 




<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Virtualization vendors: What happened to good sportsmanship?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/</link>
	<description>A SearchVMware.com blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:50:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: MSVirtblogger</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/#comment-210</link>
		<dc:creator>MSVirtblogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:56:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/?p=981#comment-210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@ROIdude - please don&#039;t try to re-write history about the whitepaper from Feb 2007. This whitepaper was launched via an article in the NY Times. It had inaccuracies and errors, no matter what you say the motivation. Let&#039;s just agree that VMW is no angel.

Eric - IT pros are starting to choose the underlying virtual infrastructure based on the workload. They&#039;re finding some workloads are better (for many reasons, not just technical) with different underlying hypervisors or streaming/app virt technology. So history is repeating itself. Just as customers have always chose the workload first, then the OS - they&#039;re doing the same for virtual infrastructure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ROIdude &#8211; please don&#8217;t try to re-write history about the whitepaper from Feb 2007. This whitepaper was launched via an article in the NY Times. It had inaccuracies and errors, no matter what you say the motivation. Let&#8217;s just agree that VMW is no angel.</p>
<p>Eric &#8211; IT pros are starting to choose the underlying virtual infrastructure based on the workload. They&#8217;re finding some workloads are better (for many reasons, not just technical) with different underlying hypervisors or streaming/app virt technology. So history is repeating itself. Just as customers have always chose the workload first, then the OS &#8211; they&#8217;re doing the same for virtual infrastructure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roidude</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/#comment-209</link>
		<dc:creator>Roidude</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:13:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/?p=981#comment-209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Eric,

Microsoft, of course, has VMware squarely in its sights and attacks it in everything from its Web site to advertisements to even its ROI calculator. Citrix recently started advertising and posting comparisons on XenDesktop vs View, but they appear to be done in a professional manner to me.  I am not aware of any direct VMware attacks against the competition other than narrowly focused rebuttals (excepting the instance a few years ago when it used the power of public sentiment to help persuade Micrsoft to chanage its VMotion killing licensing policies), and certainly nothing trash talking. Do you have specific examples I&#039;m missing, or is your article really aimed at Microsoft?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eric,</p>
<p>Microsoft, of course, has VMware squarely in its sights and attacks it in everything from its Web site to advertisements to even its ROI calculator. Citrix recently started advertising and posting comparisons on XenDesktop vs View, but they appear to be done in a professional manner to me.  I am not aware of any direct VMware attacks against the competition other than narrowly focused rebuttals (excepting the instance a few years ago when it used the power of public sentiment to help persuade Micrsoft to chanage its VMotion killing licensing policies), and certainly nothing trash talking. Do you have specific examples I&#8217;m missing, or is your article really aimed at Microsoft?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Siebert</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/#comment-208</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Siebert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/?p=981#comment-208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yeah there is an occasional brawl as tempers heat up but after its over they&#039;re all good friends again. Everyone fights occasionally even if they do get along, I challenge you to show me a husband and wife that has never fought in some way. Competition is great but the ugly mud-slinging pretty much sucks and customers do not win at all from that. And just because you use one vendor today doesn&#039;t mean you&#039;ll be using them forever, it&#039;s also possible you may be using more than one vendor at some point. Do you want a separate management systems for every hypervisor in your datacenter?  Co-operation is also needed to ensure standards like the OVF and virtual disk file formats. Right now all the vendors are doing are slamming each other which does nobody any good. There is no need for anyone to slow down, just don&#039;t try and run your competitors off the road is all.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah there is an occasional brawl as tempers heat up but after its over they&#8217;re all good friends again. Everyone fights occasionally even if they do get along, I challenge you to show me a husband and wife that has never fought in some way. Competition is great but the ugly mud-slinging pretty much sucks and customers do not win at all from that. And just because you use one vendor today doesn&#8217;t mean you&#8217;ll be using them forever, it&#8217;s also possible you may be using more than one vendor at some point. Do you want a separate management systems for every hypervisor in your datacenter?  Co-operation is also needed to ensure standards like the OVF and virtual disk file formats. Right now all the vendors are doing are slamming each other which does nobody any good. There is no need for anyone to slow down, just don&#8217;t try and run your competitors off the road is all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FPFL</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/#comment-207</link>
		<dc:creator>FPFL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/?p=981#comment-207</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hmmm. I disagree with pretty much every point you&#039;ve made. 

We also, apparently are not talking about professional american baseball, the MLB, where there is a bench clearing brawl month after month, year after year... 

&quot;Hey folks, look at all that mutual respect between the pitcher and the batter rolling around in the dirt whacking each other! Here comes the rest of the team to continue this on field Woodstock Revival!!!&quot;   

More to the point - Who says everyone doesn&#039;t win today just because you have to choose between products? That competition IS the win. Without it we&#039;d have stagnation of features and price as the IT market has had many times in the past. 

x86 virtualization is in its infancy and &quot;working together&quot; in software as often as not means slowing down to not leave anyone behind. This is not about feeding the poor, its about innovation. So why should anyone slow down? I don&#039;t see the real win there. 

There isn&#039;t today nor will there ever be just one vendor running the whole market whether they compete or work together. So even your foundational concern seems off.  The market is just too big for that. 

I&#039;ve chosen the market leader and I&#039;d argue I&#039;m seeing whatever your &quot;benefits of virtualization as a whole&quot; are already. There&#039;s nothing the other vendors have I&#039;m wanting...so &quot;interoperability&quot; doesn&#039;t get me anything but product update delays. 

-P]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm. I disagree with pretty much every point you&#8217;ve made. </p>
<p>We also, apparently are not talking about professional american baseball, the MLB, where there is a bench clearing brawl month after month, year after year&#8230; </p>
<p>&#8220;Hey folks, look at all that mutual respect between the pitcher and the batter rolling around in the dirt whacking each other! Here comes the rest of the team to continue this on field Woodstock Revival!!!&#8221;   </p>
<p>More to the point &#8211; Who says everyone doesn&#8217;t win today just because you have to choose between products? That competition IS the win. Without it we&#8217;d have stagnation of features and price as the IT market has had many times in the past. </p>
<p>x86 virtualization is in its infancy and &#8220;working together&#8221; in software as often as not means slowing down to not leave anyone behind. This is not about feeding the poor, its about innovation. So why should anyone slow down? I don&#8217;t see the real win there. </p>
<p>There isn&#8217;t today nor will there ever be just one vendor running the whole market whether they compete or work together. So even your foundational concern seems off.  The market is just too big for that. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve chosen the market leader and I&#8217;d argue I&#8217;m seeing whatever your &#8220;benefits of virtualization as a whole&#8221; are already. There&#8217;s nothing the other vendors have I&#8217;m wanting&#8230;so &#8220;interoperability&#8221; doesn&#8217;t get me anything but product update delays. </p>
<p>-P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sbramfitt</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/#comment-206</link>
		<dc:creator>Sbramfitt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/?p=981#comment-206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very good point, and something that needed to be asked a [B]long [/B]time ago. Unfortunately, with the momentum already achieved I don&#039;t see any likelihood of let up in the race to the bottom.  

It doesn&#039;t help of course that there are so many non-vendor run blogs etc. that follow (and profit from) this partisan approach.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good point, and something that needed to be asked a [B]long [/B]time ago. Unfortunately, with the momentum already achieved I don&#8217;t see any likelihood of let up in the race to the bottom.  </p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t help of course that there are so many non-vendor run blogs etc. that follow (and profit from) this partisan approach.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick Vanover</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/virtualization-vendors-what-happened-to-good-sportsmanship/#comment-205</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick Vanover</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:42:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/virtualization-pro/?p=981#comment-205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unfortunately - virtualization isn&#039;t the only space where this occurs. Not to name any examples, but some storage vendors are a little tough in this regard.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately &#8211; virtualization isn&#8217;t the only space where this occurs. Not to name any examples, but some storage vendors are a little tough in this regard.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
