Subscribe to Windows IT Pro
September 08, 2009 12:00 AM

VMware Needs to Take Microsoft More Seriously

Microsoft's virtualization strategy echos NT strategy
Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #102778
Rating: (10)

Years ago, I spoke with VMware’s CEO at the time, Diane Greene, about Microsoft's coming threat. I was curious why VMware wasn't pursuing antitrust complaints against the software giant, as Microsoft had announced that it was going to bundle a hypervisor-based virtualization platform with Windows Server. (That software was since released as Hyper-V.)

VMware had no interest in pursuing Microsoft in the courts, I was told. Instead, the company would compete with Microsoft in the open market, and Greene was convinced that VMware could maintain its technological lead.

I told her that was a mistake. Microsoft understood then, as now, that virtualization is key to the future of computing, and it would go after this market with the same dogged determination it used previously in establishing NT as the low-cost workgroup computing standard.

I'll spare you the serial-killer analogy I used at the time, but you get the idea. Microsoft isn't a competitor to be trifled with. And you don't want to be in its crosshairs.

Today, Microsoft has released its second-generation Hyper-V technology, and though VMware still maintains a huge lead in the virtualization market, Greene is out. She's been replaced by Paul Maritz of Microsoft (and NT) fame, and it's equally notable that his number two, Tod Nielsen, is also a Microsoft alumnus.

As you probably know, VMware held its annual VMworld conference last week, and I spent a bit of time with Bogomil Balkansky, the vice president of product marketing at VMware. There was a bit of competitive did-not/did-too silliness between VMware and Microsoft at the show (it amounts to Microsoft being punished for infractions at last year's show), but rather than get bogged down in that, I’d like to focus on VMware's products and strategy and how they compare to what Microsoft is doing.

At a very high level, it's fair to say that VMware got here first, has the more mature technology, and has a decidedly cross-platform approach that’s lacking on the Microsoft side. VMware, for example, can claim, as Balkansky did with me, that Microsoft's chortling this year over closing the gap with Live Migration capabilities is cute, but VMware had that feature (VMotion) years ago. The point here is clear: While Microsoft's virtualization solutions are starting to catch up, they're still years behind what VMware is doing.

There’s some truth to that. VMware's current virtualization platform, vSphere, which is based around the ESX Server 4.0 hypervisor, is still in some ways dramatically more capable than Hyper-V. Microsoft will tell you, however, that VMware's solutions tend to be more expensive--in some cases a lot more expensive.

Maybe you get what you pay for. But Microsoft's virtualization strategy should be familiar to anyone who was around in the NT days: Establish a beachhead as the low-cost alternative, add capabilities until you're at least comparable to the competition, then watch your growth start outpacing that of the entrenched market leader.

One thing’s different this time, however. While Microsoft had no real server presence in the early days of NT (at least outside of workgroup-based LAN Manager installs), this time around the company is a major player in the server market. And when Microsoft shops start looking around for a virtualization player, the freebie that comes with Windows Server is an obvious option. Especially when, again, the differences between that solution and the VMware solution are starting to dwindle.

In short, VMware's position hasn't really changed much over the past few years, but I think we're on the cusp of a dramatic change in the market. Fortunately for VMware, the market is only going to grow, and this year's gains with vSphere 4 hint at years of growth to come.

But with the overall market growing, Microsoft's share of that market is going to grow too. And eventually, I feel, it will outpace VMware and other competitors (and partners) like Xen and Citrix.

It's way too soon to start the "VMware is doomed" talk. But VMware needs to do everything it can to prevent the shedding of share to Microsoft. This will involve lowering prices, inevitably, and giving away more of the crown jewels.

But that's a natural side effect of the commoditization of a market that was previously a niche specialty. Today, virtualization is on its way to becoming a common and accepted part of the computing experience for businesses of all sizes. And there's no reason VMware can't emerge as a major player--perhaps the major player--going forward. But it's going to have to start taking Microsoft a lot more seriously.

You've been warned, VMware. Again.

Related Reading:

Related Content:

ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • Andrew
    3 years ago
    Sep 13, 2009

    For those people/business that are moving away from VMware vSphere to Microsoft Hyper-V I would be interested in knowing why.

    Now that VMware has introduced new price points in vSphere that did not exist in VMware Infrastructure 3, doing an apples-to-apples comparison of features and price with Hyper-V is now possible. Although that having been said, I do wish that VMware would be more agressive on pricing.

    http://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere/buy/editions_comparison.html

  • Scott
    3 years ago
    Sep 09, 2009

    @SCIF...I'll be glad to eat crow if I'm wrong. We'll see in a year :)

  • Gordon
    3 years ago
    Sep 09, 2009

    Having both products in house VMware and Hyper V and having virtualized numerous servers we have choosen to shelve VMware and are going strickly with HyperV. We are already running many of or production and Citrix servers on it without a hitch.
    While you are right in bringing up, look what M/S did with NT I would also throw in look at what M/S did to Novell...

  • Richard
    3 years ago
    Sep 09, 2009

    So if your product can't compete with Microsoft's offering on its own merits, you should sue them for anti-competitive behaviour?

    What's anti-competitive about someone producing a better product than you and getting a larger share of the market as a result?

    It's idiotic ideas like this that are the biggest threat to IT at the moment.

  • Leif
    3 years ago
    Sep 08, 2009

    dlregister, I can guess which one you chose because your company is a Microsoft Gold Partner. Don't see any mention of VMware as a partner on your company's site.

    Paul, you've been preaching this "beware VMware" mantra now in several postings. While I do agree that VMware needs to take Microsoft seriously for many of the same reasons you stated, I think you understate how clearly more advanced vSphere is than Hyper-V and overstate the maturity of Hyper-V. Where I think Hyper-V will especially make an impact and is already doing so, is in the small to perhaps mid-sized companies, especially those with volume licensing and/or software assurance.

    Microsoft still has a great deal of work to do for the Fortune 1000 enterprises to seriously consider it, at least for the companies already established with VMware for their production environments. And in the academic world, pricing is a relative non-issue since there are such heavy discounts for both companies' products. Makes going with the superior VMware product even easier.

    In my opinion, VMware provides superior uptime, storage utilization, memory utilization, and potential lower energy costs.

    Just a few VMware features that set it apart: storage vmotion, storage thin provisioning, DRS, DPM, transparent page sharing, HA and fault tolerance, EVC, and on and on...namely the advances VMware has with their storage and networking stacks.

    Speaking of which...where's the NFS? I believe Microsoft is really missing the boat with that one. If you want to see the easiest storage setup for virtualization, try NFS in VMware. Great performance too and much lower cpu utilization than software iSCSI. God forbid Microsoft tries to copy NAS connectivity with CIFS. I suppose they would have to since NFS runs so poorly on Windows.

    http://storagefoo.blogspot.com/2007/09/vmware-over-nfs.html
    http://viroptics.pancamo.com/2007/11/why-vmware-over-netapp-nfs.html

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here

advertisement

advertisement

Windows is a trademark of the Microsoft group of companies. Windows IT Pro is used by Penton Media Inc. under license from owner.