Is Virtualization going the way of the dinasaur?

Gentlemen, we are on the verge of huge never ending black holes of data retention. I know its a cool trick to partition the hard drive, hell, even I have virtualbox, but lets be honest.
Its a cute trick but its wearing thin.
People don't need virtualization, what they need is dropbox to store their films on.
Is your datacenter hot? Why not offshore to Iceland like so many other companies are doing?
When people first here about virtualization they think its something like virtual reality. When they realize who mundane it truly is its a turnoff.
We need to rebrand virtualization and make its appeal a bit more wide reaching to the average customer lest interest be lost. Basically virtualization needs to become sexy again if its to survive. Can we make this happen?

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

Routerronin

cruwl wrote: »

Here: Everything!

Pretty simple right?

Thats a Jamestown response which is what scares me about this technology. I just want my questions answered so I can understand.

ratbuddy

Don't sweat it, man. Virtualization will still be around when you finish your CCIE. Well, probably.

Verities

Virtualization is too complex to explain in one post and to answer you question Ronin, you'd have to do a lot more reading. However in a nut shell this is how you get a wider profit margin with server virtualization: purchase a few physical servers (let's call them hosts), create say 10-15 virtual servers on those hosts, increase uptime by allowing the virtual servers to migrate between said hosts (did you know they can do this automatically in the event of a hardware failure on the hosts?) and allow for the creation of a new virtual server in mere minutes. So basically you've saved 10-15 servers worth of maintenance fees, including cooling, administrative overhead/labor involved in setting up, and electricity consumption. I forgot to mention, you can perform hardware maintenance during normal business hours without interruption to service; migrate all VMs to another host, shut down the empty host, replace parts, power host back on and now you can move VMs right back to repaired host.

Now when you say you don't know what "needs" to be virtualized, well that really up to the business goals of the company. Are you looking for loads of uptime for shared resources? Are you looking to have 30 servers but can't afford all of them along with the overhead they bring? Virtualization cost can be effective for small businesses when using OpenStack or Microsoft Hyper-V, definitely not VMware, heck most small businesses don't even need virtualization to save costs. It's geared more towards medium to large businesses. You talk about the "cloud" and really you're just talking about a bunch of resources pooled together using virtualization software, hosted at some datacenter somewhere in the world (depending on the service provider you choose). However you have to negotiate SLAs, determine who owns the data that is actually stored on the service provider's hardware (also, did you forget to read that SLA? they're no longer responsible for your data if it's lost or if you someday decide to sue them regards to keeping your data safe), and wonder if a WAN connection goes down does that mean all business comes to a grinding halt since all of my shared resources are not hosted on site?

Guess what? Virtualization doesn't stop at servers, it also includes back end storage and networking. My hands are cramping, so I'll leave you to my friend Google, who can answer the rest of your questions.

Mishra

To the OP:

You are a CTO in a mid-sized company. You have been trying to define your costs to install a server for an application. You have been working with your directors which have given you a massive spreadsheet with lots of seemingly random detail.

You have a meeting with directors to understand the pricing model that has been assigned. For many items you hear "Well... That's an estimate. Not an exact cost."

You sit down with your buddy at dinner for drinks. Your buddy just went to AWS on 9/2013. You explain your pricing problem to your buddy and he explains "That's the beauty of AWS... I literally pay them hourly for the use of my servers. My balance sheet is very clean and shows exactly what we are spending our money on. Now I can report to the board the true costs of IT down to the exact dollar... Plus, we found out it is MASSIVELY cheaper than our estimated costs."

You think to yourself 'You have always heard Cloud this and Cloud that... You can solve your balance sheet problems, and reduce cost which makes you look like a hero and make a bigger bonus. This must be done immediately!'

This is what I think is happening and isn't going away anytime soon... These "buddies" will grow and the true benefit of the 'cloud' will spread.

Sounds Good

I'm 90% sure the OP is trolling

RouteMyPacket

Might as well post for the extra post count, that's about all this thread is worth.

kj0

*sigh* I started writing last night my next blog post on "Why Virtualize." That would have saved time.

However, he is now banned if you look above his photo.

cyberguypr

What an amazingly amusing thread. I'm with the majority who says either wasting time or lack of understanding of virtualization technologies. The big fail here is what Everyone said, circumscribing virtualization to partitioning hard drives. You are missing 90% of the wonders of virtualizing. Think smaller data center footprint, less consumed power, less cooling, quick provisioning, elasticity, etc. I could go on and on.

MCITBound

Well, that was fun.

cmitchell_00

Nice Blog. As I have told people in the past or wrote reports to my CIO etc. virtualization is here to stay.