Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Hyper-V Leaves Linux Out In The Cold

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the some-things-never-change dept.

Microsoft 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."

cancel ×

212 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (5, Funny)

mwilliamson (672411) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822558)

Microsoft so totally missed the virtualization boat that came by a decade or so ago... I'd liken buying a virtualization product from Microsoft about with buying a vehicle from Merrill Lynch.

Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822690)

They own Connectix, which was one of two companies offering a decent desktop virtualisation package a few years ago. They also got a good x86 emulator in the deal.

Par for the course. (1, Troll)

Mactrope (1256892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822796)

Buy something that works and screw it up while breaking everything else.

Re:Par for the course. (3, Insightful)

robertjw (728654) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822858)

Buy something that works and screw it up while breaking everything else.

Hell of a business model, isn't it?

Re:Par for the course. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822956)

Oh god. Since this is slashdot then microsoft automaticly sucks. Check.

I can't speak for hyper-v but Microsoft did a great job with virtual server and it's FREE... but then so is vmware server. And this is coming from someone who loves VMware and has been using it from day one.

Re:Par for the course. (2)

Mactrope (1256892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823050)

Hell's business model has blown through $40 billion in three years. Looks like a loser to me.

Re:Par for the course. (1)

robertjw (728654) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823382)

Hell's business model has blown through $40 billion in three years. Looks like a loser to me.

Maybe, but it's made Gates a LOT more money than that over the years - and it's always been the same.

Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (4, Insightful)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822734)

It also shows they're out of sync with the current server setups that people have. The number of Microsoft-only shops are dwindling, and they're purposely leaving themselves out of the mixed market.

Aren't they supposed to dominate a market before cutting off interoperability (like IE for mac)?

Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (1)

meregistered (895132) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823310)

Hey mwilliamson

They bought a company... That's what they know about virtualization. And it's taken them about 5 to 6 years to re-work it into something they can really market.

My main concern is that, right now, Microsoft is making their virtualization software very cheap and easy to get for Microsoft shops. In the company I work for VMware is out, for that one simple reason.

Even though we will get limited benefit from M$s version and VMWare is a much better solution...

Marketing wins every time. That's the one thing M$ does well....

Re:WTF does Microsoft know about virtualization? (4, Informative)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823358)

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? (4, Insightful)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823402)

Stop letting off hot air on the dumbass article. See installing fedora core 8 on hyper-v . 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).

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.

No linux availability? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822572)

Shocking!

The old arrogance. (2, Insightful)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822574)

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.

It Could Be Desperation... (3, Insightful)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822940)

I don't see why the parent was modded as flamebait. I think it is a valid observation or else Microsoft would have done better at interoperability.

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:It Could Be Desperation... (1)

ehrichweiss (706417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823208)

Is there a new version of Crossover Office? I don't remember the last version I used but it wouldn't install any versions of Dreamweaver past version 8, IIRC. If they've worked past this then I might give them a go, again. I have to use DW so I'm a mixed shop until they either get CO working, *or* they port DW to Linux(which I hear Adobe is becoming more open to that idea but not quite yet ready to take the plunge).

The old saw (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822948)

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.

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:

"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."


Yes... because it's all about choice... so having MS be one of the choices is SO FREAKING HORRIBLE!!! OMG!!!

As usual, the "all about choice" crowd proves that they really mean all about choice, so long as none of your choices dares to be Microsoft. IMO, you guys should be happy they provided official support for anything at all.

Re:The old saw (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22823138)

Aw, did somebody call your baby ugly?

Re:The old arrogance. (2, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823330)

Interesting. That's what people said 10 years ago...

Let's not jump the gun... (4, Insightful)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822588)

Are they only supporting SUSE E.S. as an ongoing policy? Or is it just the only one they've certified as of the first release?

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:Let's not jump the gun... (0, Flamebait)

P2PDaemon (723609) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822606)

Let's not jump the gun?

You must be new here... :)

Re:Let's not jump the gun... (2, Insightful)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822638)

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?

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. (4, Insightful)

Mactrope (1256892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822766)

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:Decades of experience is not jumping the gun. (1)

Thaelon (250687) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823094)

You mean like the fox guarding the hen house?

Re:Let's not jump the gun... (4, Informative)

bguthro (136509) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822840)

SuSe posted their patches [xensource.com] to the Xen-devel list mid-feb. If other distros want to take their patches, they would be able to run paravirtualized in Windows. The patches met with some resistance from the Xen developers - so if they get into upstream development remains to be seen..

So? (5, Insightful)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822592)

Microsoft can choose to support whichever companies that they want. AFAIK, only Novell has signed the Munich Agreement with Microsoft, so it makes sense for Microsoft to exclude the others. At a recent Launch event for Windows Workstation 2008, Visual Studio 2008 and SQL 2008, I saw only Novell was present (with a large booth) showing off Linux products and virtualized Windows environments. (Though it was funny listening to Steve B. try and pronounce SUSE.)

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822738)

It only makes sense for them if you consider their obvious strategy of trying to undermine other Linux distributions except Novell. If you look at it from their customers perspective, most of whom run Red Hat and not Suse, it's not a smart move, since they are being told to look elsewhere if they want a supported product.

Luckily there are lots of other virtualization vendors with much better solutions, so its really not that big a deal. I'm surprised it is getting this much press.

Re:So? (0, Redundant)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822812)

Microsoft can choose to support whichever companies that they want.
And we can choose to point out how limited their products are as a result. So?

only Novell has signed the Munich Agreement with Microsoft, so it makes sense for Microsoft to exclude the others.
And most people don't use Suse, so it makes sense for them to exclude Microsoft's Hyper-V in favor of, say, VMWare. Glad to see we're all on the same page here.

Re:So? (1)

sniperu (585466) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822822)

Is virtualisation such a big thing for SMBs ? I think not. And big shops have separate stuff for Windows and *nix, so the *nix team will choose whatever suites them (Xen, VMWare) and the Windows team is going to do the same. But when you have Hyper-V as free with the SO and VMWare costing a s*it load of money it's going to be really hard to justify VMWare in the budget.... And this my friends is why Hyper-V will be a hit.

Re:So? (1)

sltd (1182933) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822886)

AFAIK, only Novell has signed the Munich Agreement with Microsoft, so it makes sense for Microsoft to exclude the others.

I'm pretty sure Turbolinux also signed a similar agreement. I'm guessing SLES is the only Server distro that's covered.

(Though it was funny listening to Steve B. try and pronounce SUSE.)

I take it SUSE isn't pronounced with throwing a chair?

Overblown (3, Informative)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822594)

What a storm in a teacup. Will anyone except Microsoft shops want to run Microsoft's virtualization product? Will they care that Debian isn't a 'supported platform', whatever that means? It's not as if other Linux versions won't run; just you won't be able to get Microsoft's famously good technical support to help with setting them up.

Re:Overblown (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822698)

It kinda depends how much it'll cost. At the moment we run Linux servers as VM hosts, simply because buying Windows 2003 to run VMware on would cost us £500 a pop. Linux has proven to be stable, and works well.

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 (3, Insightful)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822774)

Will anyone except Microsoft shops want to run Microsoft's virtualization product
A lot of companies have a mixed environment for whatever reason. A company I used to work for had 90% of its production servers as CentOS, but one of the servers used Windows Server with SQL Server. Having a uniform environment is great if you can manage it, but a lot can't. If they want to use virtualization for some of those lesser used servers, they're going to have to turn to another platform. Releasing enterprise-level software that doesn't serve most enterprises doesn't seem like a smart move on Microsoft's part.

Re:Overblown (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22823144)

My company is a MS Gold Certified Partner, and we could care less about 90% of the crap they make.

MS doesn't even care about their partners. They are not making software for us. Or for the consumer. They only make it for their marketing department.

We get every piece of software they make for free. We run Server, SQL, XP, and Office. And even Office is optional given Thunderbird and Open Office.

My 3 year old single core laptop with 1gb of RAM runs far faster on Ubuntu than my DX10 overclocked dual core box with 4gb of ram runs XP. And we won't even go into the Vista debacle here.

The faster their market share goes down, the happier I am.

Re:Overblown (1)

lukas84 (912874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823370)

Why are you working with products you dislike?

funny tag (4, Funny)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822596)

not knowing what hyper-v is, wtfishyperv came to mind as a tag. Fishy Pervert?

Re:funny tag (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822942)

>not knowing what hyper-v is, wtfishyperv came to mind as a tag. Fishy Pervert?

That's Pervect

Little early (1)

prockcore (543967) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822620)

Isn't it a little early to be condemning the software? It's still in beta, we don't know whether more supported OSes are coming.

bullet vs foot (3, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822720)

No, it's not a little early. When you make an announcement, the lid is open and Pandora's legend is all over your shoes. The announcement did not say Suse is the first to be supported, it simply only listed it as supported. AND when you drink the coolaid, do you ever feel guilty? MS has a reputation that spoils any mis-step that the marketing droids might make. In fact this is so prevalent that not many people actually believe MS unless it is in writing and PJ has signed off on it. No matter how unfair that might be, one only has to look at the circus that OOXML has become to know that MS are not to be trusted... sigh

Re:Little early (2, Informative)

andreyw (798182) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823288)

The article is FUD. Clearly, "Linux" is supported. It just says that the only distro officially supported is SUSE. Everything else is in the "hey, I got it to work" domain. And seriously... it not their job to make sure it works with every distro. Their job is to make sure the linux kernel can run efficiently in it. That's it.

shooting selves in foot (3, Insightful)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822624)

If they won't virtualize other OS's, then they are not an option to be the main os in places that make use of virtualization.

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 (4, Funny)

KevMar (471257) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822800)

Not supported does not mean that it will not run it.

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:shooting selves in foot (1)

molarmass192 (608071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823164)

Not supported does not mean that it will not run it.

True ... but 99.999% of IT shops in companies with more than 10 employees have policies in place that say unsupported == we won't run it. It's the reality of IT in anything but mom-and-pop envs.

Re:shooting selves in foot (2, Interesting)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822846)

And looking at VMWare's new beta 3i product it gets rid of the host OS completely and loads nothing but the vmware hypervisor. It's designed to be only 16M and fit in a flash chip.

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:shooting selves in foot (1)

Todd Knarr (15451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822946)

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:shooting selves in foot (1)

miknix (1047580) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823122)

So their plan is to reduce Linux to a single company, then deal with that company
Good point! Although it is very difficult to resume Linux, GNU and all the community as a single atom.
So we should all be cool with that since Micro$oft will go nowhere thinking in that manner.

But.. Am I the only one thinking that this is another step of Micro$oft to divide the Linux community?

Why is this surprising? (0)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822636)

How many ppl expected MS to support Linux? They have exactly 2 real enemies; Google and all the companies that support or push Linux. The reality is that MS is now freed from court supervision and will go back to their standard MO. And as to those of you who say that VMWare is a threat, then you have made a serious mistake; this is going to be bundled with Windows. IOW, it will be free. It has to be. It is the only way for MS to make inroads. Unless EU steps forward, (or a new president who likes a competitive USA), VMWare will be a fraction of their size within 5 years. My bet? I think that US will do nothing and EU will likely follow the same process.

Re:Why is this surprising? (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822868)

MS Actually sees VMWare as a huge threat. That is why they are rushing Hyper-V to market with little to no real features and offering one license to cover all VMs in the host.

Why did they call it Hyper-V (0, Redundant)

s0litaire (1205168) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822646)

Bill should have just called it Hyper-W Tagline: Run Vista twice as slow as it runs on your comp. although people will probably use Hyper-V to run WinXP (so that all their programs run)

the million dollar question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822648)

which would provide better tweakabilty and granularity for security, a microsoft install with linux virtualized or a linux install with microsoft virtualized? I'm willing to bet linux with microsoft virtualized would provide better control and security. Not to mention all the amazing networking ability that is lost if the hypervisor software is not linux.

Funny how they show up 3 years late to the party and boast of innovation.

Ummm... Yeah? And? (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822652)

Microsoft is telling us Hyper-V is a Microsoft only technology.

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.

Re:Ummm... Yeah? And? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22823322)

I don't know, the sky is pretty white here.

Maybe the will work. (4, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822654)

Notice that these are supported systems. That doesn't mean that other OS's will not work.
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.

What did you expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822658)

That Microsoft would somehow embrace something other then Microsoft and their token Linux distro?

Hyper-V is what now? (3, Insightful)

Matt Perry (793115) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822660)

And just what is Hyper-V? The summary doesn't explain it. I even went against the grain here read the article (gasp!) and the article doesn't explain it. It implies that it might have something to do with virtualization but doesn't really explain itself. The "article" appeared to be more of a comment than news.

Re:Hyper-V is what now? (4, Informative)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822788)

It's a conglomeration of tech from Xen's Hypervisor and work done by citrix and Novell to make windows the DomU in Xen.

Re:Hyper-V is what now? (1)

Matt Perry (793115) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823152)

It's a conglomeration of tech from Xen's Hypervisor and work done by citrix and Novell to make windows the DomU in Xen.
Thanks. I wish the original submitter could have said that. Your one line response had more information in it (and was more interesting) than the entire non-article and summary.

Re:Hyper-V is what now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822814)

I gathered it was some sort of hypervisor running under Server 2008. A crappy product gets crappy PR- that's not the way to push crap on to people. You're supposed to tout all of its features and how it will soon support the things it doesn't. Sure not to sell now that their first splash for many an IT person was a half assed summary on slahdot.

Re:Hyper-V is what now? (5, Informative)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822830)

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/virtualization-consolidation.aspx [microsoft.com]

"
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:Hyper-V is what now? (1)

hcmtnbiker (925661) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822864)

It seems to be a special hypervisor with an API linking the "root" and "child" systems. Look at the wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] for more info I guess.

Re:Hyper-V is what now? (2, Informative)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822952)

The "article" appeared to be more of a comment than news.
You must be new here. The article was not posted because of content but because of the headline(which basically implies that Suse Enterprise Linux is not Linux, WTF?). Microsoft says in their pitch that Hyper-V supports Linux, and a random bloggers says they don't, at all. Both are wrong in their own way :(

Define 'Suppported' (2, Interesting)

kneecap (4947) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822670)

Could it be that only SUSE is 'officialy' supported and that other Operating Sytems will work anyway? It seems that the major requirement for Linux (including SUSE) is a 'Xen-Enabled' kernel.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/hyperv-faq.aspx [microsoft.com]

Hook Patches (2, Informative)

tinkerghost (944862) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823160)

According to some digging, it seems that SUSE has tweaked some XEN code to properly work with the MS Hypervisor. The patch isn't well accepted in the Xen-dev group & may not make it to the reference build.
So, anyone using the SuSE patch can run under this, but at the cost of loosing their supplied kernel.

Maybe there is a good reason... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822680)

Why would anyone want to support 20 flavors of Linux...

the shift. (1)

Neuropol (665537) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822694)

eventually, life as we know it will shift to the other side. kind of like all the excess crap in the boat, weighing down on side and then some thing happens: and it all shifts to the other side, rocking the boat, making every one uneasy. Get used to it. It's coming.

Just like the financial shakedown, the OS market will filter itself out. If a company does not want to comply with global standards, and instead pave their own road, then they'll be happy knowing they're the only ones driving on it a few years from now. Microsoft: enjoy your open road.

Actually, this *could* be a good thing (1)

fragMasterFlash (989911) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822710)

The biggest bone I have I to pick with existing virtualization solutions is the lack of hardware accelerated graphics support. If this lock-in allows Hyper-V to share access to GPU accelerated rendering in a virtualized environment then I will be all over this like a fat kid on a donut. But then again, since when has M$ ever been innovative?

Why oh why? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822724)

Why would one want to run a proper OS inside virtualisation software on top of an insecure, unstable operating system?

Makes no sense to me.

Microsoft is using old rules in a new game (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822730)

...well it's relatively new for them anyway.

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 on it. Ordinarily, I might suggest a Linux or BSD kernel and minimal environment, but we know they'd sooner die.

Re:Microsoft is using old rules in a new game (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822900)

Actually it's based on the Xen Hypervisor, which is a stripped down micro kernel. Windows is just vertualized and becomes the primary control host, or DomU in Xen terminology.

Re:Microsoft is using old rules in a new game (1)

GiMP (10923) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823210)

Yes, but no. Its a hypervisor *like* Xen, which supports Xen guest kernels, but the hypervisor is completely rewritten from the ground up. This will allow a migration path to, or from, Xen for those interested. Its surprisingly open of Microsoft, because it really gives their customers a good option to migrate away from their platform. On the other hand, it might not be entirely bad news for Xen users, because if Citrix really mucks stuff up, you've always got the choice to move to a Microsoft solution. A Microsoft solution might not be ideal, but its better than being left stranded without any solution if, for some reason, Citrix drops the ball.

Overall, though, I'm not that sure these developments are good for Linux -- because Citrix is very much in the Microsoft camp. Xen users have found themselves now reliant on Citrix and/or Microsoft. This is concerning, and I for one am following it closely.

Re:Microsoft is using old rules in a new game (1)

VampireByte (447578) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822982)

"A Hyper-V host doesn't need Solitaire running on it."


Well put, I installed Win2008 Server last week to start doing some testing for a client and was surprised that the installation process puts games on the machine and has folders like My Pictures and My Music. I mean really, is this supposed to be a serious server operating system? If "yes" then why would you have such things installed? It makes no sense to me at all.

Re:Microsoft is using old rules in a new game (1)

lukas84 (912874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823398)

That's why Microsoft introduced Windows Server Core. It's a core without most of the UI Framework and most of the Windows Shell.

Windows Server Core is the recommended way to deploy Hyper-V. If you do not know Server Core yet, look into it.

It's a very nice way to deploy basic infrastructure like domain controllers, DHCP / DNS / WINS, etc. servers with a reduced attack and maintenance surface.

The point, I think, is thus... (1)

Oxy the moron (770724) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822742)

... 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 do, it's just the occasional Linux server. And putting that on SUSE, with promises of bells and whistles from the mighty Microsoft, shouldn't be too hard of a sale.

virtual mess (1)

flahwho (1243110) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822932)

Unfortunately, SB's with 8-50 employees like the one i work for had idoits running their IT internally and outsourced from a tech place. now they're gone and I'm currently working through all the idiotic mess the prior employees and service companies did. Id like to be paid $xxx,xxx for what im doing, but try tellin that to them. What I'm doing is saving thier asse(t)s! Virtualization is the key, but only because they chose to run legacy for so friggin long! BTW I use VMware and nothing else for a reason.

Re:The point, I think, is thus... (1)

genmax (990012) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823008)

But why would a Microsoft only shop want/need virtualization ? I imagine that a vast majority of hyper-v's customers will be those who want to run two OS-es on one system, and lets face it - the OS they're most likely to want to virtualize on a windows machine will be Linux.


I still don't understand what they mean by "supported" though. How can this *only* work for SuSe ? Are there going to be proprietary programs running on the SuSe guest - and if so, what really prevents me from running them on my Gentoo box. Or do they mean that they only guarantee that SuSe will work - anything else may work, but you're on your own.

Re:The point, I think, is thus... (1)

lukas84 (912874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823278)

Supported means just that: You can call MS PSS and tell them that their Shit doesn't work. That doesn't mean that it won't work. There is a lot of stuff that is not supported for a variety of reasons:

e.G. Exchange 2007 Version is not supported in ANY virtualized Environment - it works perfectly fine though and hundreds of people, even Microsoft uses that for testing and demo purposes. It just means that if you have a critical problem and call up PSS, you will not get help.

Think of "forcibly recommended" :)

Re:The point, I think, is thus... (1)

nxtw (866177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823404)

Hyper-V only costs $28 more as part of a Windows Server 2008 license (that is, if the price for one license was $999 with Hyper-V, the price without Hyper-V would be $973). This is a pretty insigificant cost if you're already going to buy Windows Server 2008. When Hyper-V is done (it's currently a Release Candidate), supposedly MS will release it as a standalone product and sell it for $28.

Windows Server 2008 with Hyper-V licenses allow you to run a certain number of guest instances of Windows using that same license (more details [microsoft.com] ). The amount of guests you can run on a Hyper-V server is not limited by the license (only technical limits apply).

But why would a Microsoft only shop want/need virtualization ?

To run multiple instances of Windows Server on one piece of hardware...

I imagine that a vast majority of hyper-v's customers will be those who want to run two OS-es on one system, and lets face it - the OS they're most likely to want to virtualize on a windows machine will be Linux.

Not quite. People already use VMware products to run virtual Windows instances.

Of course, they can already do this with VMware ESX (expensive) or VMware Server (free, but not as good as a hypervisor-based system like VMware ESX or Hyper-V). Hyper-V provides virtualization similar to Xen - one guest is the "host" and is used for management and hardware access. Most x86 operating systems will run without modifications It's not as advanced as VMware ESX Server, but it's closer than VMware ESX in functionality than VMware Server or Virtual PC.

I still don't understand what they mean by "supported" though. How can this *only* work for SuSe ?

Microsoft provides drivers for SuSe for use with a SuSe Xen domU kernel. You can run any other Linux OS, but it will run in a virtualized environment instead. The readme for the integration components state that RHEL 5 will be supported in the future.

The code does not appear to be a binary-only module for a specific kernel. It appears to be part code, part binary, so it may be possible to compile the code for other kernels besides SuSe's.

Troll article (4, Informative)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822780)

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 (5, Funny)

pythas (75383) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822906)

Shitty article with a misleading headline posted on Slashdot about Microsoft? I'M SHOCKED.

I've been running Ubuntu Server using Hyper-V since 2008 came out without any problems.

Re:Troll article (1)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823184)

Shitty article with a misleading headline posted on Slashdot about Microsoft? I'M SHOCKED. I've been running Ubuntu Server using Hyper-V since 2008 came out without any problems.
Didn't a Microsoft representative come and strap that computer outside into the snow? I think that's what the headline is talking about and it happened to the guy who wrote it.

Re:Troll article (1)

nxtw (866177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823074)

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

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.

Not News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822782)

Microsoft makes late, less competitive offering than products already in the market.
Said product primarily focuses on Microsoft proprietary platforms.

Which Microsoft product (in roughly the last decade or so) does that not accurately describe?

Next please.

So? (1)

Rix (54095) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822786)

If it works with SuSe, I'm sure it will work with any other flavour.

Besides, if you're anything but a pure MS shop, you're not going to be using windows as the host OS anyway.

Microsoft VPC a Big POS (1)

flahwho (1243110) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822824)

If the article refers to MS VirtualPC, then I concur that it is one big POS and not worth the price tag of free! VMware has consistently stayed ahead of the curve for many years in the virtualization game and will probably continue to.

Re:Microsoft VPC a Big POS (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823434)

If the article refers to MS VirtualPC, then I concur that it is one big POS and not worth the price tag of free! VMware has consistently stayed ahead of the curve for many years in the virtualization game and will probably continue to.
Hyper-V = Microsoft's upcoming virtualization technology
VirtualPC = Microsoft's old, crappy virtualization software

Hyper-V != VirtualPC

wtfishyperv? (2, Funny)

kinthalas (102827) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822888)

I don't think I want to know anything about a "fishy perv."

wha? (1)

nih (411096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822954)

By not supporting Red Hat, Fedora, CentOS, and BSD, Microsoft is telling us Hyper-V is a Microsoft only technology
hmmm i'm not quite sure, can someone point me to the inconsistency in this quote?

wtf indeed (1)

DJCouchyCouch (622482) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822960)

I parsed the "wtfishyperv" tag as "wtf I shy perv"

Re:wtf indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22823176)

I read "wt fishy perv"

wtfishyperv (2, Funny)

patternmatch (951637) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822976)

This story is tagged "wtfishyperv", which I first read not as "wtf is hyper v", but "wt fishy perv"...soo confused.

installed Hyper-V and soon uninstalled Hyper-V (1)

snsh (968808) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823000)

Yesterday I installed Win2008 x64 from the launch kit, onto a new Poweredge server. It installed fine, then added HyperV role to it, which went fine, then installed Win2008 again as a VM. Then opened Disk Management, and the machine froze. Created a new VM, same problem. Uninstalled HyperV and tried to install VMware server. It wouldn't recognize the the NIC's.

So not only is Microsoft's hypervisor still barely out of alpha, but you can even run other hypervisors on it. Ow.

Anyone remember Netscape? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22823062)

They have done it before and just might be able to do it again. I really do fear for VMware. It's really starting to look like a cold war.

Why throw good money away (-1, Troll)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823076)

but I guess that sentiment applies to all Microsoft products...

Years ago, I told people: Yes, you can use Microsoft software, it is a little buggy, but it sure is cheap.

Nowadays I tell people: Yes, you can use Microsoft software, but it is very buggy and very expensive.

Try it before you whine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22823170)

Nice pointless rant post. Can I call you up for a free tinfoil hat?

1) If they're officially supporting SUSE then give them props for at least that much.
2) "officially" is the key word - Ubuntu, for example, works just great on Hyper-V (with a patch to the ISO). But I know I can't go to MS and bitch about things. Not as though I'm really going to go ask them for help on linux anyway... so the net difference is what? Nil.
3) Nobody's forcing you to use the product. Go elsewhere if you don't like it.

Jeez. There's just no winning with some people.

Re:Try it before you whine (1)

nxtw (866177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823450)

1) If they're officially supporting SUSE then give them props for at least that much.


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.

It's GPL... (1)

GNUPublicLicense (1242094) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823172)

... no, then why do we care? Well... we could see that they copied Linux Xen/KVM code... the interested is nil.

Tags, no spaces no caps (1)

Alsee (515537) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823248)

I really like the wtfishyperv tag on this story.
This story is seriously What The Fishy Perv!

-

So... (1)

kristopher_d (1024113) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823258)

First of all, Corporate "support" != Software "support." Don't get too riled up 'till you've tried installing your favorite linux flavor. Second, the very existence of open source software legitimizes Microsoft's behavior. Don't want to pay MS, use open source. If it doesn't exist, write it yourself. Want it prepackaged with telephone support available, albeit for a fee if its determined to by your cock-up, you may want to pay for the software.

Fine with me! (1)

Ari Rahikkala (608969) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823318)

I always thought Scatter Pack Vs were better after all.

What Is The Current Linux Flavor of the Month? (1)

BSDetector (1056962) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823438)

This is just one reason why Linux has been, is currently, and likely will continue to be a failure in the overall marketplace. Like it or not - Windows is perceived as one product. OS/x the same. For the ordinary user, they neither know or care that there god-knows-how-many different flavors of Linux exist - and that's even assuming that they even know what a "linux" is in the first place. Deal with the way that the world works!!!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>