Microsoft to Work with Xen on Virtualization

suso writes "Microsoft has released a statement to the press, saying that they are to work with Xensource on making Windows Server work with Xen through Microsoft's own hypervisor technology." Coverage available from Reuters as well. From that article: " As a result of the collaboration, the next version of Windows Server, code-named 'Longhorn,' will provide customers with a virtualisation system that promises to help run both Windows and Linux on the same machine more cost-effectively. Microsoft said it expects to conduct a public trial of Windows Server virtualisation by the end of this year and to release a commercial version of the software within 180 days of the date when Windows Server 'Longhorn' is released. Microsoft aims to release 'Longhorn' by the end of 2007, it said."

But, what about the opposite.

[CaptnMArk]

Will Windows run nicely under Xen (and also VMware)

That's what I want.

In other words...

[MartinG]

Microsoft plans to catch up with Linux when it comes to running a Xen host.

This will of course benefit Microsoft because without this, people who wanted to run both Linux and Windows on the same hardware using Xen had to use Linux as the host. (they also of course have to have hardware capable of full virtualisation)

Actually, this _may_ swing things in favour of running windows as the host because for older hardware Xen requires a modified guest. Running linux in Xen on windows allows this because xen modified linux is widely available. Microsoft in the other hand have not and probably will not release Xen-guest enabled windows, despite claiming to support interoperability. It's actually Microsoft style interoperability they want, and as many of us know that only works one way.

Is this how MS will battle Linux?

[pesc]

So MS realises that not all people will migrate from Linux to Windows. So should they offer a MS Linux?

Nah!

Instead they will offer a hypervisor. And make sure that most Linux distributions run fine under that. To help you make the decision to run Linux under a MS hypervisor, the hypervisor will offer better access to some hardware (wireless, modems, 3D graphics, DRM stuff, etc) that has no OS drivers.

Once people get used to running Linux under Windows, MS has a half victory. Now they can control how well Linux solutions run compared to running "natively on Windows".

*shudder*

Gasp! Cooperation, but MS's hypervisor under Xen?

[Proudrooster]

This is interesting from the standpoint that Xen is a hypervisor. So what does exactly does "between Xen(TM)-enabled Linux and the new Microsoft® Windows® hypervisor technology-based Windows Server® virtualization". Does this mean that the Xen hypervisor will boot a MS hypervisor or am I missing something? Shouldn't MS strive to make Longhorn a proper Xen-aware guest O/S? Maybe this is just marketing speak, but it doesn't sound correct.

Re:Gasp! Cooperation, but MS's hypervisor under Xe

[Korgan]

Nono... Its the other way around. The Linux community can now make the GNU/Linux kernel, with Xen technology, Hypervisor aware. This allows Windows to host Linux based platforms much easier.

Think of it in terms of getting the Xen folks to make sure that the next Linux kernel works 100% inside "VirtualPC 2007" by allowing them direct access to the Hypervisor subsystem of a Windows Longhorn machine.

The intention being that Windows Longhorn will host a Linux based server better than VMWare. This forces VMWares hand significantly. Its one thing to give away a product for free. This is a whole 'nother level.

Given Bill Gates is a poker lover, you could almost call this is a raise and a call.

Re:Microsoft worked with Citrix on thin clients...

[NSIM]

Hmm, as a model of how Microsoft kills it's competition, I don't think I'd pick Citrix who seem to be doing quite nicely with a market cap of $6+B

Re:And why not?

[TheRaven64]

This is not the first time Microsoft has collaborated with Xen. Xen was developed at Cambridge, which has strong ties with Microsoft. The Xen team was granted access to the Windows XP (I think, possibly 2K) source code, and ported the kernel to run on a previous version of Xen. They were not, of course, allowed to distribute these changes.

It's all a bit academic now, since Xen can (or will soon be able to; I haven't checked the status of Xen for a while) run Windows on any chip with virtualisation extensions anyway. This is just Microsoft trying to ensure that Windows can run as Domain 0, ensuring that you need one more Windows license for something that NetBSD would do better.

Yeay, rah, virtualization. Get your snorkels on.

[postbigbang]

It's like this:

1) Microsoft announces 'free' Virtual PC for free. Yawn. We're already down the street on this one. Yes, instances of Virtual Server are cool. Move along, please.
2) VMWare announces 'free' VMWare Server-- a while after their other free stuff is announced; a nice embarrassment for Microsoft, who lags miserably here.
3) SUSE comes out with Xen; proving once again that it's as fragile as any code made with toothpicks. Really: this stuff explodes into little bits if you're not careful.
4) Microsoft, not to be out done, and needing to mod their kernel to accomodate Xen's odd functionality, claims future support.

See a trend here?

Xen and Microsoft

[requim]

It should be noted, since no one else seems to have brought up the point, but Xen was originally partly funded by Microsoft. The original history of Xen had it running on both Red Hat Linux and Windows XP. IIRC They used the Shared Source program available to educators to access the source and at the time XP was enabled as a Xen hypervisor client, I don't believe it could act as the hypervisor at the time though.

I quote from the xen development website: A port of Windows XP was developed for an earlier version of Xen, but is not available for release due to licence restrictions. [cam.ac.uk]

Re:Doesn't help much...

[plague3106]

I really prefer Windows Server 2000...and if I can't get that, then the next best thing is 2003.

Server 2k3 is far more advanced that 2000, if you can't see that in yoru blind paranoia, I really don't know what to tell you.

Longhorn is right out.

You haven't even seen it yet, and you're deciding against it? So instead of the best tool for the job, its 'whatever fits my personal beliefs.'

Then there's also the matter of Windows Genuine Spyware Disadvantage(TM), which you don't have installed on the old OSes.

Funny, as you don't have to install it. It comes as a Automatic update, I uncheck the box to tell it not to install, then I check another box telling me not to bother me again. Haven't heard from it since.

Re:Well, this seems pretty obvious.

[blogchan]

What does XenSource get out of this deal ? One of the following:

• Cash
• Publicity (which helps an ailing company that recently fired all its executives and has struggled to make a dent on the market even after a full year)
• Leverage when pushing their VMI interface into linux kernels, over VMwares interface
• More importantly, behind the scenes deal to add a VMI interface into Windows, along with the licensing agreement. Someone else qutoed from the Xen website that "A port of Windows XP was developed for an earlier version of Xen, but is not available for release due to licence restrictions". To get around antitrust issues, MS will make the interface public eventually, but this wont give VMware enough time to hook into this.

Re:virtualize linux under windows?

[phayes]

Windows also has problems entering hibernation mode on workstations using more than 1Gb of memory. [microsoft.com] To diminish our electric bills, we have taken to hibernating our workstations when leaving for the evening. On workstations with over 1Gb of memory this no longer possible once any serious work has taken place and the memory has become fragmented. When running windows inside Vmware under Linux this isn't a problem.

Re:Well, this seems pretty obvious.

[jbellows_20]

Microsoft has been involved with Xen for quite some time. Anyone familar with the Xen project will remember that with Xen 1.x, the researchers were able to run Windows paravirtualized. This could not happen without Microsoft's help. This statement is Microsoft now saying that they will begin using their investment from a few years ago.

Re:virtualize linux under windows?

[phayes]

Microsoft refuses to supply the hotfix if Windows is an OEM installation. They say call the OEM. After spending 8 hours on the phone, I've found it easier to install Linux+Vmware. This bug has been out for over 9 months. With the growing number of systems using more than 1Gb, you'd think Microsoft would have elevated it from a limited issue hotfix to a patch downloadable uing windows update. You'd be wrong...