Slashdot Log In
VMware to Make Server Product Free (as in beer)
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Feb 03, 2006 08:35 AM
from the i-do-enjoy-a-good-free-server-product dept.
from the i-do-enjoy-a-good-free-server-product dept.
yahyamf writes "CNET News.com is reporting that in the face of increasing competition in the OS virtualization market VMWare is going to give away its GSX server product for free, in the hope that customers who try it will eventually migrate to the more powerful ESX server. The company recently released a free VMWare Player which could only run but not create virtual machines. The company faces competition from rival products such as SWsoft's Virtuozzo, Mircrosoft's Virtual Server, as well as open source software like Xen"
Related Stories
[+]
VMWare Inc. Releases Free Virtual Machine Runtime 318 comments
rfinnvik writes "VMWare Inc. has released a new free (as in beer) virtual machine runtime called VMware Player. According to VMWare, this free VM runtime makes it possible for anyone to run virtual machines created in their Workstation, GSX or ESX products. It also runs virtual machines created in Microsoft's virtualization products. The runtime is available for both Windows and Linux."
[+]
Ask Slashdot: Which OS Makes the Best VMWare Host? 141 comments
astrojetsonjr asks: "A few days ago, Trillian_1138 asked about running Linux on a laptop. Yagu started a thread suggesting the use of VMWare to allow running multiple flavors of Linux and Windows at the same time. Lots of readers then posted their success stories using VMWare . My primary machine is an IBM laptop and I'm getting ready to move to using VMWare to allow me run Linux, Solaris and Windows at the same time. First, what is the OS/distro with which you have had the best success hosting VMWare? Finally, what host OS install and setup tips do suggest?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
VMware to Make Server Product Free (as in beer)
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 216 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
hey don't leave out qemu (Score:3, Informative)
(http://nyamenation.org/)
Qemu may not run as fast as vmware does now but it's here, it's free and you can change whatever you want about it. The same is not true for vmware
Re:SECONDED (Score:4, Informative)
Re:hey don't leave out qemu (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.swaxhog.com/)
Re:hey don't leave out qemu (Score:5, Insightful)
Mmm? (Score:5, Funny)
Mircrosoft (Score:3, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday November 20 2003, @05:55AM)
Intel VT (Score:5, Interesting)
I suspect we can expect to see a huge swathe of hypervisors being released over the next few months, if only so x86 Mac users can run Windows apps!
Re:Intel VT (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Intel VT (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Intel VT (Score:5, Informative)
(http://theravensnest.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday October 07, @07:05AM)
- CPU virtualisation.
- Peripheral virtualisation
The first of these is practically impossible on x86. VMWare and VirtualPC (x86 edition) manage it using some really, really, ugly hacks that kill performance (and then some more hacks to boost performance). Xen works by ignoring the problem. An operating system on Xen must be ported to not use any of the x86 instructions that don't easily allow virtualisation.The second is not very hard conceptually. You just need to do some kind of multiplexing and then expose your devices as if they are a fairly general device of the category. While this is conceptually simple, it is practically a lot of work. Again, Xen dodges the problem here slightly be requiring that the domain 0 OS supports the hardware, and then providing generic virtualisation routines for various categories of device (consumer VMWare and VPC do the same - not sure about the server lines).
VT / Vanderpool / whatever make the first of these much easier (about as easy as it's been on RISC machines for the past decade or so and on mainframes for the past three. Yay for x86). They do very little for the second part of the puzzle. On PowerPC or SPARC, it might be possible to implement OpenFirmware drivers for hardware that are virtualisation-aware (IBM's servers do something a bit like this). I don't know if EFI has this capability; if it does then things like VMWare might become obsolete.
Oh, the final part of the puzzle is clustering. Xen and the server-grade VM systems provide clustering support which allows virtual machines to be transparently migrated between cluster nodes. This is quite useful, since you can run N VMs on M machines, and squeeze the low-activity ones onto a small number of nodes, then have then migrated to their own node when they are under high load.
Good Move! (Score:1)
(http://solaris.reys.net/english)
Re:Good Move! (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Jason.
Re:Good Move! (Score:4, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Monday August 18 2003, @12:25PM)
Player makes sense... small run-only environment, embeddable, etc.
But if GSX goes free what would a pricy workstation offer?
Re:Good Move! (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Ultimately GSX, Workstation and player are all essentially the same technology. ESX only differs by being a custom linux distribution making it very easy to install and a web interface to control operation and a few enterprise features such as VLANS and the VMotion addons. They've also moved some of the virtual machine I/O and handling into a kernel module rather than running in userland to gain some sort of performance advantage. Rather strangely ESX seems to be slow at supporting iSCSI. Of course there are also tools to limit bandwidth and control CPU usage on individual machines, whereas with GSX and Workstation it's a free for all.
Personally after trialling VMWARE ESX and GSX I actually prefer GSX. The "grow on use" disk type available for GSX is certainly better for small single use servers, flexibility to grow and keeps image sizes down for backups. I also really miss the client CD-ROM and floppy support which again is absent from ESX. The control panel also seems quite flakey.
Personally I feel that VMWARE have got the pricing structure wrong somehow. The only way to truely consolidate is to use big machines (20-30GB RAM) the problem here is that the cost of 4GB RAM modules is rather prohibitive, then add in some server redundancy and all the VMWARE licensing fees and it doesn't make sense any more. I'd actually prefer to pay a reasonable cost per active virtual machine, that way we can keep redundant hardware and move machines around as we see fit for performance or DR purposes.
I'm quite keen for GSX to be free or cheap, it'll then make cost sense to consider a VMWare strategy.
Jason.
Re:Good Move! (Score:4, Informative)
(http://jimstips.com/)
According to the Data Sheets found here:
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/gsx_specs.pdf [vmware.com]
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/ws_specs.pdf [vmware.com]
GSX requires a "server" host, while Workstation does not:
GSX:
Workstation:
-Jim Barr
http://jimstips.com/ [jimstips.com]
Re:Good Move! (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.paradizelost.net/)
What about existing customers? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been paying for regular updates to VMWorkstation over the years, does this mean I can stop and just use the free products?
That said, it's still worth the money I've been paying.
Re:What about existing customers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why? If you thought $1400 was too much for the product, you wouldn't have bought it. Since you bought the product, clearly you thought that what you were getting was worth more than what you were paying for it. So you were happy with the deal you made with VMware. Surely you are not petty enough to begrudge others the better deal that they are now getting?
Though I'm certainly not the religious sort, I'm reminded of the Christian parable of the workers in the vineyard. You made your own deal with VMware, and you were happy with it. What business is it of yours if, since then, they have changed their plans and now offer better deals to others?
Limitations? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.evilcon.net/)
Very exciting indeed.
Strange thing to say ... (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not only more powerful, it's fundamentally different. It's requires a different sort of administration. Also, the usage is different. gsx wil rarely be actively used in high uptime required production environments, esx will. esx also enables functionalities such als vmotion (if you have a san [wikipedia.org] that is) and will be used more often in blade server configs.
I really wonder if people will view esx as an 'upgrade' to gsx.
Why Not Use Patents? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://obsessivemathsfreak.org/ | Last Journal: Friday June 09 2006, @08:15PM)
Are all their patents pending?
Re:Why Not Use Patents? (Score:4, Funny)
VMWare is not in a good position to use patents to protect their IP.
The reason being that they actually have a product. This means they can be countersued for things like using a drop down menu, displaying a rectangle on a screen, ingenious stuff like that.
Why no free VMware Workstation? (Score:2, Interesting)
Wait a second.... (Score:4, Informative)
expected != will
gsx is big brother of vmware workstation? (Score:1)
(http://emulemorph.sourceforge.net/)
Sublime server names (Score:2, Funny)
I'm interested how the Intel Virtualization Technology will run on the up and coming SEX server.
Speculation (Score:3, Funny)
So the title "VMware to Make Server Product Free (as in beer)" is misleading at best.
Kinda Worries Me (Score:2)
I was 5 days from buying a copy (Score:1)
GXS really feels more robust than my experimentation with Xen 2.x and UML. It is still far and away better than MS Virtual Server, at least for the tasks I am planning on using it for. Unfortuanately for EMC and VMWare;
with Mircosoft to the left of you
and Open Source on the right,
Like Sun
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
Rode the six hundred.
Apologies all around....
Virtualiazation isn't going to be . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
How about a version to run under OS X? (Score:2, Interesting)
Continued Devlopment? (Score:2)
(http://slashdot.org/~nurb432/ | Last Journal: Friday August 27 2004, @03:24PM)
Related Stories? (Score:3, Funny)
And most importantly: Will it also list the dupes?
Not GSX (Score:2, Informative)
You can make your own VMs for VMware player (Score:5, Informative)
Sure you can. Take a gander at http://www.hackaday.com/entry/1234000153064739/ [hackaday.com]
What you don't get with VMware player is the nifty GUI to help you with the setup.
What excellent timing. (Score:2)
vm builder (Score:1, Informative)
all thigns virtual (Score:1)
Going to .... (Score:1, Offtopic)
(http://www.milksucks.com/ | Last Journal: Monday September 15 2003, @12:30PM)
Confused... (Score:2)
Are there any VM options for Intel Macs? (Score:1)
evaporating market (Score:2)
EMC^2 owns Vmware, so... (Score:1)
(http://www.speedracer.com/ | Last Journal: Monday August 16 2004, @08:55PM)
VMware is not competing (Score:2)
(http://ghazan.hazara.org/)
Multiple users with own kbd & monitor (Score:1)
AMD's rival technology, code-named Pacifica (Score:2)
(http://slashdot.org/)
I thought Pacifica was a complimentary technology for virtualization like VMware?
Re:Great! But.. (Score:1)
(http://www.meatspin.com/)
Re:WTF (Score:1)
(http://penopticon.com/)
Re:WTF (Score:2)
Free Beer--You pretty much just rent beer anyway. They can stop serving it at any time and you are screwed (espically if you have become addicted). If it doesn't meet your needs in some small way, you're screwed.
Free Beer is probably not a good foundation for your business, they are only giving it to you to get you to buy better beer anyway, but it's certianly much better than paying if you're broke.
If you're flush--you might as well pay for it (tip) anyway to get the (bartenders) support.
Re:WTF (Score:5, Informative)
It used to be that on election day the political machines would send men out to all the bars to buy everyone beer to toast their candidate. The idea was that the free beer would lead them to vote for the guy. Since there is an implied obligation to vote their way, the beer wasn't really free. This is then contrasted (in the "free as in beer or free as in speech") to freedom of speech, which is obviously a different sort of "free". Likewise, "Live Free or Die" doesn't imply life without cost, but rather the cost of living free.