Comments on: Is Virtualization Finally Harming Server Sales?

By: The VAR Guy

The VAR Guy — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 06:49:12 +0000

Hameed: In Intel’s defense, the company has always cannibalized itself…
-TVG

By: Hameed

Hameed — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:23:36 +0000

Two developments stiffled growth of hardware $ lately. 1. Instead of cashing on laptop growth with high margin Centrino processors, Intel had this brilliant idea of shipping Atoms. Thus cannibalizing their own growth. And the rest followed 2. Virtualization, as mentioned in this article.

By: Jeffatdell

Jeffatdell — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:46:50 +0000

Virtualization won’t hurt server sales for these reasons:
- Some servers are not virtualizable, so replacement is the ony option
- Servers are constantly going to end of life. Old neturally gets replaced with new
- The best virtualized environments require rationalized storage, and usually iSCSI networking. Many IT infrastructures don’t have the right kind of backend.
- Reducing the number of servers today will work only until the capacity exceeds todays needs, but once that ends new servers are needed.

Just one person’s opinion.

By: Bradford Knowlton

Bradford Knowlton — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 05:06:51 +0000

Great post Var Guy,

It is interesting that you mention the role out of 2008. I have been following Microsoft’s transition from a graphics heavy operating system to the lighter “core” option. After some initial testing I was disappointed with the final product, but I did think it was a step in the right direction. They finally figured out what Linux community has always known a server doesn’t need a gui, it needs a guru controlling it. When the next server line ships I think we will see a even more friendly lights out server platform from Microsoft to run in the virtualization infrastructure.

Just my thoughts,
Bradford Knowlton
http://x86Virtualization.com