A comment made:
Yeah, sure, your costs might drop, but you really think their Linux support will be better than VMware’s support? VMWare’s support is horrible enough, and they don’t make a competing product.
I’ve actually had really good experiences with VMware support. The only bad part about it has been that they are learning about their products just as we are. Take support for our EMC CLARiiON CX700s. We were having horrible I/O performance, and the solution for it, after lots of back & forth with VMware support, ended up being found by me in a pair of slides from VMworld.
The compelling reason to continue using VMware VirtualCenter and ESX Server products is that in 3.0, which I am running in beta, they completely rethink the way resource management happens. Especially in regard to billing & chargeback, as you’ll be able to solidly define resource pools that VMs are part of. Pay for 5 GHz, get 5 GHz. They also have VMotion, where you can move running VMs between physical ESX Servers. That is awesome — making infrastructure changes is so easy with that.
XenSource claims they will have that feature, but it remains to be seen since they haven’t released a product. Microsoft doesn’t offer it. VMware’s free Virtual Server beta doesn’t have it. Solaris 10 zoning can’t do it. IBM’s LPARs cannot do it. VMware is actually addressing the problems of having a virtual infrastructure, whereas the others are just helping you create virtual machines.
Being first in a market is a precarious position, though, since your competitors see exactly what it will take to compete directly with you. Hopefully VMware will continue thinking about virtual infrastructure problems and less about virtual machines…
Update: I addressed the I/O problems I was having with another post.