>From http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/nov07/11-12HyperVPR.mspx
Microsoft Hyper-V Server, a hypervisor-based server virtualization product, complements the Hyper-V technology within Windows Server 2008, allowing customers to consolidate workloads onto a single physical server. In addition, Microsoft Hyper-V Server will increase original equipment manufacturer (OEM) partners' ability to offer customers simplified, reliable and cost-effective virtualization solutions that can easily plug in to their existing infrastructure. Partners including Dell Inc., Fujitsu Siemens Computers, Fujitsu Ltd., Hitachi Ltd., HP, IBM Corp., Lenovo, NEC Corp. and Unisys are already committed to working with Microsoft to offer solutions based on Microsoft Hyper-V Server once it is available. The estimated manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) for Microsoft Hyper-V Server is $28 (U.S.). Thanks, Jeremy Phillips Senior Messaging Engineer Azaleos Corporation From: Sauvigne, Craig M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:52 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Microsoft Hyper-V I was listening to Paul Thurrott today in the Windows Weekly podcast (Episode 53 for those interested). He briefly mentioned Hyper-V. He said that there will be three installation options once it is actually released. He said you can install it on Windows Server 2008 standard/enterprise, install it on Server 2008 Core or install it on the bare metal machine. That was the first I have heard of the option to install Hyper-V without an OS. Has anyone else heard of this? Craig From: Steve Ens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:57 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Microsoft Hyper-V However when considering patching a Core vs full OS install of the host OS, the core will probably have to be rebooted far less. On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Ken Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: To be honest, in my experience you might get a few hundred MB of RAM back by running Core rather than a full install. Unless you have a few VM hosts, it's not worth worrying about either way. Performance is good - very good compared to Virtual Server 2005 However there are a few drawbacks: - No real management tools yet (SCVMM vNext is required for managing Hyper-v) - A few bugs (e.g. with TCP Offload and the new NICs) - No ability to build VMs using PXE booting and using the new synthetic NICs ( you need to use a legacy NIC) If you want a drill-down into Hyper-V architecture, I did a presentation for my local user group on it that I can send to you direct. Cheers Ken From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 7:24 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Microsoft Hyper-V It is light-years ahead of where Microsoft's VM technology has been. You want to use it on top of Server Core as opposed to the standard server install to keep your parent OS from using all your resources. I'm sure you'll have many longs days of fun with it. Tim From: Sauvigne, Craig M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:00 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Microsoft Hyper-V Has anyone been playing with Hyper-V from Microsoft? If so, what are your impressions? Since it is rolled into our licensing for Server 2008 anyway, we are looking at it for virtualization. It seems like it has a lot of the same features and functions as VMWare and ESX. I am just now setting up a test box for it. Any hints, tips or tricks to it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! ==================== Craig M. Sauvigne System Administrator Winthrop University Rock Hill, SC 29733 [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SC143 ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
