Comments on: Endangered Speicies: Vendor neutral VM Management

By: Network World weighs in on SCVMM-VI3 Management | VCritical

Network World weighs in on SCVMM-VI3 Management | VCritical — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:21:16 +0000

[...] I was writing this article, I noticed a tweet from Mike Laverick with his new post on vendor-neutral VM management — check it [...]

By: Mike Laverick

Mike Laverick — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:41:43 +0000

Yes, in away I think we are in agreement. I’ve not used Kodiak since it was first released – so I haven’t kept up with their development. But seems these so called vendor neutral tools either require vCenter – or can’t even do 1% of what vCenter can do.

Granted MS with the development resources are probably further along the track than bluebear.

The underlining subtext of my post – is that I don’t see a real big need/demand for a management solution which is vendor neutral except for hosting providers who might need to support multiple hypervisors. But these folks don’t represent the average guy who supports VMware.

By: Carlo Costanzo

Carlo Costanzo — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:06:40 +0000

Mike,

In fairness, I think SCVMM is further along the path of vendor neutrality than Kodiak is right now from a functional standpoint. Microsoft may do a piss poor job of managing two Hypervisors, but Kodiak is still struggling with one. I had some high hopes for BlueBear but it seems as though the company lost it’s steam. IMHO of course.

CARLO.