I am not saying VMWare isn't very cool. I enjoy it immensely. Just indicating the limitations for Windows support. I think anyone who would consider using a product in a production environment in a way that isn't in the end completely supported by the people with the source code are slightly insane. However my view of production may be slightly different and more critical than others.
I would like to see MS actually add VMWare to the HCL certification process and lists. I think that would be a good way to tackle it and probably the right way, they certify specific versions and don't even have to worry about underlying hardware, VMWare has to worry about that. However, realistically, I don't see it happening. If they hadn't gotten into the virtualization business I don't think they would have had much choice for much longer, but they did and some of us just said, duh, about time. Yes I would like to a very stripped down OS with the guests running on it like ESX. They may be thinking about that but more likely right now they are thinking about how closely they can tie it to the guts of a full blown Windows OS and make it integral to the core for speed and to get away from it actually being a separate product. Then after that they may look at how to strip the host (or someone else - maybe you - will figure it out for them). joe -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:54 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare The big thing that VMWare has going for it, and in my option it's a big thing, is the way they've built ESX server. The problem with using Virtual Server (or GSX Server from VMWare) is that you're still running a full blown OS underneath the virtual machines. This really causes a problem in which a single OS patch which requires a reboot means that all your VM servers also need to be rebooted - even if they're not Windows. ESX server uses a highly stripped down version of the Linux kernel[1], and few ancillary services. This architecture should result in significantly fewer issues in which the virtualization platform necessitates downtime. I lump the virtualization engine more in the hardware than software side of things - hardware should not require significant maintenance except in break/fix scenarios. Now, maybe I need to see how hard it is to get Virutal Server (or the PC equivilent of it) running in WinPE. Maybe that's the fix to all these problems. Of course, there are all those pesky licensing issues to deal with then..... Roger -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. [1] My thoughts on Linux in general are relatively well known[2] [2] I've been quoted as saying "BSD Skunks the Penguin" on more than one occasion > -----Original Message----- > From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 7:51 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare > > > Well right off the bat... MS doesn't support Windows on VMWARE; it is > best effort unless Microsoft can determine that the issue can be > reproduced on physical hardware. VMWARE claims this is because of > competitive reasons but MS never supported it even before they bought > the Connectix product. > > >From what I have heard, our dev guys have actually hit > things that they > couldn't reproduce. > > Personally I would run Windows on VMWARE all day in a lab (we > do) or at home > (I did). I wouldn't even start to consider it for production (never > ever ever). If you want to look at virtualization software for running > Windows, get into the Virtual Server preview program that MS has as > obviously the Windows products will be fully supported on that > software. > > IBM and HP both claim full support for Windows on VMWARE. > However you have > to keep in mind, what can they really do? If there is a problem with > VMWARE they can send that info back to the vendor. If they find a > problem in Windows they can send that back to MS. They have no power > to really fix anything. I have had a conversation with one of the guys > at IBM concerning the support model and in the end he said, there is > no SLA for software support from anyone - no guarantees... Great! He > mentioned that all of their VMWARE contracts are one offs negotiated > specifically with the customer at hand. But again, in the end, all > they can do is pat your hand and say, we understand, yes that does > suck that it doesn't work, but don't worry we sent someone a note - if > we could fix it ourselves we would, but we can't. > > I actually stopped using the VMWARE products at home about 3 months > ago and switched to the MS products as I figured I might as well get > used to it. > > > Here are some links worth reading: > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;273508 > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=%2Fservicedesks > %2Fbin%2Fkbsea > rch.asp%3FArticle%3D320220 > http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/hardware/server/st > ory/0,10801,87 > 185,00.html > > > joe > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Baudino > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 3:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare > > > > > > All, > > Server consolidation has us heading towards putting production Windows > Server 2003 domain controllers on VMWare VMs using ESX. We > have not yet > deployed AD widely (some business units have it and some > don't) but are > working on a new design that will handle all business units. > Our lab is a > combination of physical servers on workstation-class hardware > and VMs on > VMWare Workstation4 and on ESX. > > However, our direction for production DC's is VMs on ESX > unless we find that > it doesn't work properly or well enough. We're going to be > testing this in > the lab. I've seen recent emails about using VMs to spin off labs. > But does anyone have experience running production DC's on > VMs or any known > "gotcha's" that they're willing to share? > > > Thanks, > Mike Baudino > > > > ******************* PLEASE NOTE ******************* This > E-Mail/telefax > message and any documents accompanying this transmission may contain > privileged and/or confidential information and is intended > solely for the > addressee(s) named above. If you are not the intended > addressee/recipient, > you are hereby notified that any use of, disclosure, copying, > distribution, > or reliance on the contents of this E-Mail/telefax > information is strictly > prohibited and may result in legal action against you. Please > reply to the > sender advising of the error in transmission and immediately > delete/destroy > the message and any accompanying documents. Thank you. > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
