As of now SCVMM is not out yet
as it is RTM however I would assume the licensing is the same as SCOM or SCCM
(opps mgr, config mgr) whereas you buy a license for the server and a license
for each machine managed with an agent…I don’t believe SCVMM will
allow for agentless management as SCOM will.
Also as of this point the only
yearly thing that Microsoft has (as with any provider) is their software
assurance which you can subscribe to yearly if you choose to get free version
upgrades. Other than that you buy a copy of windows and there are no
other associated maintenance or license fees forced upon you. And as
someone else said…if you use Windows Datacenter edition you can install
as many copies of windows server as you want in VM’s COMPLETELY free…the
hardware is your only limitation as to the number you can run…which is
very attractive for most folks.
My original post and associated
question was mostly inquiring weather anyone else had downloaded the beta or
RTM and tried it out and had any opinions but this is all good discussion.
Also, everyone knows that VMware
is more mature than windows Virtual Server…however I hear good things
about the new version coming in 08. I just downloaded the RTM of Windows
Server 2008 but haven’t installed it yet…however the big update
comes 120 days or whatever after 08’s release. This is supposed to
have most of the features it is lacking over vmware.
From: MSU Network
Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Vasquez,
Timo
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager
Well we all have good input on
flexibility and current expansion capabilities, but how about the concern for
licensing someone posed earlier?
I see no issue that would cause
a complete budget drain, but are there any major concerns for any annual
licensing agreements. Software assurance, or Volume licensing concerns
with Longhorn and scvmm?
From: MSU Network
Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Charlot,
Firmin
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager
With Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 on top of Windows server
enterprise edition, you can install up to 4 VMs for free and with DataCenter
edition, there is no limit. Your hardware is the limitation there.
Although MS Virtual Server 2005 R2 does a good job but the product
is still at its infancy meaning that to get more robust features one must look
elsewhere at least for now; upgrading path maybe a challenge if you are looking
at expanding your network environment.
Firm.
From: MSU Network
Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ehren
Benson
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager
I have installed redhat 5 on
Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 and the only issue I had was tweaking
xorg.conf and the video drivers to get X to work but text based install and CLI
worked fine.
I can’t remember the exact
number off the top of my head but I believe if you run Win Datacenter edition
you are entitled to run X copies of windows VM’s on it for free (I want
to say 5?). I also believe the same is true with Enterprise edition,
however the number is less.
From: MSU Network
Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Vasquez,
Timo
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:35 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager
Licensing is not that bad of an
issue for Higher Ed, but the question is the features and how they have
improved networking, clustering and support improvement for the other non
windows operating systems.
Virtual Machine based portals
have been free for us for a number of years, but if MS is talking enterprise
class VM we would have to examine what licensing would cover or be for.
In the end if you don’t
have a cal or valid product key for your current Microsoft based VMs and
Microsoft Software on them you (not you specifically; people in general) really
are not going to see the difference. if all you utilize is Linux
pre-compiled builds nothing changes.
From: MSU Network
Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Laurence
Bates
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:24 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager
My concern about Microsoft’s Virtual Server offering is that
Microsoft is currently becoming rather heavy handed in trying to get users to
subscribe to their annual license model. I would hate to be locked into
one of their Virtual Server systems and find that it became a leverage to move
me towards an annual license fee. I am currently testing VMWare’s
offerings and like the fact that I can integrate Linux into the mix with
relative ease, including pre-built linux VM’s.
From: Ehren Benson
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:13 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [MSUNAG] Microsoft System Center Virtual Machine Manager
Nag-
I watched about an hour long recorded webcast by Microsoft
on the up and coming SCVMM part of the System Center family and my first
impressions are… WOW! It is currently RTM and should be out
soon…and paired with the updates coming when Windows Server 2008 is
released…and then again 120 days after that with the full update to
Virtual Server it seems very nice. We are beginning to think about
starting to work towards a production class Virtual environment…currently
we use VS2005 for testing but it’s not redundant enough for production
with only one server.
I wonder if any of you other MS guys/gals out there have
heard about this (if not then you should check it out) and or messed with it at
all and am interested to hear some of your impressions.
/Ehren
Ehren J. Benson, MCSE
Windows Systems Administrator
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Michigan State University
1209 A Biomed Phys Sci
517-355-9200
x2569
__________ NOD32 2584 (20071010) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com