A plan in motion

Still, there are signs that Microsoft is slowly beginning to execute one of its patented embrace-and-extend strategies in an effort to topple VMware. Part of that strategy is to evolve the product to a point where it becomes good enough for a majority of scenarios. For example, though Quick Migration can't provide the same level of seamlessness that VMotion delivers, it's still a viable mechanism for shops where "really good" availability is sufficient, and that covers the vast majority of server consolidation scenarios. Combine this with a technically sound, well-performing hypervisor (Hyper-V), and you have the makings of a viable challenger. Throw in some aggressive pricing (that is, Microsoft's decision to offer Hyper-V as a stand-alone solution for $28) and the challenger becomes a legitimate threat.

Rounding out the strategy is Microsoft's decision to allow mixed Hyper-V/VMware shops to manage VI3 assets directly from within the MSCVMM management environment. Through integration with VirtualCenter, MSCVMM administrators can manage VMware VMs using native, VirtualCenter services, including VMotion. Microsoft has a track record of successfully integrating competing technologies (and tricking their competitors into integrating Microsoft's) in order to co-opt and, ultimately, replace them. The company did it with Novell NetWare and (to a lesser degree) Unix. Clearly, Microsoft thinks it can perform a similar end run around VMware, a company with deep technical resources but also an arrogant streak that may blind it to the reality of the Redmond threat. To quote the Cylon hybrid, "This has all happened before, and it will all happen again."

Note: I tested Hyper-V RC1 and a beta version of MSCVMM 2008 on a Dell PowerEdge 2950 server running the x64 version of Windows Server 2008 Enterprise (Hyper-V requires a 64-bit environment). As with most Server 2008 "roles," enabling Hyper-V was a simple matter of ticking a check box in Server Manager and picking a NIC for use by the virtual network manager. Installation of MSCVMM was a bit more involved, requiring an instance of SQL Server 2005, the .Net Framework 3.0, and Active Directory. Fortunately, MSCMM gives the option of installing SQL Server 2005 Express Edition automatically to resolve the SQL dependency, and the .Net version requirement is a nonissue for Server 2008 installations. Windows Server 2008 ships with .Net 3.0, though it's not enabled by default.

The end game

Overall, Microsoft's server virtualization platform is shaping up to be a viable datacenter contender, especially for shops with a significant investment in Windows Server technology. Though not as robust or as sophisticated as VI3, the Hyper-V and MSCVMM combination is a quantum leap from the aging, host-based Virtual Server architecture.

The question now is, should VMware be worried? I'd have to say yes, if for no other reason than history is on Microsoft's side. No company has shown the degree of patience and willingness to try, try again that Microsoft has demonstrated over the years. Hyper-V, in its current incarnation, may not be sufficient to wrest the datacenter heavyweight title from VI3. But for many shops, it will prove to be plenty good enough, allowing Microsoft to begin eating away at VMware's market share while preparing the next-generation product for the final assault that topples the leader. Don't say I didn't warn you.