Contributor
Contributor

Hyper-V 3 vs. vSphere 5 vs. Others

Jump to solution

Hi Guys.

My boss in looking to Replace VMware with Hyper-V 3. The reason for this is around costs. However I feel the change will impact my Job as a MS Tech will cost the company less.

I’m hoping VMware changes their pricing or something as Microsoft is going to destroy VMware as they did with Novel and many other companies.

0 Kudos
1 Solution
10 Replies
Immortal
Immortal

If you do not compare the per VM cost you will be missing VMware's ability to achieve a higher density of VMs per physical host without sacrificing performance, security or a vailaibiity-

If you find this or any other answer useful please consider awarding points by marking the answer correct or helpful
0 Kudos
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

CONSIDER THE COST OF NICS .. I HEARD HYPER V DONT SUPPORT VITUAL NIC

0 Kudos
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Back when ESXi 5 licensing thing broke, I was just about to start my virtualization project. So I took a solid look at VMWare, Hyper-V and XenServer. All 3 are solid hypervisors, and yes, there is a $$$ advantage to Hyper-V.

For me, it all came down to networking. You just can't beat the VMWare vSwitch.

Neither Hyper-V nor XenServer can team more than 2 NICs. Hyper-V uses the NIC's driver to do NIC teaming.  I have R710s with 2 quad-NICS. One Broadcom and one Intel. My redundancy plan included teaming ports from each NICs. Can't do that with Hyper-V. Never found a way for Hyper-V or XenServer to have a vSwitch with more than 2 NICs.

0 Kudos
Expert
Expert

First the is to analyse the whole cost of the soltution.

1.) Intial cost of software licence  + whole implemation cost of the solution + manpower did and in which time it could be done

Compare two products

1.)  Software product 1 intial price low , implementation cost high , operation cost high, complex solution

2.)  Software product 2 initial price high, implementation cost low, operation cost low , comple solution

Conclusion : Product 2 is overall cheaper ans easier.

Take a look at Buisness process reengineering

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering

Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) is basically the fundamental re-thinking and radical re-design, made to an organization's existing resources. It is more than just business improvising.

Often, no one is responsible for the overall performance of the entire process. Re-engineering maintains that optimizing the performance of subprocesses can result in some benefits, but cannot yield dramatic improvements if the process itself is fundamentally inefficient and outmoded. For that reason, re-engineering focuses on re-designing the process as a whole in order to achieve the greatest possible benefits to the organization and their customers. This drive for realizing dramatic improvements by fundamentally re-thinking how the organization's work should be done distinguishes re-engineering from process improvement efforts that focus on functional or incremental improvement

the major challenge for managers is to obliterate non-value adding work, rather than using technology for automating it.[2] This statement implicitly accused managers of having focused on the wrong issues, namely that technology in general, and more specifically information technology, has been used primarily for automating existing processes rather than using it as an enabler for making non-value adding work obsolete

Hammer's claim was simple: Most of the work being done does not add any value for customers, and this work should be removed, not accelerated through automation

Definition

Different definitions can be found. This section contains the definition provided in notable publications in the field:

  • "... the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical modern measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed."[5]
  • "encompasses the envisioning of new work strategies, the actual process design activity, and the implementation of the change in all its complex technological, human, and organizational dimensions."[

So ask our self how many step do you need to install a hyper-v on an X86 server. At the moment we do not install esxi. We order a X86 server were ESXi is allready installed on an sd card since 2008. This means we do not need to rollout , install esxi world wide. Only Update with Update Manager. So we killed many non value working tasks, which costs before our resource.

We now can do other things. Programming and so on.

MAy be this is helpful for you

Expert
Expert

Here is a good video for how many steps you need to install hyper v versus esxi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBv8wk9vyto

Look at the scorecard at minute 10:37

ParametersHyper-VVMwareVMware/Dell/HP(esxi installed on sd-card)
Reboots710
Keystrokes684850
Clicks30140
steps1370
time37:2710:010

This is a good example for business process reengineering.

We improved it to order a X86 directly installed with esxi, so no installition not any moer needed.

Plug the esxi server in the rack , get dhcp ip address , add esxi in vc and get esxi profile . thats it.  Very fast.

0 Kudos
Contributor
Contributor

We run ESXi in our corporate office and several plant sites in Canada. A couple of our US sites are running Hyper-V 3.

We just did an Active Directory domain migration at one of those US sites and the Hyper-V clusters need to be rebuilt from scratch. They will not migrate and cannot import the existing VM's into a new cluster easily.

That's at least a weeks work which more than makes up for the cost of ESXi Standard for that size environment.

0 Kudos
Expert
Expert

Want to see, how many installes steps and keystrokes Hyper V 3.0 no needs

Also a nice comparision:

http://blogs.vmware.com/apps/2012/11/benefit-7-lowest-app-cost-of-ownership-with-vsphere-5.html

0 Kudos
Contributor
Contributor

Hi Guys.

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/112012-vmware-microsoft-cost-calculator-264453.html

Web post like this makes it impossible for me to keep VMware in the company.

CIO and CFO look at the cost and now they believe that MS has closed the gap on VMware and the cost running VMware is more than Hyper-V. Also the current MS Vendor is pushing for the replacement of VMware within the environment.

Now the big question is:

Has VMware lost the price wars or has the battle just started also can VMware move back to the number 1 slot?

0 Kudos
Expert
Expert

The hypervisor is about moving objects. Treat a object like a electron in the univers. MS OSS is a object. Linux is a object. Which hypervisor can move the most different objects(oss).  MS hypervisor (is paravirtualization).  What does a transformation form one spaceroom to another room cost? 

0 Kudos