[Info-vax] VSI has a new CEO

[Chris Townley]

On 05/08/2021 14:29, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 8/5/2021 9:16 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 8/5/21 8:38 AM, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
>>> "Everyone" has a laptop supporting VirtualBox.
>>>
>>> "VirtualBox runs on Windows, Linux, Macintosh, and Solaris hosts..."
>>
>> Two things:
>>
>> 1. Unless it has changed considerably from the last time I ran it for
>> anything, VirtualBox is unsuited for any kind of production environment.
>> And development of software intended for use in a production environment
>> is also production.
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Development environments are quite different from production environments.
> 
> Windows 7 or 10 vs Windows Server 2016 or 2019 is very clear.
> 
> Ubuntu or whatever vs RHEL or CentOS / Rocky Linux is also somewhat 
> distinct.
> 
>> 2, Many people here have expressed their desire to work in a VMS
>> environment.  Not Linux, not Mac and certainly not Windows.  For
>> one thing, it requires the acquisition of knowledge they may not
>> wish to have.  This could be a deal breaker.  Management may see
>> it as: "If I have to run Linux in order to run VMS, why am I
>> running VMS?"
> 
> If you develop for or study VMS then you certainly need
> VMS.
> 
> But most people will have something else than VMS running
> today.
> 
> We all know about one exception. But I think that is an exception.
> 
>>> I do not see why clusters and HBVS would not work in an VirtualBox
>>> environment. Not with physical shared disks of course, but over
>>> the network.
>>>
>>> In the PDF from the last Webinar there is a SHOW CLUSTER output
>>> shown having 10 nodes:
>>> 2 nodes with V9.1 (x86 in a VM)
>>> 2 nodes with 8.4-1H1 (older IA64)
>>> 2 nodes with 8.4-2L2 (should be Alpha, I think)
>>> 4 nodes with 8.4-2L3 (latest IA64)
>>>
>>> This might use some other VM environment than VirtualBox, but from
>>> the VMS point of view that should not matter, as far as I understand.
>>
>> And that is another issue.  In order to run VMS in a production
>> environment you will now have to also run something like VMWare
>> in a production environment with all the associated costs of doing
>> it.
> 
> Pulling in VMWare or similar just to run VMS would certainly
> have significant cost.
> 
> But most companies already have that in place: VMWare
> and/or IaaS cloud. And it will be a cost reduction to move
> VMS into the same environment that everything else is
> running on.
> 
> Arne
> 
> 

Are not they planning on supporting KVM as well?

-- 
Chris