Microsoft virtualisation: free, as in beer

James Bannan10 August 2007, 2:41 AM

TECH.ED |Why should you care about Microsoft virtualisation, when VMware has already perfected the software in the space? Well, for a start, the Microsoft stuff is free...!


Virtualisation in all shapes and sizes is definitely a hot topic at this year’s Tech.Ed.

I've already gone into quite a bit of depth on application virtualisation with SoftGrid, but what about Microsoft's plans for OS virtualisation -- Virtual PC and Virtual Server? Why should anyone care, when VMWare has perfected this market over the years?

Well, first of all, I'll just point out that the Microsoft stuff is free. And that's as good a reason as any to pay attention to it!

I caught up with Microsoft Australia's Michael Kleef and Andrew Dugdell to talk about virtualisation. Michael is a technology evangelist with Microsoft and Dugdell is a MVP (Most Valuable Professional) for virtualisation.

Michael KleefMichael Kleef

Andrew DugdellAndrew Dugdell
First up, Microsoft Virtual Server

For those of you who are familiar with Microsoft Virtual PC 2007, it helps to think of Virtual Server in the same manner, with the main difference that a virtual server (on a Windows server host) runs as a service and doesn’t shut down when a user logs out.

Of course, that’s a simplistic explanation – Windows Server is geared heavily towards enterprise-level performance, stability and compatibility. Virtual PC does a great job, but you wouldn’t use it as a base for a system requiring mission-critical availability in a live environment. This is no different to running up a server on VMWare Infrastructure rather than VMWare Player.

There have been a few iterations of Virtual Server since its inception as Virtual Server 2004. Each new version has involved a large increase in performance as well as greater support for virtualising modern hardware and a greater range of support host operating systems.

According to Microsoft, the latest version – Virtual Server R2 SP1 – was stress tested on a single physical machine on which 500 virtual servers each with 512MB of RAM were run up simultaneously. Of course, there are very few organisations that would seek such a model, but it’s clear that scalability is not a problem here.

Virtual server also works well in a clustered environment – if one physical server in a cluster needs to be taken down (which would take down any running virtual servers as well), they can be moved across to another server in the cluster. There’s a minimal downtime of 30 to 60 seconds while the active session is written to disk, but this is still a much better proposition than dealing with full server downtime.

The next planned release is Windows Virtualization Server, which is on track for release 180 days after the release of Windows Server 2008. This is a hypervisor-based solution which installs a very thin management layer straight over the hardware. It has a parent partition which manages resources for the host and any installed virtual machines, which are managed from a remote management applications.

Windows Virtualization Server will also enable 64-bit virtual clients on a 64-bit host. Virtual Server 2005 R2 SP1 only allows 32-bit virtual clients.

And the price?

As I mentioned at the top of the article, the nice thing about all Microsoft virtualisation products is that they’re completely free. As Kleef explained, Microsoft feels that if you’ve paid for server licensing, then virtualisation capabilities shouldn’t incur an extra cost.

Of course as with all virtualisation products you still have to license all the virtualised operating systems – the one exception is if you purchase Windows Server Enterprise. This allows you install four virtualised systems at no extra cost.

And what about full desktop virtualisation?

At the moment Microsoft’s focus is very much on the server market, but there are plans in place. A whitepaper was released in May entitled “VECD (Windows Vista Enterprise Centralized Desktop) for Virtual Server” which outlines the product suite implementation which will allow businesses to host Vista Business/Enterprise on Virtual Server and have thin client connect to the desktops via RDP. You can download the whitepaper here.

As virtualisation is such a flexible technology, I wanted to know how both Michael and Andrew use Microsoft’s virtualisation products in everyday life. Andrew has a Virtual PC machine running on his Media Centre, so that he gets the benefit of two “always-on” individual machines. He’s also run up a stripped-down virtual machine which just runs IE7 to create a secure browsing environment, as all the data gets wiped once the machine shuts down.

Michael does a lot of demo presentations, so Virtual PC and Virtual Server has made his life much easier. He can demo five virtual systems from one physical machine and can quickly run up demo labs and proof-of-concept scenarios without having to build those systems up from scratch.

James Bannan is attending Tech.Ed Australia 2007 as a guest of Microsoft.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Bob T:

As well as Server Enterprise Edition "giving you" 4 licenses, Datacenter Edition allows you unlimited clients (from Server 2003 R2 onwards).
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensingr2/overview.mspx has licensing information.

There is also a virtualisation calculator at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/calculator.mspx to "estimate the number and cost of Windows Server licenses needed for your virtualization scenarios".

No, I don't work for Microsoft, I'm just eagerly awaiting the launch of the next version of Virtual Server for the 64 bit clients.

Bob T

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Sly Coder:

Microsoft's virtualisation tools are free, only if you buy the server product? Wow! Bargain.

Let me see how that compares to say our 20 systems running Linux and VMWare Server.

Now, 20 x $2000 per server licence for Windows Server, totalling $40,000.

Compared to 20 x $0 for Linux server and 20 x $0 for VMWare Server.

$40,000 for the Microsoft solution contrasted with $0 for the Linux/VMWare solution.

It's nice when a business decision is so clear cut, no?



29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

mix:

ROFL

29 February 2008, 8:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymousxx:

Because we all use Linux at our business right?

29 February 2008, 8:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

tin:

Sensible ones do... Only an idiot (or uninformed people) would choose to pay a fortune for cripple-ware when there's so many free options.

29 February 2008, 8:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Daniel Harvison:

Considering that there's a free version of VMware server for just about every linux distro out there, doesn't it logically follow that they (whomever makes vmware) would make a version for windows? And even if they don't, surely it's possible to set up dual-boot, where virtualization is really needed?

29 February 2008, 8:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Sly Coder:

Well dude, maybe you should.

Do the math.

The Linux/FOSS savings map out to 30% of your TOTAL cost of ownership bill. That includes hardware. That includes wages. If you're in business and you steer away from a 30% saving, then you should get out of business.

Sure, you may lack skills in Linux, but remeber you once also lacked skills in Windows? Windows isn't some kind of inherent mental skill humans have. It's learnt. As is Linux.

And just as Windows/DOS once eclipsed CP/M, TRS-DOS and Apple DOS, so Linux will eclipse Windows.

As I said, do the math. Follow the Penguin's inexorable rise and know that complex systems such as markets do not do linear growth - they do chaotic, critical-mass exponential growth.

Remember how the geek-created Internet eventually killed off all other proprietary networks? (ie, DECNet, SNA, Microsoft's NetBIOS)

Well, the geek-created Linux will do the same with proprietary operating systems. It make take 5 years. It might take 15 years. But you can't stop this process.

12 months ago, few in the IT firm where I work 'did' Linux at home; now most of them do. What's changed? Ubuntu is a piece of cake for Windows users. And Compiz Fusion makes Windows Wow! look like rat-droppings.

And once you've got the attention of many in the IT world, then their friends, relatives, kids and eventually employers will follow suit.

So do yourself a favour and skill up. Remember what happened to the last platform pushed by the then king-of-the-heap monopolist - OS/2. Don't the last person caught behind on Windows.

Those of you who have knowledge of the IT industry that extends beyond 15 years, know that I'm right.


29 February 2008, 8:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Warfare64:

Right on Sly Coder! The math (and logic behind IT professionals having to learn Linux) is straight up!

Either Linux or Mac OSX will beat out Windows. We are in a "window of opportunity" due to bringing a full 64-bit solution to the desktop. Micro$oft's attempts at 64-bit computing has failed at every attempt. Linux is ideally primed as it usually amounts merely to a recompile for virtually anything - but, although I use Ubuntu at home and being a Linux user since 1993, Linux still has a ways to go before being fully ready for the desktop (but, it has come a long way since the early 90's and I'm thrilled that distributions like Ubuntu are almost a snap for the typical desktop user). Mac OSX is ideally positioned at this point in time.

There are over half a dozen critical paths that will establish the next dominant operating system. This paper does a very good job at this (found it on the Ubuntu Bug #1 launchpad database).

I would love for Linux to become the next dominant OS, but, there is a lot of work to be done still (but, it is achievable in this small remaining window of time). Even if Mac OSX wins, I'll still be happy; I'm sick and tired of Micro$oft OS' and either Linux or Mac OSX is a welcome replacement.



29 February 2008, 8:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags