Any comparison of Microsoft Hyper-V and VMware vsphere requires a lot of different aspects to be considered. First, their target customers and different models of deployment feature combinations are not the same. The number of actual machine instances is different and deployment requirements vary greatly, and these requirements also lead to different infrastructure and configuration choices. Second, it is a matter of management, and management is closely related to the size of the installation. In addition, we will consider a number of other issues, including cost, performance, scalability and availability.
Target Customer side:
VMware still has an edge when it comes to high-end, roughly-virtualized customers. VMware's capabilities such as distributed resource scheduling (DRS) meet the need for large environments to run a large number of VM devices under a variety of resource requirements, while in another case we can only nod to Microsoft. If a small and medium-sized enterprise buys Windows Server 2012, it's pointless to buy VMware vsphere to virtualize some specific features anyway.
Under what circumstances it makes sense to use VMware, which is a difficult question to answer. Hyper-V 2012 adds a lot of new functionality to SMB 3.0, and even the smallest businesses can support highly scalable clusters with Low-cost servers and commercially available SAS disk drives. The Hyper-V 2012 hosts also provide additional levels of redundancy for host VM replication capabilities, which were not supported in previous versions. From this point of view, the duel between the two is leveled.
At the same time, VMware has a similar feature, that is, using the same Microsoft Shadow Copy Service (VSS) behind the scenes. These similarities, and many others, make comparisons between the two products more problematic. In the end, their products are performing well and users can adjust to meet most of the virtualization requirements.
Management tool Aspects:
At the low end, Microsoft provides the user with a basic kit on Hyper-V Manager as a installable item for Windows Server 2012. VMware's traditional management tool, VMware vsphere Client is a free client that users must install on their PCs. Both provide a service to connect to a remote host, allowing users to manage any system on the network.
Some features are not implemented on the underlying management tools for both products. The advantage of Microsoft Hyper-V Manager is that, for example, it can move into the virtual machine tool and then enter it and clone or replicate the virtual machine tool. With VMware, users must connect to Vcenter server to move in or clone a virtual machine utility. However, due to respect for the hypervisor, the VMware vsphere Client provides more information about the host server and the client virtual machine server. VMware scored a point in this comparison, thanks to a more detailed chart presentation.
VMware provides vcenter server for managing large installations, while Microsoft provides system Center 2012. The newly released vcenter (version 5.1) adds a web-client portfolio that manages the user's VMware infrastructure anywhere. Both VMware and Microsoft use Windows PowerSHEll (command-line shell and scripting System management tools) to support automated management. VMware also added a free command-line tool called POWERCLI, which contains a long list of custom PowerShell cmdlet script files to manage the user's vsphere infrastructure.
Memory Environment Aspects:
Does hypervisor support excessive memory allocation? Excess memory allocation is a technique provided in vsphere that allows administrators to allocate more RAM capacity to the virtual machine than the host. There are a lot of support or objections to this topic, but it is clear that allocating more resources than physical requirements will increase the overall density of the virtual machine. Using excess memory allocations in a production environment is appropriate for each organization. That is to say, in my opinion, this technique can bring important benefits when used in the right environment.
Transparent page sharing:
Transparent page sharing is a way to achieve excessive memory allocation. Using this technique, the common code that is shared between virtual machines is itself virtualized. For example, you have 100 virtual machines running Windows XP in your VDI environment. With transparent page sharing, RAM is not necessarily a major limiting factor for server desktop density. VMware is more prominent in this technology.
Finally, it can be seen that in the virtualization field, VMware still has irreplaceable status, although Microsoft Hyper-V in the field of virtualization in recent years, and even beyond VMware in some functions, but at present, whether it is user awareness or cost-effective aspects, VMware is better.
The above is a small set to introduce you to the Hyper-V and VMware comparison which easy to use, I hope to help you, if you have any questions please give me a message, small series will promptly reply to everyone. Here also thank you very much for the cloud Habitat Community website support!