Chris Steffen, over at Virtualization blog made a post to separate some of the “myths” from the reality of the debate between Hyper-V and VMware. The article refers to InformationWeek’s “9 Reasons Enterprises Shouldn’t Switch To Hyper-V”:
1. Breadth of OS support – Myth: Hyper-V has no support / limited support for Linux. Reality: Microsoft supports more than just the Windows server platforms, including versions of Linux from Red Hat and Novell. “VMWare claims to support 4x more OSes that Hyper-V, but what does that really mean? When Microsoft lists an OS as supported, they COMPLETELY support the actual OS installation in the VM and you can call Microsoft support on that OS. Microsoft has support agreements with Red Hat and Novell specifically for this purpose. VMware provides no support for the actual OS, telling customer to refer to the vendor.”
2. Memory management – Myth: VMWare allows for memory over subscription and this is a good thing. Reality: Microsoft solution doesn’t allow for over subscription of critical resources, but you shouldn’t do it anyway. First, there’s nothing poor about the way that Hyper-V manages memory – it works exactly as designed. It was designed with system performance and stability as the paramount priorities, whereas the VMWare solution appears to have been designed to allow a customer to cram as many instances on to the VM host as possible, regardless of the consequences.