ITComparison Virtualization Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3 (VMware Biased)

Virtualization
Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3 (VMware Biased)

Please be warned this comparison is biased toward VMware. For our un-biased comparison please check Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3 (un-biased).

VMware MS Virtual Server

Component Failure

NIC teaming, HBA multipathing

Relies on mgmt OS

OS/Application Outage

unplanned

VMware HA

x-host VM Cluster

planned

VMotion

DRS Maint.mode

No Microsoft host pooling

Complex Microsoft host clustering

Resource Shortage

VMware DRS

No Microsoft host pooling

Irreversible hot add

Server Failure

VMware HA

Complex Microsoft host clustering

Files Deleted

VMware Consolidated Backup

No integrated backup tools

Storage Failure

VMware Consolidated Backup

No integrated backup tools

Interrupted Live Migration

VMFS distributed file locking

No distributed FS to prevent VM corruption

Cost Per VM Low Medium

64-bit Support Production Support Not Available

OS Support

32- & 64-bit, Windows, Linux,NetWare, Solaris guests

Limited Windows, Linux guests

Mgmt OS a single point of failure?

False True

Hypervisor just an extension to a fat OS

False True (Windows 2003)

Customer Support

Well established virtualization support Adopted virtualization support and still building it.

Primary Customer usage
85% of VMware customers use server virtualization in production1

Primarily in test/dev environments

Requires Host OS No - Bare-Metal Installation Yes, Windows 2003 is required.

Performance High Low

Security

High Host OS dependant
(exposed to all Windows 2003 vulnerabilities)

Other Related Comparisons:

Xen Server Enterprise VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3

Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 VS Xen Server Enterprise

Microsoft Windows Hyper-V (WSV) VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3.5

Virtualization Comparison Forum:

Please post your requests, comments, opinion, concern, and read other

readers comments at our Virtualization Comparison forum.

Virtualization Comparison Forum:

Please post your requests, comments, opinion, concern, and read other

readers comments at our Virtualization Comparison forum.

ITComparison Official Blog:

Please Feel free to blog about Virtualization, and read other readers blogging

at our ITComparison Official Blog.

Please Read our Disclaimer

Call us: 1-800-coming-soon

ITComparison.com
(Virtualization)

	VMware	MS Virtual Server
Component Failure	NIC teaming, HBA multipathing	Relies on mgmt OS
OS/Application Outage	unplanned VMware HA x-host VM Cluster planned VMotion DRS Maint.mode	No Microsoft host pooling Complex Microsoft host clustering
Resource Shortage	VMware DRS	No Microsoft host pooling Irreversible hot add
Server Failure	VMware HA	Complex Microsoft host clustering
Files Deleted	VMware Consolidated Backup	No integrated backup tools
Storage Failure	VMware Consolidated Backup	No integrated backup tools
Interrupted Live Migration	VMFS distributed file locking	No distributed FS to prevent VM corruption
Cost Per VM	Low	Medium
64-bit Support	Production Support	Not Available
OS Support	32- & 64-bit, Windows, Linux,NetWare, Solaris guests	Limited Windows, Linux guests
Mgmt OS a single point of failure?	False	True
Hypervisor just an extension to a fat OS	False	True (Windows 2003)
Customer Support	Well established virtualization support	Adopted virtualization support and still building it.
Primary Customer usage	85% of VMware customers use server virtualization in production1	Primarily in test/dev environments
Requires Host OS	No - Bare-Metal Installation	Yes, Windows 2003 is required.
Performance	High	Low
Security	High	Host OS dependant (exposed to all Windows 2003 vulnerabilities)