then it leaks to a blog a few days later.... big surprise.
Either way, I'm glad they reverted back. I didn't have a problem with the vRAM consumption-pricing model but they would have had to done completely away with the license per-socket and went strictly on vRAM.
I was amazed this stayed a secret as long as it did. I knew about it almost a month before the CRN article and that was the first real leak.
We told them at PTAB that the only way for these new vCloud Bundles to work was to get rid of vRAM. You can't ask a customer to pay that much (another whole vCloud Bundle socket license) just to add some vRAM. It would never fly and it was causing people to stay on vSphere 4.1 as they looked at other options.
It's a smart move.
Eh. We get excited about this stuff. Is hard not to make some comments about [REDACTED].
For those of you running free versions -- What does esxi do that xensever (free version) or xcp (oss/free versoin) or kvm don't do? None of those have anywhere near 32G memory limits IIRC. The memory limits just seem silly to me. I'm asking honestly as I haven't used esxi. The last free vmware server version I used was vmware server 1.0 IIRC.
It's a convenience thing and a market share thing.
Right now at least, VMware the largest hypervisor footprint by a long shot. After vTax, Hyper-V and KVM/RHEV have made some inroads, but virtually (get it?) every data center that does x86 virtualization does ESXi/vSphere.
So on a pure percentage basis, VMware basis is the skill one probably has, so it's more familiar.
Also, virtually (getting old) every virtual machine that's offered up as a pre-made VM image is released on OVA or some other VMware. Sure, there are tools to convert, but it's just stupid easy and quick to load up an OVA.
The fact that ESXi is a very small contained hypervisor is also nice. Standing it up is simple (usually on a USB flash drive) and you can be up and running in 15 minutes.
And 32G for most of us isn't too much of a limit for the free version.
Technically speaking, I can't think of anything off the top of my head that the free version can do that the other hypervisor can't. It's more a matter of familiarity and convenience. Which as much as we don't like to admit it in the tech world, are important factors.
Now, 32 GB is fine for most right now, I can get cheap whitebox motherboards that can take 32 GB now. A year from now? Probably not, so I'd reconsider ESXi unless they up'd it some more.