Please be warned this comparison is biased toward Xen. For our un-biased comparison please  click Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 VS Xen Enterprise 4  (un- Biased).

	Xen	MS Virtual Server
Planned upgrade/ Outage	XenMotion	Complex Microsoft host clustering
Cost Per VM	Low	Medium
64-bit Support	Production Support	Not Available
OS Support	32- & 64-bit Windows, Linux	Limited Windows, Linux guests
Mgmt OS a single point of failure?	False	True (windows 2003)
Hypervisor just an extension to a fat OS	False	True (Windows 2003)
Customer Support	Company Main Stream is Virtualization and all its support are concerned into that direction beside Xen are backed up by the Open Source Community.	Adopted virtualization support and still building it.
Primary Customer usage	Production Ready	Primarily in test/dev environments
Requires Host OS	No - Bare-Metal Installation	Yes, Windows 2003 is required.
Performance	High	Low
Take Advantage of New Processors which include virtualization enhancement	Highly	Not addressed yet
Security	High	Host OS dependant (exposed to all Windows 2003 vulnerabilities)

Other Related Comparisons:

Windows Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V VS VMware ESX 4.0

Xen Server Enterprise VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3

Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 VS VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3

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.

IT Comparison Index:

   Click here to access our site index at our home page.