

Microsoft Hyper-V Leaves Linux Out In The Cold 212
whitehartstag writes to mention that Microsoft has announced their new Hyper-V as feature-complete. Unfortunately the list of supported systems is disappointingly short. "No offense to SUSE Enterprise Server crowd, but only providing SUSE support in Hyper-V is a huge mistake. By not supporting Red Hat, Fedora, CentOS, and BSD, Microsoft is telling us Hyper-V is a Microsoft only technology. More Mt. Redmond, Microsoft center of the universe thinking. That's disappointing. Sure, if you are a Microsoft only shop, Hyper-V will be an option for virtualization. But so will VMware and XenServer. But if you run a mixed shop, Hyper-V won't solve your problems alone — you'll have to also add VMware or Xen to your virtualized data center portfolio. Or just go with VMware and Xen and forego Hyper-V."
WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Par for the course. (Score:4, Insightful)
Buy something that works and screw it up while breaking everything else.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell's business model has blown through $40 billion in three years. Looks like a loser to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell's business model has blown through $40 billion in three years. Looks like a loser to me.
Re:Par for the course. (Score:5, Interesting)
Given that Hyper-V doesn't actually support virtualization except under Microsoft's shroud (Novell is part of it now), I see no way that it is going to actually do anything other than try to lock people into yet more Microsoft proprietary incompatible bullshit.
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Insightful)
Aren't they supposed to dominate a market before cutting off interoperability (like IE for mac)?
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Informative)
Stop letting off hot air on the dumbass article. See installing fedora core 8 on hyper-v [msdn.com]. Even Ubuntu server is being used by people on HyperV. SUSE is supported in the sense of calling up MS's support desk and talking to them about it. But Linux distributions work just fine. This is just MS's way of telling people that they're on their own if they try other distributions(this is usually true for Linux servers anyway).
Misinformed blogger makes a flamebait article that reads like ex-lover's childish rant complete with doomsday threats and with a inflammatory headline, the 'editor' doesn't do any editorial work and the hundreds of misguided comments below will just bash on MS and earn insightful, informative and interesting mod points. Also, this will be repeated in the comments in other articles as the gospel truth because most people don't even RTFA, forget about actually seeing if there is a grain of truth in it. In other words, just another day on Slashdot.
If you really want to know about Hyper V, go here [technet.com].
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Insightful)
In the Microsoft world, "unsupported" means literally "we do not support this." i.e. "if you call us for support on this, we won't answer your question." There are a million things that Microsoft doesn't support, but still work perfectly-- Microsoft doesn't support typing in an IP address to Windows Remote Desktop Client, to use a particularly strange example I came across a few years ago, and yet it works fine and always has.
I don't know what Linux people think "unsupported" means, but they have the wrong idea whatever it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I agree with you that most of this is FUD, the fact that the other distros "work just fine" is irrelevant. "Not supported" means, to the enterprise world, not doable. Meaning, Microsoft VM ain't gonna happen in the big shops.
I think that there is a valid overall point to this submission, regardless of its hyperbole. It is that Microsoft's arrogance to think that they don't have to support other distros is exactly a fall back to their old ways. And this time, giving it away for free or making it a part of the Windows operating system isn't going to save Hyper-V like it did to save so many of their other products. For this fight of the hypervisor (essentially the new OS of the data center), VMWare has all the market share and lock in.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It is that Microsoft's arrogance to think that they don't have to support other distros is exactly a fall back to their old ways.
Arrogance?
Supporting a platform is a two-way street y'know. If RHEL works smoothly on Hyper-V it's because of the effort Novell and MS have put in.
There will still be corner cases where things don't work. It's impossible to nail them without having Red Hat on board working with MS to do that -- they know their own OS better than MS, they have the test automation etc., and know their scenarios. But Red Hat won't work with MS on this, because even if they wanted to they'd get crucified by the Open Source com
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Insightful)
If a user cannot call the Hyper-V tech support regarding an issue they are having running RHEL on Hyper-V and receive a proper response other than "we don't support that," then it is effectively useless and cannot form any part of that company's virtualization strategy. It may work just fine, but there are many companies with specific corporate policies prohibiting use of unsupported software, and in some cases, running into a serious problem with unsupported software can be seen as a violation of Sarbanes-Oxley and may be construed as negligence.
Whether it works OK or not with other linux distributions is irrelevant. Without real support, it's a non-starter for most businesses. That's not MS-bashing or Linux-fanboyism, it's just plain fiscal responsibility.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Right, but the only other option available to Microsoft is to 'support' all those Linux and who-knows-what-else distributions at an enormous price, when it brings very little benefit to 99% of their customers. It simp
Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (Score:5, Interesting)
You're not correct in assuming that MS can take the lead in supporting RHEL (and other linuxes) on Hyper-V.
To support something, you need to test it thoroughtly and be sure yourself that it works. Then at least when a customer calls with an issue, you know that their scenario is supposed to work.
Now Novell has been partnering with MS for about 2 years now. One of the things they will have done, is to run the gamut of their test automation on Hyper-V virtualized instances of SUSE. Based on this they will give MS the 'green-light' saying 'you are ok to support SuSE on Hyper-V'.
RH has no such working relationship with MS. They may want to (I have no idea), but based on the community reaction to Novell's partnership, I doubt they would enter into one even if they wanted to. Without that, how is MS supposed to validate RHEL?
Re: (Score:2)
They support only 1 single product. (Score:2)
The fact is that almost any other commercial company, is offering support for at least 3 Linux platforms.
A very high number of commercial Linux application is tested and supported for at least RedHat, SuSE and Ubuntu.
(for a concrete example similar to microsoft's product, have a look at the list of platforms officially su
supported != usable but.... (Score:3, Insightful)
If i look at the release notes, even fewer OS are supported:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=3ED582F0-F844-40BA-B692-230845AF1149&displaylang=en [microsoft.com]
What you often see is that virtualisation is used to put old application that are only reliable on old but unsupported OS (like windows 2000 or NT 4.0) run on virtualized hardware.
So i bet they the list of operating OS will be longer. ( win98, NT4.0, windows 2000 server, old SP1 X
Re: (Score:2)
Please make that happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just curious, but isn't virtualization basically the interpretation of assembly instruction from one architecture to another
No it isn't, that's CPU emulation. Virtualization doesn't enable running software for different architectures than the native one.
so that it can be run in near-native or native formats (meaning little to no translation) to the CPU of the physical hardware?
Interpretation meaning little to no translation? I'm sorry, but that does not make sense. Interpretation basically is translation.
The old arrogance. (Score:2, Insightful)
It Could Be Desperation... (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe it isn't arrogance that caused Microsoft to go this current route. It could be they are trying to force Linux out of their (presumed) territory. It could be an act of desperation as Microsoft watches the world move to open source operating systems and applications. These new Eee PC platforms that cost only a hundred bucks or so will be pulling the rug out from under Microsoft as they have to forgo profit just to stay in the game. And as finances in the USA tighten up, there will be even more pressure to leave the expensive proprietary closed source world behind in favor of the open and free siren song of Linux.
Priced Microsoft products recently? It's unbelievable -- especially when you can get most all functionality for free. And Linux is now much friendlier than it was before. While I am a Linux fan-boy, the facts are what they are and Microsoft is just as capable of seeing it as we are.
And any business setting that wants/needs to maintain some MS compatibility ought to look at Codeweaver's Crossover Office. I use it here and it lets me run Microsoft Office apps under Linux with no virtualization needed. They install and run fine. Same for a lot of other software that supposedly is Windows-only.
Re: (Score:2)
The old saw (Score:2, Insightful)
You guys said the same exact thing ten years ago... and MS still doesn't need to interoperate.
Care to make a wager you will repeat the same statement ten years from now?
From the OP:
Re:The old saw (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not against having Microsoft as a choice. I just think people should realize WHAT they're choosing when they choose Microsoft, which is basically becoming their bitch and paying for the privilege.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So, it looks like the old "We don't have to interoperate" arrogance is still going strong at Microsoft. Let's see if they still think that way in another ten years.
Then I guess our decision to use VMWare is going to be a good one.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
it's worked well so far (Score:2)
>arrogance is still going strong at Microsoft.
Really, why would Microsoft spend money on Linux integration with companies that they don't have a relationship with, like redhat? Why are you getting pissed at them for doing exactly what is in their own business interests?
>Let's see if they still think that way in another ten years.
Well, they thought that way 10 years ago, and then 10 years before that, and every business on the planet thinks t
Let's not jump the gun... (Score:5, Insightful)
Shouldn't any distribution based on a kernel build that doesn't require anything more or significantly different from the underlying hardware, relative to SUSE E.S. work just as well?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Put another way:
If you have a problem with another distribution under Hyper-V, and Microsoft is refractory about support, shouldn't you be able to replicate the problem under SUSE and make them fix THAT?
Decades of experience is not jumping the gun. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would you go to the trouble when other solutions just work? Trusting Microsoft to run Linux ... there is no propper analogy for such a stupid thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Let's not jump the gun... (Score:4, Informative)
Novell should expect to have their code rejected (Score:4, Insightful)
Novell have stated that their main focus is now 'interoperability' via the Microsoft patents that have been granted to them. Novell's corporate culture has no compelling reason to avoid implementing MS patents; quite the opposite in fact. Their execs are making increasingly flaky, shift statements WRT patents as well.
I don't think it odd at all that they are mistrusted.
Re: (Score:2)
SuSe is currently the only supported Linux distribution, but support for Red Hat is coming in the future (according to the readme for the Linux integration components).
The Integration Components are part
Re: (Score:2)
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Overblown (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
As for other OS guests on Hyper-V, that depends too... sometimes MS finds 'unsupported options' that basically mean your favourite OS doesn't work, similar to how Vista wouldn;t run on VMware for some really obscure reason. (until VMware worked around the issue, that is).
Re:Overblown (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
funny tag (Score:5, Funny)
Little early (Score:2)
bullet vs foot (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Then why not support the largest server distro? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The omission of RHEL is probably punishment for Red Hat not signing their patent agreement.
shooting selves in foot (Score:4, Insightful)
You'd think they'd WANT to support everything, and do it well, so that people would actually *want* to choose them as the host os.
Stupid.
Re:shooting selves in foot (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft does not support the piracy of its software, but people still do it with out microsoft's support.
The fact taht they mention one distibution speaks wonders for them. At the same time they are saying you can run linux, but you didn't hear it from us.
If your running linux, support is something you do yourself most of the time anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
True
Re:shooting selves in foot (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Have a VMWare cluster setup with vmotion and you want to upgrade hosts. Slap in another 3i box, pre-configured, turn it on and let VMWare rebalance the hosts.
Re: (Score:2)
MS sees anything but Windows as a threat to their existence. But they can't figure out how to fight a community. They do know how to fight and beat a company, though. So their plan is to reduce Linux to a single company, then deal with that company.
Re: (Score:2)
This game here is to play on the virtual mach
Ummm... Yeah? And? (Score:2)
My GOD! The sky... It's gone all... BLUE !
Seriously... It surprises me far more that they included SuSe, than the rest that they left out.
Maybe the will work. (Score:5, Insightful)
Novell probably agreed to help Microsoft support Suse Enterprise. Redhat isn't playing nicley with Microsoft so Microsoft isn't going to play nice with Redhat.
Fedora? Not a chance. Fedora is cutting edge code. I have no idea why people use this for servers when there are better distros to use on a server.
CentOS? Well this is a better distro to use on server than Fedora but it is Redhat without the support and price tag.
Finally BSD? BSD is dieing..... Just kidding. I just don't think Microsoft feels that it is worth the time.
What I didn't see is if Solaris is on the list.
So buy VMWare or use Xen folks.
Really if you want to be a Microsoft shop and run Linux then you now have an option of a Microsoft blessed Linux. If you are not a "Microsoft" shop then you can use VMWare, Xen, or VirtuaBox and have a lot more options.
I guess on the bright side they are supporting a Linux distro. It could have been a Windows only vm system.
BSD (Score:2)
I figure it this way: Microsoft steals every other idea that comes out of Apple, what's one more?
Of course, they'll have to screw up BSD's guts so it's compatible with the vulnerabilities
Or something like that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hyper-V is what now? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hyper-V is what now? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hyper-V is what now? (Score:5, Informative)
"
Introducing Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V
Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V, the next-generation hypervisor-based server virtualization technology, allows you to make the best use of your server hardware investments by consolidating multiple server roles as separate virtual machines (VMs) running on a single physical machine. With Hyper-V, you can also efficiently run multiple different operating systems--Windows, Linux, and others--in parallel, on a single server, and fully leverage the power of x64 computing.
Key Features of Hyper-V:
* New and Improved Architecture. New 64-bit micro-kernelized hypervisor architecture enables Hyper-V to provide a broad array of device support methods and improved performance and security.
* Broad OS Support. Broad support for simultaneously running different types of operating systems, including 32-bit and 64-bit systems across different server platforms, such as Windows, Linux, and others.
* Symmetric Multiprocessors (SMP) Support. Ability to support up to four multiple processors in a virtual machine environment enables you to take full advantage of multi-threaded applications in a virtual machine.
* Network Load Balancing. Hyper-V includes new virtual switch capabilities. This means virtual machines can be easily configured to run with Windows Network Load Balancing (NLB) Service to balance load across virtual machines on different servers.
* Hardware Sharing Architecture. With the new virtual service provider/virtual service client (VSP/VSC) architecture, Hyper-V provides improved access and utilization of core resources, such as disk, networking, and video.
* Quick Migration. Hyper-V enables you to rapidly migrate a running virtual machine from one physical host system to another with minimal downtime, leveraging familiar high-availability capabilities of Windows Server and System Center management tools.
* Virtual Machine Snapshot. Hyper-V provides the ability to take snapshots of a running virtual machine so you can easily revert to a previous state, and improve the overall backup and recoverability solution.
* Scalability. With support for multiple processors and cores at the host level and improved memory access within virtual machines, you can now vertically scale your virtualization environment to support a large number of virtual machines within a given host and continue to leverage quick migration for scalability across multiple hosts.
* Extensible. Standards-based Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) interfaces and APIs in Hyper-V enable independent software vendors and developers to quickly build custom tools, utilities, and enhancements for the virtualization platform.
"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Define 'Suppported' (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/hyperv-faq.aspx [microsoft.com]
Hook Patches (Score:3, Informative)
So, anyone using the SuSE patch can run under this, but at the cost of loosing their supplied kernel.
Microsoft is using old rules in a new game (Score:2)
For people who understand and appreciate the value of virtualization, I cannot imagine why someone would want to run a server on a Microsoft host of any kind whether it's VMWare on Windows or Hyper-V. If Microsoft would like people to trust that this platform would be reliable, they should build it on an entirely new kernel or at least one that's very stripped down that will support ONLY the purpose of running VMs. A Hyper-V host doesn't need Solitaire running o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The installation process does not install games and picture/music playing software by default. You need to select the "Desktop Experience", which does install this kind of software.
The point, I think, is thus... (Score:2)
... Microsoft doesn't need to corner the "we've already got a brazillion servers and we need virtualization technology now!" group. I think Microsoft can still very successfully leverage this against small Microsoft-only shops. Small business with 50 employees and 8 servers? Cut your IT admin staff down to two or maybe even one! Pay us $x,xxx once and stop paying those lackey's $xx,xxx per year plus benefits!
In my experience, most small business *don't* have more than Microsoft products, and if they
Re: (Score:2)
Windows Server 2008 with Hyper-V licenses allow you to run a certain number of guest instances of Windows using that
Troll article (Score:5, Informative)
Hyper-V is not a full fledged cpu/hardware emulator like VMWare and is more of a hypervisor which needs support from the client operating system (like Xen which they have a licencing deal with). This is because there are some hardware x86 instructions which conflict each other when run on two operating systems at the same time. So, there actually needs to be some client side code that needs to plug into the Linux kernel code. Right now, I guess only Novell has it in as they are MS's partner.
There could be several licensing problems with third party patents and licenses before releasing it as GPL. Or, it might not have been released now because Hyper-V has already been delayed a lot and the team must be in a hurry to push out the beta instead of testing it against every distribution of Linux in the wild.
Last of all, the headline. Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10 SP1 isn't Linux? The headline should've said only SUSE Linux Enterprise Server was supported. Instead, we have a inflammatory headline designed to rake in the hits from angry visitors. And it worked.
Re:Troll article (Score:5, Funny)
I've been running Ubuntu Server using Hyper-V since 2008 came out without any problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
False. Hyper-V works with arbitrary guest operating systems (that is, it provides eumlated hardware to run most x86 operating systems). However, it operates better with hypervisor-aware OSes - much like Xen.
So? (Score:2)
Besides, if you're anything but a pure MS shop, you're not going to be using windows as the host OS anyway.
wtfishyperv? (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
wtfishyperv (Score:2, Funny)
Tags, no spaces no caps (Score:2)
This story is seriously What The Fishy Perv!
-
Fine with me! (Score:2)
Why should they support linux? (Score:2)
Its not like we don't have other choices that do, like VMware, Xen, Qemu....
Re: (Score:2)
Guess WHAT? (Score:2, Funny)
and:
THERE IS NO EASTER BUNNY.
Were you expecting they would release it open source?
Best of both worlds (Score:2)
I kind of assume that SuSE was partnering for the Hyper-V support, and that it's really SuSE's job to push the support to the rest of the community. Seeing as it is SuSE's distro and not Microsoft's, and that SuSE is the one bound by the GPL and the touchy feely morality of the Linux community.
(disclaimer: didn't RTFA)
Compatibility and support (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
VirtualPC = Microsoft's old, crappy virtualization software
Hyper-V != VirtualPC
Re: (Score:2)
They will also officially support RHEL 5 in the future according to the "Integration Components for Linux Read Me". This should (at least) provide support for CentOS.
Re: (Score:2)
http://vmware.com/pdf/GuestOS_guide.pdf [vmware.com]