There were many clever entries, but in the end “Hard Hat Area” won out.  Thanks to all who participated.

Related posts:

1. Cloud Power Caption Contest [Win VMware Workstation 8!]
2. vComeback Contest Winners! [Microsoft Cloud Power]
3. vComeback Contest: Microsoft Cloud Power Billboard
4. Idle RHEV Hypervisors save power?

As it turns out, this Microsoft Cloud wasn’t zoned for optimal utilization — it ended up in a construction site.  Sort of like unsuspecting consumers of the Office 365 service, which is so prominently featured on the sign.  Or, as they say at Azure: Temporary “DNS issue” folks. Nothing to see here.

Cloud Power: Under Construction. Hard Hat area. (Winner: Josh Atwell)

Submit Your Caption for a Chance to Win!

Think of your most clever caption to the photo above and post it below as a comment for a chance to win a copy of VMware Workstation 8 ($199 value).  Hurry, contest ends October 11.

Here are a few examples to get you started:

• This cloud looked a lot taller in the brochure.
• Are they building an entrance?  Or an exit?
• Traffic fines doubled… and so have my operational costs!

Google vs. Microsoft

Want to know the real irony here?  This obstruction is a pedestrian footbridge that will be frequented by Google employees on their commute to one of many buildings in the area.  You can’t make this stuff up.

View Larger Map

Rules: Winner selection is subjective.  If similar entries are received, the first submitter will have priority.  Entry must be received by October 11, 2011 11:59 p.m. PDT.  Prize not claimed within five days of notification will be forfeited.  Contestants must be legal residents of earth.  Not sponsored or endorsed by any third-party.

Related posts:

1. Announcing the Cloud Power Caption Contest Winner
2. vComeback Contest: Microsoft Cloud Power Billboard
3. vComeback Contest Winners! [Microsoft Cloud Power]
4. Unboxing the Cloud

Case Study:  The Very Expensive Laptop

Imagine you are looking to buy a new laptop, equipped with various accessories and software.  Part of the decision is to select an appropriate office suite to include in the configuration:

There are a number of office suite options: the less capable choice adds $80 to the price, and the one you really need to do your work adds $230 — almost three times the cost.  Outrageous!

Laptop with Professional Suite Costs Three Times More!

That’s the headline anyway.  Obviously, it’s far from true because it only focuses on one component and misses out on the big picture.

From laptops to cars to private clouds — cost comparisons that focus on just one portion of a solution don’t make much sense.

Compare Entire Solutions

The truth is, comparing just one component of a solution is arbitrary and meaningless.  To truly compare two alternatives, one must look at the complete solution.

In the case of our laptop, it turns out that the professional configuration costs about 17 percent more than the one that doesn’t meet all requirements.  A far cry from the three times hyperbole.  Not only that — it has capabilities the cheaper alternative cannot match, a difficult aspect to quantify when performing a pure cost comparison.

Practical Application

Now we’ve seen how cost comparisons can easily be manipulated by focusing on just one aspect of a complete solution.  Are there any real-world examples of an out-of-context cost comparison without regard for the big picture?  Yes…

Allow me to introduce the Microsoft Virtualization Cost Comparison Calculator:

By using the exact same trick to artificially compare the cost of VMware vSphere to a handful of System Center products, the Microsoft Virtualization team has settled on a marketing message: VMware costs N times more than Hyper-V.

Three Times More?  Five Times More?

Would a reasonable person choose to spend over three times more for something if a suitable alternative is available?  No! Just as a vSphere solution is not multiple times the cost of Hyper-V, neither is Hyper-V a suitable replacement for the industry leading virtualization platform.

For a true cost comparison, with line-by-line transparency, check out the VMware Cost Per Application Calculator and see for yourself how the complete solutions compare.

Related posts:

1. IGT Part 1: Mojave Only Need Apply
2. The Truth About Hyper-V Memory Overcommit
3. VMware vSphere 4.1 – the best virtualization platform yet
4. Layers and Layers of FUD

What’s the difference between ESXi and vSphere?

While that’s an easy one for most VCritical readers to answer, there are newcomers that may benefit from a simple overview.  If you’re here seeking vSphere understanding, welcome!

VMware vSphere Demystified

VMware vSphere is the industry-leading virtualization platform that consists of two primary products: VMware ESXi and vCenter Server.  ESXi is the hypervisor and installs on bare metal hardware.  vCenter Server provides centralized management and allows administrators to configure and monitor ESXi hosts, provision virtual machines, storage, networking, and much more.  The vSphere Client is a Windows application that acts as a single pane of glass to manage either a standalone ESXi host directly or an entire datacenter though vCenter.

VMware ESX vs. ESXi

VMware ESX was introduced a decade ago and will be discontinued with the upcoming major release.  Carrying the torch forward will be ultra-slim VMware ESXi, which has already seen several years of successful production deployments.  Both products are bare-metal hypervisors — they install directly onto a server instead of a traditional general purpose operating system — and have the same capabilities, accommodating any licensed feature from Essentials to Enterprise Plus: vMotion, DRS, HA, FT, and more.

The primary difference is that with ESXi the Red Hat Linux service console is gone, leaving just the hypervisor and critical supporting features.  By eliminating tons of unnecessary Linux components, ESXi footprint is measured in mere megabytes — not gigabytes like competitors.

Microsoft Hyper-V Server vs. VMware ESXi

I always get a kick out of well-meaning folks that try to claim that ESXi should not be compared to Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1, insisting that it’s much closer to compare with Microsoft Hyper-V Server.  Hyper-V Server, for those less familiar, is a free product that is essentially Windows Server 2008 Core with the Hyper-V role and a snazzy text-based menu that allows you to do a few key things — like run Windows Update.

Make no mistake about it, weighing in at several gigabytes and requiring care and feeding on Patch Tuesdays, Hyper-V Server is anything but a thin, purpose-built hypervisor.  It’s Windows — just not the “Windows you know.”  As Aidan Finn, Microsoft MVP and Hyper-V expert says, “…I would almost never install Server Core…”

Another vSphere Advantage over Microsoft Virtualization

Readers of  VCritical have learned many of the technical advantages that ESX/i has over Hyper-V, but there is another advantage that vSphere holds over Microsoft when it comes to virtual infrastructure:  By releasing both the hypervisor and the advanced management in lockstep, VMware vSphere is a platform that is greater than the sum of its parts.

You might be wondering, how a virtualization platform could introduce new, advanced capabilities if the hypervisor and management products are on different release cycles.  No need to wonder, just witness Microsoft virtualization and see firsthand.  Don’t take my word for it — look at how a real Hyper-V customer sees things:

It’s unbelievable that Microsoft would roll out new features to the virtualization product that are not supported in their virtualization management product… The Hyper-V and SCVMM teams don’t march in lockstep, and what updates they do release are too far apart.

Clearly Hyper-V customers have not been pleased with the manageability delays, but that’s not all…

The Bad News Flows in Two Directions

Later this year Microsoft will release System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2012, but the next version of Windows Server and Hyper-V is still merely the subject of speculation.  This leapfrog release cadence creates a situation where VMM 2012 must attempt to overcome limitations with the platform by painting over them, in lieu of elegant solutions integrated with lower layers of infrastructure.

Consider this example:  Instead of introducing a new streamlined hypervisor clustering capability, VMM 2012 attempts to orchestrate the 29 steps currently required to install, configure, and validate a failover cluster for use with virtual machines.  Maybe some administrators will find it an improvement over the existing manual effort, but is it better than the simple drag-and-drop design found in vSphere?

Synchronized vs. Staggered

VMware vSphere is the leading virtualization platform for many reasons.  It’s hard to understand how asynchronous hypervisor and management releases would be acceptable, let alone desirable.  Just another compromise encountered when building a hypervisor on top of  a general purpose operating system.

Related posts:

1. What is VMware ESXi?
2. VMware ESXi 5 Scripted Install to USB Flash
3. If VMware ESXi 4 is so small, why is it so big?
4. VMware ESXi and Hyper-V installation comparison

The Setup

In breakout session BD12: Hyper-V and Dynamic Memory in Depth, a demo environment was presented with a dozen virtual machines allegedly configured to use Dynamic Memory, with the Hyper-V Manager interface boldly displaying “Dynamic Memory” as part of each VM name.

One small detail was omitted from the demonstration, however:  Most of these virtual machines — both the “Dynamic” as well as the “Static” variants — are empty shells with no operating systems installed, as shown this thumbnail:

Hyper-V Dynamic Memory requires cooperation with guest integration services.  Without those services, VMs will fall back to good, old-fashioned Static Memory.

The Great Fake Dynamic Memory Demo of 2011

The “demonstration” went on to show how Dynamic Memory responds when memory is consumed inside one of the virtual machines.  The only VM that appears to have an OS installed is the first one.  The other 11 VMs are powered on but never generate load on the CPU and never report memory demand back to Hyper-V — a sign that the guest integration services are not running:

Reality Check

In reality, when a Windows 7 SP1 VM is started up on Hyper-V it almost immediately demands more than the meager 384MB recommended in the breakout session.  In fact, a dozen Windows 7 SP1 VMs– running in my own lab — looks like this:

It’s easy to see that Dynamic Memory is actually enabled and working here, as the assigned memory for each VM has increased based on the demands of a running operating system.

Why Fake the Demo?

Clearly the Dynamic Memory demo at MMS 2011 was misleading, but why?  Could Hyper-V Dynamic Memory have accommodated that same VM density if operating systems were actually running?

Related posts:

1. Hyper-V [Not Exactly] Dynamic Memory
2. Hello Dynamic Memory?
3. SearchServerMisinformation.com
4. The Truth About Hyper-V Memory Overcommit

Not to throw The Cloud under the bus, but somehow a glitch has allowed this Evernote note to circulate freely; it appears to be straight from Steve Ballmer’s MacBook Pro:

Your Turn!

What should Microsoft be looking for in the next STB leader?  Leave a comment below — funny or serious, your choice!

Disclaimer for the humor-impaired:  This is satire.  No, seriously.

Related posts:

1. Dear Red Hat…
2. Cloudy with a chance of vaporware
3. vComeback Contest: Microsoft Cloud Power Billboard
4. Storage vendors unanimously applaud SCVMM innovation

The response was overwhelming and many of the entries were quite hilarious.  It wasn’t easy, but I’ve selected two winners, each will receive a copy of Maximum vSphere:

Tony DiMaggio:  Yoda called…he wants his speech writer back.

Jacob Foster:  Do you work for Microsoft?

I hope you got a kick out of reading the entries — it’s all in good fun.  There were several interesting concepts submitted that VMware really should take a second look at; I’ll be sure to mention them to my colleagues in the marketing department!

Who knows… we might have to do this again sometime.

Related posts:

1. vComeback Contest: Microsoft Cloud Power Billboard
2. Announcing the Cloud Power Caption Contest Winner
3. Cloud Power Caption Contest [Win VMware Workstation 8!]
4. Microsoft likens vSphere cloud to ancient fax machines

Fun fact: The billboard on the opposite side is running an Apple iTunes ad.

“VIRTUALIZATION ALONE DOES NOT A CLOUD SOLUTION MAKE.”

Catchy, yet sophisticated and original.

Your witty comeback could win you a cool vSphere book!

Got a pithy response to this new Microsoft cloud marketing line?  Share it with the virtualization community by submitting a comment below for a chance to win a great prize.

The possibilities are endless.  Keep it clean.

For instance, you might reply:  “Yeah, I’d say the exact same thing if my virtualization was Hyper-V.”

A panel of distinguished judges I will subjectively select two winners to receive copies of Eric Siebert’s excellent book, Maximum vSphere.  Contest ends January 13, 11:59 p.m. PST and is open to everyone, but prizes will only be shipped to winners within the US.  Two winners will be announced no later than January 17.

Multiple responses are allowed — submit early, submit often.

UPDATE: Check out the colorful commentary by Colin Steele at TechTarget.

Comeback inspiration

For some comeback inspiration, take a look at this classic Seinfeld scene.  Just don’t go all George Costanza on us.

Disclaimers:  Book giveaways provided by publisher.  Contest not sponsored by, nor affiliated with, any third-parties.    No clouds were harmed in the making  of this blog post.

Related posts:

1. Announcing the Cloud Power Caption Contest Winner
2. vComeback Contest Winners! [Microsoft Cloud Power]
3. Cloud Power Caption Contest [Win VMware Workstation 8!]
4. Book Review: VCP4 Exam Cram [Giveaway!]

“That’s why I still maintain that at some point, you’ll be at 40 percent to 50 percent virtualized and you’re 50 percent physical, and that’s an important thing to recognize. If you recognize that, you can set the strategy. It’s not, ‘Oh God, we thought the world was going to be only virtual.’ That, fundamentally, is why I think VMware is in trouble,” he said.

In related news, Gartner recently predicted 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.  [Better start looking for some investors that can help me get VM cap-and-trade started.]

But seriously, many companies have already instituted “virtualization first” 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.

Bob Kelly also explained the true cause of server sprawl in that same article.  If you’re like me, you probably thought it was because of DLL Hell — complex product dependencies that made it extremely risky to manage multiple applications on a single Windows NT system — and SMP scalability problems.  Nope, it turns out that the real issue was the need for sufficient capacity to accommodate peak demand… wink, wink.

Which 50% will you virtualize?

Related posts:

1. VMware ESX 4 can even virtualize itself
2. Single Pane of Glass — Hyper-V Edition
3. Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager released
4. Storage VMotion Q&A

I first read of this particular issue on Network World today.  But unlike the official Microsoft Virtualization Team Blog, NW actually includes some details about this supposed ban — like this quote from an official VMware spokeswoman:

Yes, competing vendors are allowed to exhibit, including exhibiting competing products.

The VMworld contract was big news — back in May — but since then, like it or not, most competitors and industry watchers have conceded that the fine print in the VMworld contract is industry standard.  Just read the comments in that Virtualization.info article referenced by MSFT.

While it does make for pretty good drama, you should know that VMware has not banned Microsoft from exhibiting SCVMM 2008 R2.  I do admit, “Try the virtualization manager that VMware doesn’t want you to see!” does sound a lot more intriguing than “Here’s SCVMM R2, it does mostly the same stuff as the first release, and it can manage vSphere now — if you count VI3 feature parity.”

See you at VMworld.

Related posts:

1. Hello, SCVMM 2008 R2
2. How to get to VMworld 2009
3. Wild SCVMM 2008 R2 rumors and speculation
4. What’s New (and What’s Vapor) in SCVMM 2008