News Stay informed about the latest enterprise technology news and product updates.

Three Things I Learned at SNW…

1)       HSM, ILM, ITIL still lack the appropriate policy management software to truly allow storage to move between tiers.  Sad, really – processing power is at an all-time high price/performance ratio, yet we don’t have software that can effectively leverage this power to even “brute force” analyze data and provide automated, policy-driven data migration.

2)       The midrange storage space is about to explode with new products.  All of the SAS products coming to market are going to put increased pressure on FC margins and revenue.  Who knows?  In three years, we say some really nifty products in attractive, inexpensive packages.  I’m waiting for storage vendors to start offering enclosures with hundreds of 2.5” drives.  The thought of a thousand 2.5” drives per rack solves lots of problems for me.

3)       Things are tough all over.  No, really – every facet of IT spending seems to be falling under scrutiny.  Many of my peers, who once bought IBM, EMC and HP are talking with – and buying from – Hitachi, NEC, Pillar and a host of others, just because these players are offering more (more professional services, migrations, price breaks, etc).

Join the conversation

13 comments

Send me notifications when other members comment.

Please create a username to comment.

Do you think RHEV 3.2 is on par with vSphere and Hyper-V?
Cancel
looking at the features required for an day to day operations of an visualization environment RHEV 3.2 does all for much less cost when compared to vmware.
Cancel
It's a question of scale. For the largest environments, RHEV is still lacking robust DR features (replication options or integration) and facilities for enterprise backup tools. However, for smaller installations, I'd say that yes RHEV is easily the equivalent of VMware or Hyper-v with a considerable cost saving too!
Cancel
It has been on par since version 2.2
Cancel
It's getting closer and is about 1/3rd the price, but still has ways to catch up. It's finally to the level of ESX 3, has a ways to reach vsphere 5.... That said, it's getting good enough where price is a significant factor.
Cancel
RHEV is on par with Hyper-V, not vsphere (yet).
Cancel
Support in EMEA is not good. P2V conversion tool is inadequate. SDN and networking support is not as good as vSphere. Spice protocol doesn't support remote printing , 3D graphics, etc. V2V tools is just plain voodoo. It is not easy to migrate existing KVM machines into the platform. libvirt guestfs and those other tools are wonderful for distro based virtualization but they become "behind the scenes" magic that we can't use to repair things such as booting problems, etc within the VM.

I keep trying to get clients to look at RHEV-M. If their first experience is with OVirt, then its a lost cause. It not like experiencing CentOS then moving to RHEL.
Cancel
free and hibillty
Cancel
I have all three in our environment. When we have had networking blips or a GBIC on a SAN go bad or some other supporting infrastructure service or device problems, VMWare registers the event, but stays up. KVM sometimes stayed up, but we have had some cluster wide outage - especially with blips in storage path - even though we had redundant paths. Hyper-V was more stable & robust than KVM, but neither was as good as VMWare. However, for the cost difference between the three products, it is worth having one alternative solution to VMWare in house for systems that don't require the same level of availability or service.
Cancel
Just no, missing some features to reach theese other technology especially about network and storage and flexibility features. But in these last two years RHEV is very grown and I think that it could reach the others. if no, at least it' ll have some other features that make it unique.
Cancel
It is most likely to be exceeding that HyperV and vSphere does.
Cancel
I consider it more stable / secure and affordable
Cancel
If you are working with centralized san's the two products are on par especially if you are using netapp's products. If you are largely using local storage or a storage product that doesn't fit the current storage model then vmware is going to win on the feature end of this. Also if you need to support more unusual OS's like freebsd or os/2 then vmware has an edge as well but the gap has been shrinking on each RHEV release so by the time 4.0 is out I can see that feature gap going away.
Cancel

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchDisasterRecovery

SearchDataBackup

SearchConvergedInfrastructure

Close