<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>VCritical &#187; market share</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/market-share/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vcritical.com</link>
	<description>Informed Virtualization Criticism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:13:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Which 50% will you virtualize?</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/10/which-50-will-you-virtualize/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/10/which-50-will-you-virtualize/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:40:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PASS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=1884</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bob Kelley, a Microsoft VP, recently made the claim that only 50 percent of all workloads will be virtualized.  The rest of the industry clearly disagrees.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PC World recently published an <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/174204/with_hyperv_r2_microsoft_sets_its_sights_on_vmware.html" target="_blank">article on Hyper-V R2</a> competing with VMware vSphere.  I found this statement from <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/kelly/" target="_blank">Bob Kelly</a>, Microsoft Corporate Vice President, Infrastructure Server Marketing, to be remarkable:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;That&#8217;s why I still maintain that at some point, you&#8217;ll be at 40 percent to 50 percent virtualized and you&#8217;re 50 percent physical, and that&#8217;s an important thing to recognize. If you recognize that, you can set the strategy. It&#8217;s not, &#8216;Oh God, we thought the world was going to be only virtual.&#8217; That, fundamentally, is why I think VMware is in trouble,&#8221; he said.</p></blockquote>
<p>In related news, <a href="http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1211813" target="_blank">Gartner recently predicted</a> that 50% of all x86 server workloads will be virtualized by 2012.  Still no word on what happens in 2013, after global virtualization limits have been reached.  [<em>Better start looking for some investors that can help me get VM cap-and-trade started.</em>]</p>
<p>But seriously, many companies have already instituted &#8220;virtualization first&#8221; policies and deploying new apps on physical hardware requires sign-off from upper management.  If Bob Kelly is correct, half of all provisioning requests seek waivers from this policy?  Incomprehensible.</p>
<p>Bob Kelly also explained the true cause of server sprawl in that same article.  If you&#8217;re like me, you probably thought it was because of <strong>DLL Hell</strong> &#8212; complex product dependencies that made it extremely risky to manage multiple applications on a single Windows NT system &#8212; and SMP scalability problems.  Nope, it turns out that the real issue was the need for sufficient capacity to accommodate peak demand&#8230; wink, wink.</p>
<p><strong>Which 50% will you virtualize?</strong></p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2010/03/pimp-my-hypervisor/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Pimp My Hypervisor'>Pimp My Hypervisor</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/vmotion-from-physical-esx-4-to-virtual-esx-4/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: VMotion from physical ESX 4 to virtual ESX 4'>VMotion from physical ESX 4 to virtual ESX 4</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2010/02/taking-snapshots-of-vmware-esx-4-running-in-a-vm/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Taking snapshots of VMware ESX 4 running in a VM'>Taking snapshots of VMware ESX 4 running in a VM</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/12/best-of-2009/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Best of 2009'>Best of 2009</a></li>
</ol></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/10/which-50-will-you-virtualize/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>140 vSpheres/hour</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/140-vsphereshour/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/140-vsphereshour/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:08:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VMware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vSphere]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=1436</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even in the face of a tough economy and "free" competing hypervisors, VMware continues to acquire customers.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about these <a href="http://www.vmware.com/company/news/releases/vsphere-momentum.html" target="_blank">impressive vSphere performance figures</a>:</p>
<p>Since VMware launched vSphere 12 weeks ago there have been over 350,000 downloads &#8212; 140 per hour!</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s not all:  in the first half of 2009, VMware acquired <strong>twenty-one thousand</strong> new customers &#8212; 121 new customers per day!</p>
<p>Can&#8217;t wait for more great news in the coming week &#8212; see you at VMworld.</p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/03/microsoft-tries-deception-gets-caught/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Microsoft tries deception, gets caught'>Microsoft tries deception, gets caught</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/09/my-vmworld-2009-experience/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: My VMworld 2009 Experience'>My VMworld 2009 Experience</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/is-scvmm-2008-r2-really-banned-from-vmworld/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Is SCVMM 2008 R2 really banned from VMworld?'>Is SCVMM 2008 R2 really banned from VMworld?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hello-scvmm-2008-r2/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hello, SCVMM 2008 R2'>Hello, SCVMM 2008 R2</a></li>
</ol></p><div style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; background-color: #C0C0C0; padding: 7px;border: dashed thin">

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/140-vsphereshour/#comments">Leave a Comment</a> •
<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/vcritical">Subscribe to RSS</a> •
<a href="http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailverify?uri=vcritical&loc=en_US">Subscribe via Email</a> •
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/eric_gray">Follow Eric Gray on Twitter</a><br/>

More articles on: <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/market-share/" rel="tag">market share</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/vmware/" rel="tag">VMware</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/vsphere/" rel="tag">vSphere</a> • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/category/virtualizationism/">Browse All Virtualization Content</a><br/>

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/140-vsphereshour/">140 vSpheres/hour</a> by <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/about/">Eric Gray</a> © 2009 • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/">VCritical</a>

</div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/140-vsphereshour/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hyper-V Market Share Lies</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hyper-v-market-share-lies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hyper-v-market-share-lies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:58:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VMware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=1326</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So now it&#8217;s okay to just make up market share numbers?
Last week Microsoft COO Kevin Turner made a shocking proclamation in this Dow Jones article:
&#8220;We launched our first product in October of this past year. from then till now, we gained 24 points of market share against a very, very formidable competitor,&#8221; Turner said.
There are [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>So now it&#8217;s okay to just <em>make up</em> market share numbers?</strong></p>
<p>Last week Microsoft COO Kevin Turner made a shocking proclamation in this <a href="http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200907301824DOWJONESDJONLINE001100_FORTUNE5.htm" target="_blank">Dow Jones article</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;We launched our first product in October of this past year. from then till now, we gained 24 points of market share against a very, very formidable competitor,&#8221; Turner said.</p></blockquote>
<p>There are at least <em>two </em>problems with Turner&#8217;s statement:</p>
<ol>
<li>Hyper-V 1.0 was released in June 2008, not October</li>
<li>There is absolutely no data available to support the fictitious &#8220;24 point gain&#8221;</li>
</ol>
<p>Microsoft is still scrambling for a convoluted explanation of this lie &#8212; I can&#8217;t wait to hear what they come up with.  Please note, however, that the part about VMware being a &#8220;very, very, formidable competitor&#8221; was independently verified to be true.</p>
<p>Virtualization.info just <a href="http://www.virtualization.info/2009/08/microsoft-claims-hyper-v-reached-24.html" target="_blank">published a short article on the topic</a> and mentions some previous market share numbers &#8212; helps put things in perspective.</p>
<p>Between the &#8220;<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/humble-but-dishonest/">million Hyper-V downloads</a>&#8221; and this new fabricated market share statement coming from the highest levels of Microsoft, it raises the question:</p>
<p><strong>What else is Microsoft Virtualization making up?</strong> Customer wins?  Price comparisons with VMware vSphere?</p>
<p>Smells like desperation to me.</p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: The Million Hypervisor March'>The Million Hypervisor March</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/10/which-50-will-you-virtualize/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Which 50% will you virtualize?'>Which 50% will you virtualize?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/even-gpl-cant-make-hyper-v-linux-vms-well/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Even GPL can&#8217;t make Hyper-V Linux VMs well'>Even GPL can&#8217;t make Hyper-V Linux VMs well</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/12/igt-part-2-san-misers/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: IGT Part 2: SAN Misers'>IGT Part 2: SAN Misers</a></li>
</ol></p><div style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; background-color: #C0C0C0; padding: 7px;border: dashed thin">

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hyper-v-market-share-lies/#comments">Leave a Comment</a> •
<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/vcritical">Subscribe to RSS</a> •
<a href="http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailverify?uri=vcritical&loc=en_US">Subscribe via Email</a> •
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/eric_gray">Follow Eric Gray on Twitter</a><br/>

More articles on: <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/market-share/" rel="tag">market share</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/microsoft/" rel="tag">Microsoft</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/vmware/" rel="tag">VMware</a> • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/category/virtualizationism/">Browse All Virtualization Content</a><br/>

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hyper-v-market-share-lies/">Hyper-V Market Share Lies</a> by <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/about/">Eric Gray</a> © 2009 • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/">VCritical</a>

</div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hyper-v-market-share-lies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Humble&#8230; but dishonest</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/humble-but-dishonest/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/humble-but-dishonest/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:29:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hyper-V]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=1314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Windows Server 2008 automatically downloads the non-beta Hyper-V patch after installation.  If Microsoft is using this metric for Hyper-V deployments, they are not being honest.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hard to believe that Microsoft Virtualization is <a href="http://blogs.technet.com/virtualization/archive/2009/07/22/windows-server-2008-r2-hyper-v-server-2008-r2-rtm.aspx" target="_blank">still trying to convince the world</a> that more than a million people have downloaded Hyper-V in the past year:</p>
<blockquote><p>We&#8217;re pleased and humbled to announce that in the first 12 months of Hyper-V R1 availability with Windows Server 2008, there have been over 1+ million downloads of Hyper-V R1 Gold (RTM) software, making Hyper-V the fastest growing bare metal hypervisor in x86 history.</p></blockquote>
<p>In case you are not familiar with this scam, please refer to the <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/">Million Hypervisor March</a> and <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/06/hyper-v-deployments-suddenly-drop-to-zero/">Hyper-V Deployments Suddenly Drop to Zero</a>.</p>
<p>What will they do now?  Windows 2008 R2 will not be shipping with a beta version of the hypervisor like Windows 2008 did.  There will be no automatic download of the &#8220;Gold&#8221; code as the new R2 OS is deployed.  I suppose they will just have to count <em>every single</em> Windows 2008 R2 license as a Hyper-V host &#8212; just like they do right now.</p>
<p>What do you think?  <strong>Is there the slightest chance that this &#8220;1+ million&#8221; figure represents actual Hyper-V deployments?</strong></p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/06/hyper-v-deployments-suddenly-drop-to-zero/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hyper-V deployments suddenly drop to zero'>Hyper-V deployments suddenly drop to zero</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: The Million Hypervisor March'>The Million Hypervisor March</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2010/02/hypervisor-footprint-quiz/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hypervisor Footprint Quiz'>Hypervisor Footprint Quiz</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/wanna-see-a-million-esx-licenses/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Wanna see a million ESX licenses?'>Wanna see a million ESX licenses?</a></li>
</ol></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/humble-but-dishonest/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hyper-V deployments suddenly drop to zero</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/06/hyper-v-deployments-suddenly-drop-to-zero/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/06/hyper-v-deployments-suddenly-drop-to-zero/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:04:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hyper-V]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=1214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Microsoft Virtualization was counting Hyper-V downloads -- requried for every Windows Server 2008 system -- and using that metric to imply Hyper-V adoption.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In recent months, we have seen the Microsoft Virtualization team release some pretty amazing statistics about Hyper-V downloads.  First, at MMS 2009 David Greshler claimed one million Hyper-V RTM downloads.  More recently&#8211; and it&#8217;s really unclear why these stats differ so greatly &#8212; Jeff Woolsey has been throwing around <a href="http://blogs.technet.com/virtualization/archive/2009/06/12/vmware-fud-fiasco-final.aspx" target="_blank">750,000</a>+ as the number of downloads whenever he has a chance.</p>
<p>If you need a quick refresher on what they mean by downloads, please review <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/">The Milion Hypervisor March</a> article.  In a nutshell, Microsoft Virtualization decided to get creative with the metric they use to track Hyper-V adoption.  Windows Server 2008 RTM shipped with a beta version of Hyper-V (interesting decision) that is automatically updated via the Windows Update patch management mechanism.  Any up-to-date Windows 2008 system is essentially counted as a Hyper-V host, which is totally unrealistic and, frankly, dishonest.</p>
<p>That decision now leads to an unfortunate dilemma.  <a href="http://blogs.technet.com/virtualization/archive/2009/06/17/Re_3A00_-Windows-Server-2008-SP2-Hyper_2D00_V.aspx" target="_blank">Windows Server 2008 SP2 is now available</a> and it includes the RTM version of Hyper-V &#8212; no longer any need to download and update Hyper-V.  That means:</p>
<p><strong>As new Windows Server 2008 deployments move from RTM to SP2, the Hyper-V downloads cease.</strong></p>
<p>The moral of this story is clear.  When selecting a metric to brag publicly about progress, make sure it&#8217;s legitimate &#8212; or the truth may bring unintended consequences.</p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/humble-but-dishonest/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Humble&#8230; but dishonest'>Humble&#8230; but dishonest</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: The Million Hypervisor March'>The Million Hypervisor March</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2010/02/hello-dynamic-memory/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hello Dynamic Memory?'>Hello Dynamic Memory?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/a-very-flashy-hypervisor-hyper-v-server-r2/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: A very flashy hypervisor: Hyper-V Server R2'>A very flashy hypervisor: Hyper-V Server R2</a></li>
</ol></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/06/hyper-v-deployments-suddenly-drop-to-zero/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Million Hypervisor March</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 16:52:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ESX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hyper-V]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VMware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=1064</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hyper-V is often downloaded to Windows Server systems that will never be used to run virtual machines.  Making this an irrelevant metric for Hyper-V installed base figures.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a recent post on the <a href="http://blogs.technet.com/virtualization/archive/2009/05/09/hyper-v-winning-daily-vmware-fud-reaching-new-heights.aspx" target="_blank">Microsoft Virtualization Team Blog</a>, Jeff Woolsey attempts to build a case for Microsoft Hyper-V adoption and reliability based on less-than-straightforward proclamations &#8212; explaining that there have been over 750,000 downloads of Hyper-V.  If he would have compared notes with David Greshler before writing the post he most likely would have claimed <strong>one million</strong> &#8212; that was the figure Greshler supplied at the recent Microsoft Management Summit:</p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-1070" title="Microsoft now has 23%!" src="http://www.vcritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/mms2009_idc.png" alt="Microsoft now has 23%!" width="489" height="137" /></p>
<p>There seems to be a problem with this highly-inflated claim;  the casual observer may even infer that over a million system administrators have downloaded and installed Hyper-V in order to run virtual machines.</p>
<p>Let me assure you that this is impossible, and here is why:<span id="more-1064"></span></p>
<ul>
<li>Windows Server 2008 shipped with the beta version of Hyper-V</li>
<li>Hyper-V is just another component of Windows Server 2008</li>
<li>Windows Update is used to automatically download updates for all Windows components</li>
<li>In July 2008, the RTM version of Hyper-V was made available on Windows Update</li>
<li>After installation, all Windows Server systems automatically download the Hyper-V update &#8212; whether they intend to ever run virtual machines or not</li>
<li>Hyper-V download count++</li>
</ul>
<p>What&#8217;s that?  Hyper-V downloads occur whether or not a system is even being used as a hypervisor?</p>
<p>Yes!  <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950050" target="_blank">Update 950050</a> is <strong>automatically downloaded</strong> to all Windows Server 2008 hosts &#8212; the standard Windows Update process.  Actually, the Hyper-V update is even downloaded to virtualized Windows systems (which are certainly not even capable of running Hyper-V):</p>
<p><a href="http://www.vcritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/hyper-v-download.png"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-1067" title="Hyper-V RTM downloaded automatically" src="http://www.vcritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/hyper-v-download-300x214.png" alt="Hyper-V RTM downloaded automatically" width="300" height="214" /></a></p>
<p>With that new understanding, you can decide for yourself whether or not it is honest to claim that there have been one million Hyper-V downloads, or if it is statistically significant to use that number to compute the reliability of Hyper-V (&#8220;.02%&#8221;).</p>
<h2>Market Share</h2>
<p>While we are on the topic, at the Microsoft Management Summit David Greshler also reminded us of the IDC Virtualization Tracker stats, crediting Microsoft with 23% of the market &#8212; which is by units, not revenue.  <em>Please refer to the slide at the top of this post.</em></p>
<p>It&#8217;s interesting to see the label &#8220;Momentum&#8221; and the &#8220;now has&#8221; statement, both of which imply progress.</p>
<p>Last year IDC released market share numbers that caused quite a stir.  You can read all about it from a VMware perspective at <a href="http://www.mikedipetrillo.com/mikedvirtualization/2008/10/idc-microsoft-grabs-market-share-from-vmware.html" target="_blank">Mike D&#8217;s blog</a>, but to quickly summarize: IDC stated that in Q2 2008 Microsoft had 23% market share (when Hyper-V had been actually shipping for less than a week).  Here we are &#8212; quarters later &#8212; Microsoft has increased their share to&#8230; 23%.  That&#8217;s <em>some</em> momentum.</p>
<p>I find it ironic that the whole point of the Microsoft blog post referenced above is to provide &#8220;facts&#8221; and dispel alleged VMware FUD.  It&#8217;s safe to say that this battle is far from over.</p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/06/hyper-v-deployments-suddenly-drop-to-zero/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hyper-V deployments suddenly drop to zero'>Hyper-V deployments suddenly drop to zero</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/08/hyper-v-market-share-lies/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hyper-V Market Share Lies'>Hyper-V Market Share Lies</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/07/humble-but-dishonest/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Humble&#8230; but dishonest'>Humble&#8230; but dishonest</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/have-you-seen-the-idc-report/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Have you seen &#8220;the IDC report&#8221;?'>Have you seen &#8220;the IDC report&#8221;?</a></li>
</ol></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two thousand?</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/two-thousand/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/two-thousand/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:58:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCVMM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[System Center]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gartner recently published a report with some interesting details on System Center Operations Manager (SCOM).  One of the three key findings:
Operations Manager 2007&#8217;s value diminishes when managing non-Microsoft IT elements, whether management is provided by Microsoft or a third party.
Sort of reminds me of the value of SCVMM-VirtualCenter integration, but that&#8217;s another topic.
Something that really [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://mediaproducts.gartner.com/reprints/microsoft/vol10/article2and3/article2and3.html" target="_blank">Gartner recently published a report</a> with some interesting details on System Center Operations Manager (SCOM).  One of the three key findings:</p>
<blockquote><p>Operations Manager 2007&#8217;s value diminishes when managing non-Microsoft IT elements, whether management is provided by Microsoft or a third party.</p></blockquote>
<p>Sort of reminds me of the value of <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/scvmm-to-vmware-you-will-be-assimilated/">SCVMM-VirtualCenter integration</a>, but that&#8217;s another topic.<span id="more-165"></span></p>
<p>Something that really caught my eye is that the product has racked up 4000 licenses in the year-and-a-half that it has been available.  But, if you know the product architecture, you would concur that most sites require several licenses.  That implies about 2000 SCOM 2007 sites, to make a reasonable estimate.</p>
<p>Is that a lot?  Perhaps, since Gartner found one strength to be &#8220;A significant installed base.&#8221;</p>
<p>Consider this:  To take advantage of the highly-advertised SCVMM features like PRO Tips, topology diagrams and reporting (<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/misleading-documentation-or-none-at-all-ill-take-the-latter-thanks/">well, in 60 days&#8230;</a>) you need to integrate with SCOM.  Does that mean that there are just a couple thousand environments out there that are actually ready to deploy Microsoft virtualization?</p>
<p>Are you one of the two thousand?  What about everyone else?  Read up on SCOM architecture and deployment just to get started with virtualization?  Doubtful.  For those with real work to do, today, take a look at <a href="http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/">VMware Infrastructure</a> with a free 60-day trial.  You can use <a href="http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/drs.html">VMware DRS</a> right away to intelligently place virtual machines on hosts and even move them around with zero downtime.  Kind of like PRO Tips, without the <a href="http://blog.scottlowe.org/2007/07/23/live-migration-vs-quick-migration/">quick migration downtime</a> and all the moving parts of SCOM:</p>
<p><a href="http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb432132.aspx"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-215" title="scom-diagram-technet" src="http://www.vcritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/scom-diagram-technet-231x300.gif" alt="" width="231" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>Root Management Server?  Clusters?  Report Server?  Management Servers?  DW DB?  Agents?  Please pass the Tylenol.</p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/pro-tips-pros-only-please/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: PRO Tips: pros only, please'>PRO Tips: pros only, please</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/04/save-14970-on-vmware-esx-management/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Save $14,970 on VMware ESX management'>Save $14,970 on VMware ESX management</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/11/scvmmpro-complexity-high/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: SCVMM/PRO Complexity: High'>SCVMM/PRO Complexity: High</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/say-it-aint-so-pro/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Say it ain&#8217;t so, PRO!'>Say it ain&#8217;t so, PRO!</a></li>
</ol></p><div style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; background-color: #C0C0C0; padding: 7px;border: dashed thin">

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/two-thousand/#comments">Leave a Comment</a> •
<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/vcritical">Subscribe to RSS</a> •
<a href="http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailverify?uri=vcritical&loc=en_US">Subscribe via Email</a> •
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/eric_gray">Follow Eric Gray on Twitter</a><br/>

More articles on: <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/market-share/" rel="tag">market share</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/scom/" rel="tag">SCOM</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/scvmm/" rel="tag">SCVMM</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/system-center/" rel="tag">System Center</a> • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/category/virtualizationism/">Browse All Virtualization Content</a><br/>

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/two-thousand/">Two thousand?</a> by <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/about/">Eric Gray</a> © 2008 • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/">VCritical</a>

</div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2008/11/two-thousand/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Have you seen &#8220;the IDC report&#8221;?</title>
		<link>http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/have-you-seen-the-idc-report/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/have-you-seen-the-idc-report/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:30:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Gray</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualizationism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VMware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vcritical.com/?p=96</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you are following the virtualization industry, you have most certainly seen one of the many articles about the IDC Virtualization Tracker report that was just released.
Folks, this report has some big problems.  According to the IDC Fact Sheet, &#8220;IDC&#8217;s Worldwide Quarterly Server Virtualization Tracker consists of independent, unbiased data, updated quarterly.&#8221;  I&#8217;m not sure [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you are following the virtualization industry, you have most certainly seen <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/34131">one of the many articles</a> about the IDC Virtualization Tracker report that was just released.</p>
<p>Folks, this report has some big problems.  According to the <a href="http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=IDC_P15379">IDC Fact Sheet</a>, &#8220;IDC&#8217;s <em>Worldwide Quarterly Server Virtualization Tracker</em> consists of independent, unbiased data, updated quarterly.&#8221;  I&#8217;m not sure where this allegedly independent, unbiased data came from, but hopefully next time it will actually be independent and unbiased.</p>
<p>Mike DiPetrillo has written up an <a href="http://www.mikedipetrillo.com/mikedvirtualization/2008/10/idc-microsoft-g.html">excellent analysis of the report</a>.  Check it out!</p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2009/05/the-million-hypervisor-march/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: The Million Hypervisor March'>The Million Hypervisor March</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/12/incoming-google-traffic-introduction/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Incoming Google Traffic: Introduction'>Incoming Google Traffic: Introduction</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/hey-boss-where-do-you-want-these-virtual-machines/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Hey boss, where do you want these virtual machines?'>Hey boss, where do you want these virtual machines?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/storage-vendors-unanimously-applaud-scvmm-innovation/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Storage vendors unanimously applaud SCVMM innovation'>Storage vendors unanimously applaud SCVMM innovation</a></li>
</ol></p><div style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; background-color: #C0C0C0; padding: 7px;border: dashed thin">

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/have-you-seen-the-idc-report/#comments">Leave a Comment</a> •
<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/vcritical">Subscribe to RSS</a> •
<a href="http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailverify?uri=vcritical&loc=en_US">Subscribe via Email</a> •
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/eric_gray">Follow Eric Gray on Twitter</a><br/>

More articles on: <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/market-share/" rel="tag">market share</a>, <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/tag/vmware/" rel="tag">VMware</a> • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/category/virtualizationism/">Browse All Virtualization Content</a><br/>

<a href="http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/have-you-seen-the-idc-report/">Have you seen &#8220;the IDC report&#8221;?</a> by <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/about/">Eric Gray</a> © 2008 • <a href="http://www.vcritical.com/">VCritical</a>

</div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vcritical.com/2008/10/have-you-seen-the-idc-report/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
