How would explain the core differences in Hyper-V from VMware’s offerings?

351960 pts.
Tags:
Hyper-V
Hyper-V vs. VMware
Microsoft virtualization
Microsoft Virtualization Chat 7/30
VMware
How would explain the core differences in Hyper-V from VMware's offerings? This question is from the 7/30 Microsoft Virtualization Chat on ITKnowledgeExchange.com

Answer Wiki

Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.

EdwinYuen:

At Microsoft, we really feel that virtualization should be ubiquitous, a little bit like how TCP/IP stacks were considered in the past. It should just be a given, part of the Operating System. Also, we believe that Virtualization is a skill, not a specialty. This means your existing IT staff, products, and most importantly, processes can have virtualization infused into them, without the need for a separate, duplicate Virtualization infrastructure. Finally, we believe that in the end, it’s all about applications and how they run on Virtualization. Users should get the same or better performance on their applications when using Virtualization. The key is managing the applications, how they run, how they are configured, and how they are accessed. Microsoft is uniquely positioned to provide end to end, application management in the virtual world.

——————————————————————————-
423:

Hyper V is built on hypervisor layer. HYPERVISOR, A core component of Hyper-V,

Windows hypervisor is a thin layer of software between the hardware and the OS that allows multiple operating systems to run, unmodified, on a host computer at the same time.

It provides simple partitioning functionality and is responsible for maintaining strong isolation between partitions. It has an inherently secure architecture with minimal attack surface, as it does not contain any third-party device drivers.

VMWare offers various virtualization solutions like vmware esx server, vsphere, vmware workstation etc.

Hyper-V will generally always beat ESX in terms of raw performance: Hyper-V is a “Microkernalized Type 1″ hypervisor which leverages paravirtualization. ESX is different in that it is a “Monolithic Type 1″ hypervisor which leverages hardware emulation. This is a key difference and it’s where the functional differences exist between the two approaches.

Hyper-V is considered “microkernalized” because its drivers are all installed into its administrative OS and not into the hypervisor itself. For that reason, Hyper-V’s hypervisor is only around 260K in size as compared to ESX’s 32M.

Discuss This Question:  

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when members answer or reply to this question.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

To follow this tag...

There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Thanks! We'll email you when relevant content is added and updated.

Following