[Info-vax] Bare Metal VMS (Frame.Work Laptops) <<<< complete answer late

[Dan Cross]

In article <vi23qd$2qcsq$1 at dont-email.me>,
Arne Vajhøj  <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>On 11/25/2024 7:34 AM, John Dallman wrote:
>> In article <vhti7a$1sg3t$1 at dont-email.me>, vlf at star.enet.dec.com
>> (Subcommandante XDelta) wrote:
>>> As for Hypervisor/VMS, perhaps, this is an interesting option, to
>>> make it a little more palatable to the VMS ecosystem:
>>>
>>> https://blackberry.qnx.com/en/ultimate-guides/embedded-hypervisor
>> 
>> Demanding a hypervisor that isn't well-established in business IT is
>> another thing for customers' management to dislike.
>> 
>> The VSI plan is to run on the well-established hypervisors, and confine
>> the unfamiliar aspects of VMS to individual virtual machines.
>
>That is the business requirement.
>
>VMS must run on what the customers use.
>
>>                                                               Sadly,
>> Broadcom's greed after taking over VMware is making that harder.
>
>I don't think it really changes the relevant hypervisors.
>
>They need to support ESXi, KVM and Hyper-V. Anything else?

One jopes Bhyve just works.

	- Dan C.

>Before Broadcom it may have been 75%-20%-5% - after Broadcom
>it may be 30%-65%-5%, but that does not change VMS support
>requirements.
>
>Above is for on-prem production systems.
>
>For public cloud it is given by the cloud vendor.
>
>And dev systems is different. VirtualBox, Player/WorkStation,
>KVM etc..
>
>(I know VirtualBox has been pushed a lot for this, but given
>peoples experience on both Windows and Linux has been very painful,
>then VSI should probably consider dropping that)
>
>Arne
>
>