Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

    Is Hyper V Beta stable enough to go into a production environment or should I look at doing a core installation and using virtual server 2005?

    If I user virtual server 2005 is/will there be a migration path to Hyper V?

    Can the two exist together on the same server?
    Stacey Smith
    Sr. Systems Engineer

    The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane --Samuel Clemens

  • #2
    Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

    Why would you want to put beta anything in a production environment?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

      I don't,

      bu I also don't want to deploy a system that may be out dated in a few months.

      I imagine the MS support for VS 2005 will fade quickly once they have Hyper going (of course thats just the MS Pessimist in me)

      I am being asked to deploy an exchange 2007 server using Virtual Server technology, more specifically I have to stay with in the bounds of MS products so I am trying to weigh my options and reduce migration headaches down the road.
      Stacey Smith
      Sr. Systems Engineer

      The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane --Samuel Clemens

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

        Don't assume that. Either wait till June or July for Hyper-V RTM, or use VS2005 R2 SP1 now.
        Cheers,

        Daniel Petri
        Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Active Directory Directory Services
        MCSA/E, MCTS, MCITP, MCT

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

          Ahh but the gotcha there unless I am overlooking something is that VS 2005 R2 SP1 only supports 32bit OS which leaves exchange 2007 out cold.


          this quote taken from tech net blogs (See last line) again maybe I missed something. But it looks like I will have to wait for HV or use a 3rd party solution..



          Virtual Server 2005 R2 runs on both 32-bit and 64-bit (x64) host operating systems. It supports both AMD64 and Intel IA-32e/EM64T (x64) processors. Note that Virtual Server 2005 R2 does not support Itanium (IA-64) processors. Earlier versions of Virtual Server run on x64-based hardware provided it is running a 32-bit version of a supported host operating system.
          Note that Virtual Server 2005 R2 requires that guest operating systems be 32-bit.
          Stacey Smith
          Sr. Systems Engineer

          The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane --Samuel Clemens

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

            Originally posted by ssmith View Post
            Ahh but the gotcha there unless I am overlooking something is that VS 2005 R2 SP1 only supports 32bit OS which leaves exchange 2007 out cold.
            Right, I missed the part about you wanting to run Ex2007. True, VS2005 only supports 32-bit guest machines.

            Did anyone say VMware? Or, as I said, wait till WSv is RTM in 4-5 months.
            Cheers,

            Daniel Petri
            Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Active Directory Directory Services
            MCSA/E, MCTS, MCITP, MCT

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

              if the budget allows that - get VMware ESX or try to use Xen or Virtualbox.
              unfortunately, M$ is still a bit far from making a good V product. 2008 on the whole is very raw, and hyperV looks like a nice try to emulate ESX, but nothing more than that.

              actually, MS are being very cheeky releasing a beta product openly, before this they released betas, but never told the customers what those are, using the customer as QC for their products and releasing patches as they went along. A fact that made every MS product usable more or less a few months after SP1 was rolled out.
              ________
              Celica
              Last edited by DYasny; 6th March 2011, 18:15.
              Real stupidity always beats Artificial Intelligence (c) Terry Pratchett

              BA (BM), RHCE, MCSE, DCSE, Linux+, Network+

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

                I fear that VirtualBox is no loger an option, as their maker was recently aquirred by one of the major players...

                http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Virtu...s-innotek.html
                Cheers,

                Daniel Petri
                Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Active Directory Directory Services
                MCSA/E, MCTS, MCITP, MCT

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

                  Innotek was ackquired by Sun, but it doesn't mean they will change their policy there. Looks like Sun are opening as much of their code as they can. Solaris is now free, and that's not only OpenSolaris, but the official product as well.

                  I think they bought Innotek because they wanted to incorporate a workstation product along with their old infrastructure virtualization products
                  ________
                  Marijuana dispensaries
                  Last edited by DYasny; 6th March 2011, 18:16.
                  Real stupidity always beats Artificial Intelligence (c) Terry Pratchett

                  BA (BM), RHCE, MCSE, DCSE, Linux+, Network+

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

                    Well, we decided not to go virtual and just deploy more servers.

                    I do have the virtual environment setup though (server2008 with Exchange 2007 running on server 2008 ) and seems to be stable. I just can't go live with something listed in beta..would have been better if MS had not told me it was beta..lol
                    only problem is the OAB...but that is another forum topic.
                    Last edited by biggles77; 16th April 2008, 06:48. Reason: Fix 2008 + )and the smilie that combo creates.
                    Stacey Smith
                    Sr. Systems Engineer

                    The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane --Samuel Clemens

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

                      with blade systems getting cheaper, virtualization might not be the best option
                      ________
                      Dodge Super 8 Hemi
                      Last edited by DYasny; 6th March 2011, 18:17.
                      Real stupidity always beats Artificial Intelligence (c) Terry Pratchett

                      BA (BM), RHCE, MCSE, DCSE, Linux+, Network+

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

                        lol..funny you should say that I was just given a new 6 blade intel server with built in san to play with...
                        Stacey Smith
                        Sr. Systems Engineer

                        The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane --Samuel Clemens

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Hyper V vs Virtual Server 2005

                          Adding my 2 cents a little late, but...
                          I just installed win 2008 server with HyperV RC0, and it seems solid. I even moved a Win2k virtual server from Virtual Server 2005 to the Hyper-v box. But you have to be sure to uninstall the Virtual Machine Additions first, or it will bluescreen. Oh, and connect it to a "Legacy" adapter, not the "Network" adapter... It is very fast, and seems solid.

                          The vhd technology is basically all set. If you start with RC0 and there are changes in the final product, chances are good you can simply create new Virtual machine and attach the same VHD, and all will be Ok.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X