vSphere 6 released today!

MySongRanHills said:
That statement is an oxymoron. Nothing is improved by using a web gui. All you get is better execution of an already terrible idea.
Click to expand...

Well, I use the free version of ESXi for my home use purposes, so I have never actually used the web version, but the client is no shining example of a management protocol either, especially considering it is Windows only, and has more bugs than just about any other software I regularly use.

I WISH I could use the web client, if only for the fact that it is cross platform (and well, also for the new (post 5.0) features which are restricted in the client.

Most of those features wouldn't make a different for my use, but the more flexible teaming and other network management would be a huge deal to me.

Being limited to static teaming, is not great, but what is even worse is that it is all or nothing. If you create a team of physical nic's attached to a vswitch, that team becomes the ONLY interface to the outside world.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041463712 said:
Well, I use the free version of ESXi for my home use purposes, so I have never actually used the web version, but the client is no shining example of a management protocol either, especially considering it is Windows only, and has more bugs than just about any other software I regularly use.

I WISH I could use the web client, if only for the fact that it is cross platform (and well, also for the new (post 5.0) features which are restricted in the client.

Most of those features wouldn't make a different for my use, but the more flexible teaming and other network management would be a huge deal to me.

Being limited to static teaming, is not great, but what is even worse is that it is all or nothing. If you create a team of physical nic's attached to a vswitch, that team becomes the ONLY interface to the outside world.
Click to expand...

That's not going to change anytime soon. LACP and LBT will likely always be part of the vDS simply because the standard switch doesn't have the code to perform any of those functions. It's a small, simple virtual switch. The vDS is where all the new features are ending up. If anything, I could see the vDS or some neutered version of it possibly moving down to lower license levels but I wouldn't hold my breath.

For now if you want LACP or more robust teaming options without paying for anything you'd need to use Hyper-V Core.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041463712 said:
I WISH I could use the web client, if only for the fact that it is cross platform (and well, also for the new (post 5.0) features which are restricted in the client.

Most of those features wouldn't make a different for my use, but the more flexible teaming and other network management would be a huge deal to me.

Being limited to static teaming, is not great, but what is even worse is that it is all or nothing. If you create a team of physical nic's attached to a vswitch, that team becomes the ONLY interface to the outside world.
Click to expand...

I'm using vCenter for the lab practice and to be able use the storage API for Veeam. My set-up is too small (2 hosts ATM) to ever have any slow downs of the web client. My chief complaint with the web client is it just flat out doesn't make sense. There is almost no carry over between UI of C# client and web client. So if you got used to where something was/how to config something,you will have to re-learn. It isn't hard to figure out, but why force new learning when there is no benefit. Nothing is done faster or in less clicks/menus in web client. I always use the C# client unless something can only be done in web client.
 
The way to make the web client effective is to learn how to use the search and related fields to navigate. Once you master some of what can be accomplished through those, then it becomes faster than the thick client. Trying to do things the "thick" way on the web client is a disaster though.
 
lopoetve said:
The way to make the web client effective is to learn how to use the search and related fields to navigate. Once you master some of what can be accomplished through those, then it becomes faster than the thick client. Trying to do things the "thick" way on the web client is a disaster though.
Click to expand...

You could definitely have a point there. I have rarely used the search and am very familiar with thick client.

That said it is ugly as all hell and just completely unintuitive. They can fix the performance issues perhaps, but the UI needs a redesign toward making things more clear at a glance IMO.
 
MySongRanHills said:
You could definitely have a point there. I have rarely used the search and am very familiar with thick client.

That said it is ugly as all hell and just completely unintuitive. They can fix the performance issues perhaps, but the UI needs a redesign toward making things more clear at a glance IMO.
Click to expand...

It's very intuitive once you stop trying to use it like the thick client. It's WAY more intuitive than the thick client as placement of items and objects are much more standardized.

Just stop using the thick client and go web...especially when you go to 6.0 and it's much faster. Thick client is dead. Get over it already.
 
NetJunkie said:
It's very intuitive once you stop trying to use it like the thick client. It's WAY more intuitive than the thick client as placement of items and objects are much more standardized.

Just stop using the thick client and go web...especially when you go to 6.0 and it's much faster. Thick client is dead. Get over it already.
Click to expand...

There is definitely a learning curve, but once it 'clicks', you'll find some really neat things that can be done :)
 
MySongRanHills said:
That statement is an oxymoron. Nothing is improved by using a web gui. All you get is better execution of an already terrible idea.
Click to expand...

Well, cross platform management is kind of a huge deal IMHO.

Its terribly annoying that the ESXi client is Windows only.

I currently have to run a Windows 7 guest in virtual box on my Linux desktop in order to manage my ESXi server which has 5 linux servers and 2 BSD servers running on it...

It feels so backwards.
 
Also,

Any comments on whether it is worth the trouble to upgrade from 5.5u2 for free license users?

It seems like the features won't change for us. Are there any performance/stability/security improvements that make it worth the hassle, or is there no real difference from 5.5u2 for us?
 
It means it was released to General Availability..

At some point today our code will be updated on the website for download... however its is marked a available build and will be released sometime today..
 
dasaint said:
vSphere 6 code is now available for download.
Click to expand...
And at surprisingly good speeds.

This will be my first time upgrading a vSphere environment instead of just blowing it away and starting from scratch. Does anyone have a guide I could follow?
 
TeeJayHoward said:
And at surprisingly good speeds.

This will be my first time upgrading a vSphere environment instead of just blowing it away and starting from scratch. Does anyone have a guide I could follow?
Click to expand...

When I went from 5.1 to 5.5, I just popped the disc in (or did I use a USB stick, can't remember) it asked me if I wanted to upgrade or do a fresh install, I chose upgrade and then waited.

(for some reason ESXi installs always take a while and freeze at certain percentages for long times during install)

When done, I just booted it up and it was running as before.

It was a very painless process.

I had to reinstall the client though. Despite there not being any feature changes between 5.1 and 5.5 for client users, I needed the 5.5 client to access 5.5.
 
TeeJayHoward said:
And at surprisingly good speeds.

This will be my first time upgrading a vSphere environment instead of just blowing it away and starting from scratch. Does anyone have a guide I could follow?
Click to expand...

Always bugs me that I have to log on to VMWares site in order to download it.

Makes it difficult to wget it directly to my server.
 
And what on earth does this mean:

"This license key can be deployed on an unlimited number of physical hosts, but is restricted to deployment on less than or equal to 0 Physical Servers."
 
Zarathustra[H];1041480436 said:
And what on earth does this mean:

"This license key can be deployed on an unlimited number of physical hosts, but is restricted to deployment on less than or equal to 0 Physical Servers."
Click to expand...

I believe the 0 physical servers thing is related to vCenter stuff...
 
Zarathustra[H];1041480422 said:
When I went from 5.1 to 5.5, I just popped the disc in (or did I use a USB stick, can't remember) it asked me if I wanted to upgrade or do a fresh install, I chose upgrade and then waited.

(for some reason ESXi installs always take a while and freeze at certain percentages for long times during install)

When done, I just booted it up and it was running as before.

It was a very painless process.

I had to reinstall the client though. Despite there not being any feature changes between 5.1 and 5.5 for client users, I needed the 5.5 client to access 5.5.
Click to expand...


The ONLY catch to this is if you are using vSAN you can do the same as long as you were running GA builds but IIR if you had 5.5 GA and wanted to goto 5.5U1 where vSAN was GA'ed you had to rebuild from scratch....

I tend to rebuild often just b/c i use Beta/RC/RTM based codes...
 
Zarathustra[H];1041480427 said:
Always bugs me that I have to log on to VMWares site in order to download it.

Makes it difficult to wget it directly to my server.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I download every file I can get my hands on and throw it on my NAS.
 
Installing vCSA 6 now. I must admit, I'm confused by the Appliance being distributed as an .ISO and not a .OVA... But it's not that hard to figure out.

<ISO>\vcsa\vmware-vcsa is an .ova file without the extension. But if you want to install it the "new" way, install <ISO>\vcsa\VMware-ClientIntegrationPlugin-6.0.0.exe, then open ISO\vcsa-setup.html. The new wizard seems to work pretty decently.
 
Last edited:
The Reason for this type of deployment is assuming you don't already have a vCenter in place... it has the options for the migration within it just more if you dont have a vCenter heres a easy way to deploy one...
 
dasaint said:
if you dont have a vCenter heres a easy way to deploy one...
Click to expand...
I don't get it.

1) File->Deploy OVF Template, done.
2) Mount .ISO, install plugin, open web page, done.

It's added an extra step. I could see it being useful if you don't already have vSphere client installed, I guess... But if you don't have vSphere client installed, how are you managing the ESXi host you're going to be putting the vCSA on?
 
Gotta think 4th Dimensionally ;)

Now i can deploy vCenter via my Mac, Linux Machine, Non-Windows Box... All i need is a web browser and the ISO is the concept... Places where the C# client cant go..

To answer the 2nd Question... Web Client is where the company eventually wants to get to... Trying to stop being so dependent on Windows for Manageability and make it multi-platform.

Tiny steps towards bigger results...
 
dasaint said:
Web Client is where the company eventually wants to get to.
Click to expand...
Thank god they're listening to their customers and deployed a thick client for 6.0. I've been stuck using the web client for the last several months, and it is (and always has been) crap. It's much, much better than it was... But it's still nowhere near as nice as the thick client. And don't get me started on the host-based-client BS they deployed with 6beta2... Ugh!
 
Thick client is there, but it only lets me connect to my ESXi 6 server. If you try and connect to vCenter I get told it will not work for that, only a host direct. That made me giggle.

That said, the web client does seem to kick a lot of ass compared to what a pile it was before. VERY happy with the properly updating task history.

EDIT: I found a newer version of the fat client on the my.vmware.com website as opposed to the version that downloaded by clicking the link via the ESXi page. Very interesting. Maybe this will get it working... will see very soon.

EDIT2: YEP. Can connect to vCenter with it this way. That was silly, I don't get why the ESXi link is different / older. Kind of dumb. Maybe it was an oversight.
 
Last edited:
defuseme2k said:
Thick client is there, but it only lets me connect to my ESXi 6 server. If you try and connect to vCenter I get told it will not work for that, only a host direct. That made me giggle.

That said, the web client does seem to kick a lot of ass compared to what a pile it was before. VERY happy with the properly updating task history.

EDIT: I found a newer version of the fat client on the my.vmware.com website as opposed to the version that downloaded by clicking the link via the ESXi page. Very interesting. Maybe this will get it working... will see very soon.

EDIT2: YEP. Can connect to vCenter with it this way. That was silly, I don't get why the ESXi link is different / older. Kind of dumb. Maybe it was an oversight.
Click to expand...

Pre-Release RTM/RC/Beta Codes had coded what you mentioned above, only the GA code is supported for the C# client to work with the vCenter...

IIR In the pre-releases it was forced to use the web client to improve upon it.
 
Yeah except it shouldn't have been beta code :eek:. I downloaded the client by clicking the link from my fresh GA install of ESXi 6. Perhaps they just hadn't updated the vsphereclient link. Don't know.

In either case, glad I have it figured out.
 
Yea let me know how u got that first client DL ill test it myself and report back if there are issues...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top