VMware backs down, changes vSphere 5 pricing(gigaom.com)
gigaom.com
VMware backs down, changes vSphere 5 pricing
http://gigaom.com/cloud/vmware-backs-down-changes-vsphere-5-pricing/
4 comments
This is not a concession. For my essentials plus license I get 256gb RAM under 4, but now even under the amended new licensing I only get 32gb. Still not happy.
VMware reminds me of Palm in 2000... They start something which will change the entire industry but somehow they are loosing their lead rapidly...
Lol. Can you explain how?
Hyper-V is gonna eat VMWare's lunch. 2008 Server is kicking ass and taking names, and is indeed a solid product from what I hear. MS's next iteration of server+virtualization will be the death knell for VMWare unless VMWare drastically reduces prices and comes up with remarkable innovative improvements in the next few years.
Hyper-V is a hail mary play, in case EMC/VMWare does something really stupid to screw up a good thing.
VMWare is an enterprise product. How many big enterprises are using Hyper-V? (A: Zero, officially anyway)
VMWare is an enterprise product. How many big enterprises are using Hyper-V? (A: Zero, officially anyway)
Alternative virtualization platforms are proliferating and get better all the time. Vmware has an early lead like Palm did and is correctly optimizing revenue from that lead but down the road ... where is palm today?
Agreed. Between Citrix (xen) and Redhat (kvm), as well as the related open source offerings, keep getting better.
I think the main area that VMWare still has a win, from people I know who use it, are management tools and the ability to prioritize/allocate/throttle IO on network block devices (SANs) per vm.
I think the main area that VMWare still has a win, from people I know who use it, are management tools and the ability to prioritize/allocate/throttle IO on network block devices (SANs) per vm.
They're still charging based on vRAM. I don't see this as much of a backdown, really.
It looks like VMware is trying pretty hard to capture most of the surplus value created by the cheaper ram.
I mean, it's been long said that VMware will look at how much money you can save by virtualizing and consolidating your old hardware, then they try to charge just enough less than that number to make the project still worth doing; In the past, I think, this has been seen as more reasonable, as vmware is helping to create some of that value.
Moving to grab some of the surplus value created by cheap high-density ram, something VMware has nothing to do with, I think, has been seen as unjustified and greedy in the SysAdmin world; it remains to be seen if still charging by the gigabyte of ram but just charging less will be accepted.