- #Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 Patch#
- #Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 software#
- #Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 free#
- #Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 windows#
Probably a good idea in principle, but going about it on this scale is quite the gamble. This reeks of a desperate attempt to diversify by a company in a declining industry. Of course with Dell being a private company, we won't have the detailed financial reports that we would see for a publicly traded company, so it will be harder to tell how it's going until they file for bankruptcy. Does the merger of their product lines into a more complete offering create significant value and additional revenue potential? Enough value and potential to justify the $14B premium that Dell is paying for the acquisition? I tend to doubt it. A $67B acquisition is quite a huge premium on that price. Looks like EMC closed with a market cap of ~$53B on Friday. EMC has positive earnings and is paying out dividends, so Dell won't be providing investment capital that EMC could not otherwise access.
Both companies are fairly well, if not very well managed, so Dell execs aren't going to lend value to EMC's operations in that regard. Veeam partnered up with VMWare so their backup product can utilize some direct hooks in VMWare itself, to do things that are usually off limits to other applications not made by VMWare.Īcquisitions that account for more than a small fraction of the acquiring company's overall value are risky and don't have a good track record. We built one high-spec rack mount server and virtualized 5 of the older physical machines to consolidate it into one box with more drive space and usable RAM.)Īnd if you start considering paying VMWare's price for all of the "vmotion" licensing related to moving VMs between virtual servers, etc.? Depending on what you actually need - you might be able to save some money just going with VMWare "essentials" instead and combining it with the 3rd. (That's all we never needed at my previous job working for a small manufacturing firm.
#Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 free#
VMWare is still available in a free version though, if all you need is the need to virtualize a number of systems on a single server. Until that happened, your only other "enterprise-grade" solution came from Citrix and had a price tag comparable to VMWare.
#Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 windows#
Really, the one thing that made VMWare suddenly appear expensive was Microsoft's move to support the same basic functionality built into Windows Server via Hyper-V. We have plenty of end users that run third party apps or custom apps that require certain versions of older or different *NIX hosts that can now all run on 'commodity' Hardware virtualized by VMwa You can also move your VMs that happen to be using more resources to ESX Hosts that have more resources available.Īs to running different OSs in VMs, that is more common that you think.
#Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 Patch#
Yes to a point but if you HA the ESX Hosts (that run the VMs) you can patch and failover/failback your ESX Hosts and so your VMs. If anything, it seems like one *huge* point of failure is being described here. But I'm surprised to hear anyone say it is for high availability. Sure there is some economy of scale virtualizing machines and there are virtues in virtualizing you can share some resources and save on hardware where appropriate.
And I don't know many places that do that (at least not any place of any size). Unless of course you run a different operating system for every one of your servers. When was the last time you only had to patch one host? You normally will have to patch all of them. And a host is a host is a host, VM or not. Otherwise you wouldn't need multiple OS's now, would you? And they all require resources. And in my experience those somethings happen concurrently with what happens in multiple virtual OS's on the physical box. And how can you virtualize additional OS's without adding more CPUs, RAM, and disk space without making a joke of what you are running?Presumably you add OS's to actually do something.
#Latest data domain os version 5.4.3.2 software#
The actual servers have to be high availability before any software that runs on them. The VMs run on actual servers, not virtual ones. So this and other comments like it seem strange to me.
0 kommentar(er)
