[Info-vax] VMware

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 12/9/2019 4:11 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 12/9/2019 1:00 PM, Kerry Main wrote:
>> To put thinks in perspective, I would say that VMware has approx. 90+% of
>> the hypervisor market, so their formal support is very important.
>>
>> Having stated this, VMware is a bit like Oracle and Microsoft i.e. 
>> once they
>> achieve a certain level of market dominance, they keep cranking up their
>> prices as they believe Customers will just keep paying.
>>
>> In fact, many of the larger Customers are now starting to rebel and 
>> look for
>> viable alternatives.
> 
> As I may have mentioned, I have no experience with such products.  That 
> written, the following question may or may not have any relevance.
> 
> At what point does the cost of the VMware make that piece of HW in the 
> corner not so expensive, in comparison?  Regardless, it would still have 
> it's own power supplies, and that can be an issue.

Even a relative low end and low cost physical server can usually run
a lot of VM's today. Maybe 20 or 40 or 80 depending on size
and workload. Virtualization saves money even with high
VMWare licensee costs.

But it is not just about HW cost. There is also the flexibility.
In a virtual environment you can easily allocate more CPU and more
memory to a VM where workload is increasing. You can easily install
and start new VM's (minutes instead of waiting weeks for hardware
to arrive).

Arne