Microsoft, Novell shake hands on virtualization
You got SUSE in my Server 2008
Cloud storage: Lower cost and increase uptime
Odd couple Microsoft and Novell are reaffirming vows to let their products play nice together with an announcement of full joint support of SUSE Linux run as a guest operating system on Window's virtualization hypervisor, Hyper-V.
The deal spins from Microsoft anointing Novell as its pet Linux distribution back in 2006, while the software giant was attempting to cool off other distros with (apparently idle) threats of IP infringement.
The product is the first commercial code to come from a Microsoft and Novell jointly controlled "Interoperability Lab," opened September 2007 in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
"For customers standardizing on Microsoft's hypervisor who also have a mixed-source IT environment, this virtualization solution give that choice," said Bob Kelly, veep of server marketing at Microsoft. "For channel partners who need a cross-platform hypervisor offering, our work with Novell gives them an easy starting point."
Speaking of channel partners, the companies said Dell is the only major systems vendor to be participating. It's presently testing and validating software on PowerEdge server blades and rack-mounted systems at the Microsoft/Novell love nest. Others signed on include Insight, Computer Integrated Services Company of New York, Continentel Resource, Total Tech Systems, and 21Vianet.
While running SUSE in a VM under Server 2008 may not be ideal for everybody, it's certainly a good thing to have someone definite to cry to when things go pear-shaped. ®
COMMENTS
@ Hornard
taskkill -f does the same thing as kill -9
Yeah, I remember the time when IIS had to be hidden behind *nix. Though I live in todays world where a Windows IIS server behind a firewall is fine. Good enough for Nestle, Vodafone, Alliance & Leicester and millions of other enterprises....
The kernel of Windows has been as secure and reliable as Linux for a good decade. Both Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 share the same kernel, however that's about as far as it goes.
However Server can be setup with no GUI, no IE, no explorer - nothing. Just IIS or AD or DNS etc. Hosting VM's on this would be fine - including Linux guests.
The advantage is also that you know when a patch is coming out for Windows, rather than it just appearing as it does on Linux.
Other than the above, you didn't actually make any other points so I guess this is as much as I can "bring it on"... :-S
A little history lesson, with a bit of current day observation thrown in
Anyone recall the time when inhererntly insecure server (iis) was so insecure it had to be hidden behind Linux servers to deliver m$ web presence ?
Now as Obama recently said : 'you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig'. The same with vi$ta. It is the same bloated, rotten wrinkley old whore underneath as previous versions of window$, except they've thrown in 20 tons of lard to boot (and re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-boot, etc).
So by anology, window$ $erver 2008 is most likely the same as vi$ta, because by analogy this part of m$ has been sat on it's ass for the last decade as well. The good news is that it will take about a year for any malware to install on a system like this owing to it being so slow due to bloat, so you should have some time to notice that the old whore is ill :-).
Now lets take a proper look at the task scheduling/handling algorithms employed by *nix, and *do$e. *nix employs proper POSIX compliant handling, so kill -9 something really does make it fuck off the system there and then. The equivalent in the m$ environment (aka cesspool) gives you the limp wristed 'it won't go away cos it's not responding' shite. *nix systems are also much better at handling rogue processes than the m$ *do$e offerings, again because of POSIX.
So I have to say I agree with the guys on here who say that Linux VM on m$ is the wrong way round. I give my reasons above.
Flame because I expect the m$ fans to 'reply' ! Bring it on fanboys !
More uninformed mythology from freetards
"Linux can be stripped down much more, leaving you with a lot less scope for security holes or patches that need installing." said Joe Montana.
I would bet good money Mr Montana has not actualy looked at the roles on Windows 2008. Not only is the core role tiny with a tiny attack surface for bad people to shoot at it is MUCH simpler to set up that minimal environment than on any Linux disto I know.
Don't confuse an old windows desktop you once used with a proerly managed Windows server.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
What you need to know about cloud backup
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM implementer’s checklist
