Cisco this week officially
entered the server market with a line of blade systems that's 100 percent built for virtualization. In a Dell-like move, Cisco is
supporting third-party hypervisors, particularly ESX and Hyper-V. It's also pushing network virtualization and storage management -- so in essence, the whole kit and caboodle is virtual from the get-go.
I have a theory. The network hardware market is drying up faster than spilled beer in Key West. And Cisco already owns nearly everything that Juniper hasn't managed to snag. A lot of this has to do with the nature of networks and network gear. While it only takes a Microsoft OS and an app or two to max out a PC, it takes a lot of data to saturate a network connection. Even most 100-bit/sec Ethernet connections are largely untaxed, and now we have 1-gig and 10-gig wares to choose from. And since a lot routers and switches come with an abundance of ports, it takes a while to use up all of them.
The server market is new territory, Cisco has the sales force and brand, and it can weave a compelling virtualization story. This could be huge. Would you buy a server from Cisco? Send yeas and nays to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 18, 20090 comments
I remember going to Microsoft when it only had two buildings -- one for apps and another for MS-DOS -- with a cafeteria in between. Now the Microsoft campus makes Harvard look puny. All these workers drove up house prices and drove up traffic.
The Obama administration feels the Microsoft employees' pain and plans to help fund an overpass to make it easier to get from one side of campus to the other. Hey, Obama! My driveway needs paving. Can you help a fella out?
What would you spend the stimulus money on? Advice (but no cash or checks) can be forwarded to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 18, 20090 comments
The Wall Street Journal reports that
IBM is negotiating to buy Sun Microsystems for more than $6 billion (one-thirtieth of what we've given to AIG).
This could be a large and possibly problematic deal. Already, IBM has a range of platforms, PC servers, System x mainframes, PowerPC servers, and the System i and System x. Even Houdini couldn't untangle this knot of products. Sun has a similar issue. It has standard PC servers, as well as RISC machines -- and Solaris runs on both. The two also have an array of virtualization, management and storage tools.
There's tremendous value in Sun, a company that never stops innovating, but there's also colossal overlap and confusion -- not to mention the likelihood of layoffs. Is this a good idea, or will IBM become a hodgepodge of incompatible and competing products? Give us your best M&A advice at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 18, 20090 comments
After a Forrester study revealed that virtualization is
popping up all over the place (as Jordan says, "duh"), a couple of readers shared how they're contributing to its spread:
I have decided that I need to work for Forrester or Gartner. I've never seen another industry that brings in billions in revenue to state the obvious six months to a year after everbody else already knew it. Of course, people are using virtualization. Of course, it's widespread. Of course, it saves lots of money. Duh?
On a serious note, we are about to utilize a Hyper-V failover cluster to run several of our core services such as DHCP, some DCs and DNS servers, WINS and WSUS. With the way that Datacenter 2008 offers unlimited virtualiztion licensing for the OS, it is a no-brainer. Especially with tight budgets.
-Jordan
We have zero interest in the energy aspect of virtualization. We are, however, going to embrace the new virtualization models to help minimize downtime in case we have failure of our various server computers. We are very attracted to the resilience these new virtual environments can offer.
We recently purchased two low-end Dell PowerEdge T300 servers to retire some eight-year-old servers. Once we are done with the upgrade, we will have four main servers online, each running some version of Windows Server. On our two new servers, we are going to run the free VMware ESXi hypervisor. Initially, each machine will have just one live virtual machine, an instance of Windows Server 2008 Enterprise. We plan to create additional virtual machines for each of our four main servers and keep shutdown available -- that way, if any of our servers physically fail, we can fairly quickly roll over to a cold VMware image, do a quick restore of the most recent backup data for that server, and we are good to go. We don't require 100 percent uptime, but we are interested in minimizing the downtime in the case of a major server failure.
With the current economy, these two servers will likely have to last me quite awhile. I like the versatility a virtual environment gives me to be able to create a new server if I really need to, or even just take a snapshot to test a routine software upgrade. As I get more comfortable with the performance of scaling up the number of virtual machines running on a single box, we may consolidate our servers some, but for now that is not the goal. I would imagine that many folks are in the same boat as myself -- using these new virtual environments to reduce downtime and just enhance our options in a small IT environment.
-Dennis
What do you think? Share your thoughts below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 18, 20090 comments
In response to Doug's question about green IT, one reader says it's more a matter of money than environment:
I'll go green only if the green equates to dollars. I have lived enough years to remember discussing the coming ice age and the first Earth Day that was an awareness for global cooling. The climate is going to do what it wants and we can't influence it. Can we get Peter, Paul and Mary to sing "Where have all the sunspots gone"?
Now, if I can save some bucks by using an alternative and RELIABLE power source, I am all for it. My clients would go for saving some green, too.
-Anonymous
Steve Ballmer is bullish about the economy, particularly the tech sector. But Paul thinks technological innovation only goes so far:
Technology needs application. Without companies buying technology, its "resilience" is moot. To demonstrate a point of concern, a friend of mine works for a local FOX TV affiliate and says that the company has asked all managers throughout the FOX chain to take a week of unpaid furlough. Think of all the technology used by a typical TV station. If they don't buy, we don't fly.
-Paul
Incidentally, in that same item about Ballmer, Doug made a reference to economist Paul Samuelson -- for which Floyd is grateful:
Your obscure references -- I like 'em! When I run into these references (like the one to Paul Samuelson), I head to Google. I've learned quite a bit from these as I very often get caught up in tangential references to your references. So, thanks for the education...and thanks for creating a big time-sink for me!
-Floyd
And finally, who's your favorite Stooge? Shemp is Doug's pick. Here are some of yours:
Shemp?!?! Nobody compares to the always cranky, ever-present Moe Howard, king of the Stooges!
-Charles
Sorry, but my vote goes to Curly.
-Jim
My favorite is Moe. Nobody could slap a Stooge like Moe!
-Eduardo
Larry was my favorite; loved the hair.
-Carl
Curly gets my vote by far. Of course, my Italian mother always called me a "stroonza" (idiot).
-Anonymous
Curly, far and away. Great pratfalls and shtick!
-Neal
Curly.
-Anonymous
I'm a Shemp fan. Do you recall the Barney Miller episode where Levitt asks Dietrich what he's doing tonight? Dietrich answers he's going to a Three Stooges festival. Levitt says, "I always saw you as an art museum type, very cultured." Dietrich replies, "On the contrary, with its universal portrayal of interpersonal relationships, especially the machiavellian interplay between Moe and his siblings, it is an essential..." Levitt just blinks dumbfounded and blurts out, "I like the ones with Shemp." Dietrich gazes at Levitt as someone would look at the bottom of his sneaker expecting to see a swathing of canine excrement and says, "We dont have anything further to discuss" and turns to casually walk away.
Just a vignette to bring you momentary cheer. Hooray, Windows 7 is coming!
-Bill
Got something to say? Let us have it! Comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 16, 20090 comments
Microsoft has used virtualization for years to ensure compatibility. Windows NT ran on RISC chips like Alpha, even though it was native to Intel. The solution was the Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL), a thunking layer that more or less let NT run on different processors.
Some gurus saw this approach and thought a somewhat similar approach could work with Windows 7 to help it run the software and drivers Vista failed to support. The idea was to use a virtual layer that mimics older OS architectures. The newest OS -- say, Windows 7 -- would be the leader and underneath would run the virtual layer. If done elegantly, you wouldn't even know the virtual layer is there.
Microsoft hasn't chosen this approach with Windows 7, and so far the compatibility reports are pretty good. These virtual pundits may be smart, but the Windows 7 dev team may be even smarter.
Posted by Doug Barney on March 16, 20090 comments
I remember some months ago reading about a research team (not Microsoft) that found IE 8 to be the
safest browser ever built. This is a bit like saying the Mercury Bobcat was the safest car -- before it was ever built, and before its gas tanks started exploding.
I didn't run IE 8 through any lab tests, but you've all told me about IE 8 and how the beta and release candidate spend more time crashing than driving. How can it be the fastest when it isn't even moving? When it does work, many of you find it faster than IE 7. But can we at least wait 'til final release before declaring victory?
Posted by Doug Barney on March 16, 20090 comments
Microsoft tries as much as possible to lock down new product features early in the beta, and then drives to make sure they all work. The Windows 7 crew must have missed that memo as the team
just added a troupe of tweaks, tunings and trimmings all tailored toward tightening the tool before it takes on release candidate status.
Many of the tweaks are fixes to little problems, like USB items not working after the machine comes out of suspend mode. Others affect look and feel, such as moving the "new folder" button up higher so it's easier to build new places for files.
Posted by Doug Barney on March 16, 20090 comments
I wrote a two-part series arguing that Windows 7, still in beta, is already better than Vista. Microsoft apparently agrees, letting slip that
Windows 7 runs many apps that Vista chokes on.
I always felt that Windows 7 needed a whole new kernel. Yet even with the old Vista kernel, it's far more compatible and way faster. I guess the problem is with the millions of lines of code that surround the kernel, not the core itself.
Of course, I could be wrong, and the production version of Windows 7 may well disappoint. Let's hope not!
Posted by Doug Barney on March 13, 20090 comments
Remember the "Grapes of Wrath"-style truck the Three Stooges always drove, where the tires were patched and then the patches patched? That's what a
DNS patch from Microsoft this week looks like, once its own holes are blocked up.
This patch only works if the server hasn't already been attacked. If so, the patch doesn't remedy the problem or offer protection. The only solution? Patch your systems fast, before they're compromised.
So who's your favorite Stooge (besides Iggy Pop)? I think Shemp is the only Stooge with true sophistication, and I never got the simplistic humor of Curly. Send in your votes for Moe, Larry, Curly, Shemp, Joe Besser or Curly Joe at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 13, 20090 comments
Microsoft has been
touting IE 8 as the next big browser, particularly for enterprises, but these readers think it still has a long way to go:
I had nothing but problems with IE 8. It crashed too many times for me. I love IE but I could not bear IE 8 on Vista. I got so frustrated with that browser, I decided to go back to Mozilla and uninstall the update. I think the most annoying thing was seeing that stupid box that says IE has stopped responding. I just couldn't bear that error message and how slow it was over anything.
Until they fix IE 8, forget it. IE 7 is much better.
-Michael
I used the beta version of IE 8 and found one of the banks I use did not support it. Then it was a nightmare to remove IE 8 and go back to IE 7. Once IE 8 gets its foot in, it doesn't like to be removed!
-Joe
IE 8 in 64-bit is awful. I have to use the 32-bit version, installed side-by-side, as the 64-bit version crashes 99 percent of the time (on Vista SP2 and Win 2008 Sever).
-Russ
My biggest complaint about IE 8 is how it "fixes" sites for you. So far, I've only run into a couple of problems, but guess what one of them is? Gmail. Coincidence? If I have 'Compatibility View' turned on, the page constantly refreshes...never to load. If I turn it off, it acts like I'm running Netscape 2.0 and shows me the Gmail footer in italic Times New Roman. I have to use the dumbed-down HTML view for Gmail whenever I'm running IE 8 now.
-Sharon
Share your thoughts with us! Leave a comment or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on March 13, 20090 comments
Bill Gates may be brilliant, but he's not immune to the collapse of capital. In the latest Forbes 400, Gates is still
ranked the richest person in the world, but he lost enough money to support Bernie Madoff's lifestyle for a year. In one year Gates went from $58 billion to $40 billion, and I'm sure his family has made some tough economic sacrifices. I don't think he's at the point where he serves Two-Buck Chuck and Old Milwaukee to Bono, but he may be putting off that new Lexus.
What's really interesting is that Gates, in terms of proportion, lost far less than pal Warren Buffet, a professional investor. Gates is only No. 1 because his foundation gives its money away carefully. Every disbursement is researched to the fullest; there are no earmarks or fluff in how The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation spends.
If this style of smart charity interests you, and if you use your IT skills for good, I want to hear from you at [email protected]!
Posted by Doug Barney on March 13, 20090 comments