Comments on: VMware: Hyper-V on Server Core vs ESXi

By: Arjantim

Arjantim — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:27:39 +0000

I totally agree with Robert and Brian. This is no comparison this is just a VMware-ad.

I think Vmware shouldn’t do this kind of thing. I rather work with vmware. But sometimes it’s just not what i choose, but what my boss wants.

So VMWare focus on the great products you have, compare operational costs, performance and that kind of stuff and don’t let yourself in with a dogfight with Microsoft (you really don’t need it).

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:12:15 +0000

A better comparison would be Hyper-V Server vs ESXi, as both are bare metal virtualisation programs – no OS to be seen.

Also, the installation is pointless to compare really – what matters is day to day administration, hardware support and speed of virtualised machines.

By: C. Beerse

C. Beerse — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 08:18:38 +0000

Het zou leuk zijn als ESX (zonder i) ook in de lijst staat. Volgens mij slaat die ook geen slecht figuur tegenover HyperV.

By: The things that are better left unspoken : Setting the Record Straight One Post at a Time

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 08:53:48 +0000

[...] with Server Core – Too Dry and Crunchy for our Taste VMware: Hyper-V on Server Core vs ESXi Evaluating Hyper-V with Server Core – VMware ESXi 3.5 ESXi vs Hyper-V installation [...]

By: Robert Roos

Robert Roos — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:59:48 +0000

Unfortunately it’s too easy for VMWare to kick Hyper-V only on its weak spots through such an advert; the installation of a machine is a minor aspect of the entire VM lifecycle.
Can anybody show an objective report between these two regarding i.e. operational costs, installation, performance, features?