I just finished a Hyper V class. In that class were 8-10 different companies (multiple students from the same company). All but one of them was there to convert from VMware to Hyper like myself. The other one had no virtual environment at all.

We have VMware, 48 Enterprise CPU licenses, vCenter, and some View as well. We have over the last two years went from 60% virtualized in the Data Center, down to a single physical server that has a special card in it. We are an all Windows shop, save for one redhat vm that performs a single function.

We lincense “Data Center” from Microsoft so that we dont have to worry about how many copies of windows server we run on my 8 way production VMware cluster. We also use DPM 2010 to backup data on our critical VM’s.

With all of that I own everything I need for Hyper V and VMware now becomes a single item on my IT budget “Hyper Visor”, that is NOT cheap.

We are testing Hyper V right now, before our 3 year VMware contract is up at the end of this year. So far for what we use, we have not seen a single negative that would stop of from moving to Hyper V.

I came upon this site searching for something un-related. You ask others to be nice in the comments section, but your general attitude is one of sarcasm and you take pot shots at Hyper V or anyone supporting it all the time. That reeks of arrogance especially coming from a VMware employee.

Honestly its the same attitude I get from my VMware sales team and I am getting tired of it.

The money we spend on VMware might not be a lot when it comes to the bigger picture, at least that is how my sales team makes me feel, but I am sure they will miss it when I dont renew.

Why pay double and maintainence fees for the same thing…

Its that simple.

I can understand that, if you’re not upfront and honest about everything that they need then you end up shooting yourself in the foot with the “oh, you just need to buy this module” situation.

However, in most cases, if you position the full portfolio you won’t have these issues, and as I said, there are definite use cases where Hyper-v will hit the price point/performance for the customer.

I guess that as a company not driven by virtualisation, we have to be very careful, if we keep having to add to a solution for it to work, we won’t get any further business from the customer, and with the virtualisation project maybe accounting for 5% of their yearly turnover with us, we’ve got to be right first time.

I agree with you that there are partners out there that maybe don’t have the skills / knowledge to put together a fully functional solution that includes nuts to soup, however, I take great pride that even if we price ourselves out of the deal, we would have delivered against all requirements (even if they weren’t listed in the scoping document).

Trying to be fully independent we have offered multiple solutions, not just Hyper-V and VMware, and I think the numbers speak for themselves.

I am convinced that both manufacturers have a place in the market, but right now, VMware is still winning 98% of the time.

The cost justification does not come down to the hypervisor, if you look at total cost of ownership I believe that our customers have had best value for money.

Also, if our customers decide to move on from us as a supplier, they know that there are many more partners willing to support VMware implementation.

Don’t forget, some of our SMBs while only having less than 100 users can have well over 100 server workloads, and as mentioned, while some don’t have particularly mixed environments, some have very specific industry applications.