[Disclaimer: I'm a VMware partner.]

Let's continue the analogy, shall we?

1) Very few drivers want to build their own car.

2) The cars built upon the XenSource engine do not perform better than the cars built by VMware, as shown by recent benchmarks (from both camps)

XenSource playing the open source game is a farce: all their add-ons on top of Xen are proprietary.

In contrast, VMware's ESX entire source code is available via the VMware Community Source Program to anybody who is serious about partnering (you just have to explain what you want to implement and swear that you will not make the source code public).

Many partners (including myself) are making BIG money with VMware virtualization. That is the very reason Intel and Cisco have bought slices of VMware.

Of course, this is a competitive place: some partners win, some partners lose. The winners are happy and stay with VMware. The losers whine, and they talk to other losers like Mr Crosby.

Bashing the winners' cash cow (VMware) is not a good way to befriend the winners.

I think Mr Crosby is just trying to justify its inability to make money out of the Xen code base. Nobody wants XenSource because nobody needs XenSource. With the advent of hardware-assisted virtualization, paravirtualization is dead. And just in case you haven't noticed, the once overhyped Xen is no longer the cool kid on the block in the open source world: KVM is.

Darn tootin' VMWare is a car. A classy Citroen C6 with the efficient V6 Twin-Turbo Diesel. With a service contract, and a dealer network for guaranteed support. Last time I tested XEN, it was an engine, yes. An ancient, asthmatic 2CV engine. If I'm getting to work, I know which I'll use....

(and I'm speaking as a Citroen CX-driving Novell fanboy here :-)

People want stability. What would you chose? An overly customized car (like those race-car wannabes) or a reliable, performance driven car? (Like a BMW)

Xen is all set to become an "also rans" in the Virtualization game. It's time to smell the competition and see that VMware is light-years ahead. No catching up is going to make up for all those years of stable code and the amazing features.

When it comes to actually doing something, I don't really care who builds what part of the thing, and who wins which slice of the pie. VMWare is proven, quite robust, it works. I can find VMware specialists, there are a lot of resources on the web. I cannot modify VMware to suit my needs ? I don't want to, I already have what I need.

Based on your metaphor, Xen needs a good service. I tried it out recently and it won't even boot Linux on my system, something dire happens during boot and it dumps a load of diagnostics (that go off the top of the screen so I can't see what broke) and sulks. Normal Linux and VMWare server run just fine. A shame, because competition is good and it keeps the 800lb gorillas on their toes.

"1) Very few drivers want to build their own car."

Every Real Driver wants and needs the best car available built for them. And that will always be a Very Selective Custom Operation with the seemingly Impossible delivered effortlessly. And any AIReal Driver/MasterPilot will XPect IT 42 Fly at the Simplest of Command and Control Inputs..... Man and Machine Meld.....Cold Fusion by another name.

And for that you cannot entertain just proprietary components from even classy jalopies.

"And just in case you haven't noticed, the once overhyped Xen is no longer the cool kid on the block in the open source world: KVM is." ........ I couldn't agree more if KVM is <<<A KVM switch (with KVM being an abbreviation for Keyboard, Video, Mouse) is a hardware device that allows a user to control multiple computers from a single keyboard, video monitor and mouse. ....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KVM_switch >>>

But to ride that bronco, you'll need a firm seat locking you in XenSource Hypervisory Wizardry...... for such is the Real Metaphor of a flash pedestrian VMWare Vehicle rendered as against the clockwork precision of ITs Unique Imaginative R&D Virtualisation Custom Builders....... both may be in the same business and even working for the same team but as different as Chalk and Cheese with one assembling a Polo and the other creating a Veyron.

Methinks the Polo, no matter how reliable and well built will never ever aspire to pushing the envelope.....but it does allow for the envelope to be pushed ... so don't hog the cash whenever even the Present Future of Future dDevelopments in VMWare and XenSource, which is surely Intelligence by A.N.Other name, are as far advanced in their differences as are the apparent similarities between the Polo and Veyron..

A Mutually Beneficial Constructive Interdependent Independency is surely much Better as a Beta Model Platform for Future Projects....... something which the Teutonic Sector/MindSet appears to have XXXXCelled at.

People want stability. What would you chose? An overly customized car (like those race-car wannabes) or a reliable, performance driven car? (Like a BMW)

Think you'll find some of the fastest / best performing cars in the world are Kit (and limited build)cars, so keep your german Boring Machine for W**kers....

Go watch a track day and see how many 911 / M3 ponces get there arse kicked

by £7k "race car wannabe's"

Oh FYI

http://www.tigerracing.com/cars/tiger-z100-main.php

http://www.ultimacars.com/home_page_fra.htm

"Think you'll find some of the fastest / best performing cars in the world are Kit (and limited build)cars, so keep your german Boring Machine for W**kers....

Go watch a track day and see how many 911 / M3 ponces get there arse kicked

by £7k "race car wannabe's"

Those race cars will need rebuilding, constant attention and very expensive parts to keep them in optimum condition and perfomance. They're also not running nearly as often as the production models.

When you're talking about running a virtualisation system, it's the very stability and longevity that win, not outright horsepower. Leave the 'race condition' monsters to the trackday chavs and pc modders - I need a reliable system that runs and runs and runs with little maintenance. VMWare wins.

1) Very few drivers want to build their own car.

Every driver wants to build their own car... It's the lack of cash that inhibts them...

2) The cars built upon the XenSource engine do not perform better than the cars built by VMware, as shown by recent benchmarks (from both camps)

Your point being?

XenSource playing the open source game is a farce: all their add-ons on top of Xen are proprietary.

So?

In contrast, VMware's ESX entire source code is available via the VMware Community Source Program to anybody who is serious about partnering (you just have to explain what you want to implement and swear that you will not make the source code public).

So in other words it's closed source unless you're willing to sell your soul to the devil(yes even if it's free)

The whole IDEA of Free Software and Open Source is for people to SHARE it with

each other with no limits.

re: amanfrommars

KVM is the Kernel Virtual Machine that's a recent inclusion in linux.

Not enough code review. There's not enough code review because the source code is *not* free and open.

VMWare is more open that Microsoft Windows - and chlorine is less toxic than fluorine. That doesn't make either VMWare or chlorine a good choice for my nutrition.

A totally-closed-source system is subject to "secret" vulnerabilities and exploits. That's why it's unacceptable to intelligent sysadmins.

The open source debate from the perspective of those faced with the prospect of USING open source software (not those faced with DEVELOPING it which I think is a different story) seems to boil down to whether we as developers/sysadmins are paid to be intelligent or to be productive.

Honestly my employeer really isn't concerned with how intelligent I am. That simply isn't good enough for them. I can understand every single line of code in the Linux kernel and see where it fits into the big picture of the entire kernel stack, but at the end of the day, if I can't juggle the 12 tasks I've been given to the satisfaction of my boss and my customer, then what value am I to my company's business?

Besides, a truely "intelligent" sysadmin recognizes that in order to keep up pace with the business she must use her intelligence to be able to discern which vendors she can trust and which she can't trust to deliver reliable services and solutions that meet the customer's expectations. If I have to personally code review every peice of software I run in my shop then why not just write it all myself? What time am I saving in using someone else's stuff? And if I'm not personally code reviewing the software then why should I trust some random person/community in the open source world who is doing the code reviews for who-knows-what motivation as opposed to a company's internal employees doing the code reviews; employees whose motivation is perfectly clear and well understood: to please their managers who are interested in making the business money - money that is made by producing quality goods and services in an open marketplace. Why is it some want to inherently trust the "open source community" more than inidividual companies? Don't we all operate, as individuals, on the same principles of wanting to carve out a living for ourselves? Or are contributors and reviewers in the "open source community" really so altruistic and benevolent that they have no needs of their own they are trying to meet? I really think most open source fans would like to believe that open source programmers and reviewers are working under this, "the programming world has given me so much, it's about time I started giving back" mentality.

If anyone (perhaps someone has???) did a serious study of how many QUALIFIED eyes look at the source code of a given open source project and how many QUALIFIED eyes look at the source code of a given proprietary software product, I think most open sourcer's would be surprised at which solution really receives more scrutiny. I think the results of such a survey would show that the "yeah, but knowing that I COULD review the code if I wanted to" is a silly and impractical argument.

Lastly, I use both open source software and proprietary software. I choose which, not based on that criteria alone, but rather based on an intelligent (there's that word again) evaluation of which will best meet the needs and vision of my business. It would appear that Mr Crosby would prefer an Open Source world to an Open Marketplace world ("open source is the best solution, regardless of what the marketplace wants"). I don't think he does so out of an altruistic and benevolent mindset but rather because VMWare is incredibly successful in the Open Marketplace and ZenSource is not.

No virtual anything is that useful this is all a load of

hypothetical crap there isn't a problem in crying

need for these solutions admit it they aren't required for

anything.Who got all dreamy eyed over these needless

abstractions we have enough of those more is simply

playing with yourself.