| Vendor | Claim to Fame | Key Products | Pros/Cons |
|
Double-Take Software
|
Physical-server recovery vendor shifts to virtualization. |
Disaster recovery
|
Pros
Supports both VMware and Microsoft; long track record in critical reliability functions; fail-over and disaster recovery for both physical and virtual servers from one vendor. Cons
Still adapting physical server-based licensing to accommodate virtual servers as well. |
|
Embotics
|
Applies policy-based management to virtualized environments. |
Management
|
Pros
Policy-based security and automated administration hits compliance and administration requirements for big users; close alliance with Microsoft; time saved automating server administration is multiplied by the number of VMs for which it can do the same. Cons
It's a startup whose sustainability is unproven; products support VMware architecture, but Embotics was also recently named part of Microsoft's Startup Accelerator Program, and Microsoft protégé status could come with pressure to favor Hyper-V and Redmond interpretations of the virtual world. |
|
EqualLogic
|
Added iSCSI to the fiber-only SAN world, drastically reducing virtual storage cost and complexity. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
History of solid performance and presence in a must-have part of the virtualization market; low-cost consolidated servers little good without low-cost storage; now has backing of Dell's deep pockets. Cons
Dell is focusing heavily on the mid-market right now. |
|
FalconStor
|
Adding VTL capability to virtual environments. |
Disaster Recovery
|
Pros
Long history and installed base of storage and disaster recovery products; record of reliability; range of applicable products; partnerships with Virtual Iron, other hot virtualization companies. Cons
Strongest in mid-market, not among larger customers; best-known for software, all-in-one packages, which could leave the integration headache with the customer. |
|
Hewlett-Packard
|
Has maintained partnerships with VMware, Citrix and other virtualization vendors since at least 2003, and offered virtualization on its own server and Unix variant as well. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
Multi-OS support; menu of sophisticated systems and network management products; alliances with Microsoft, VMware, most other significant players. Cons
Relies on vendor and channel partners for most of its virtualization expertise; with no specialization in virtualization, HP runs the risk of being outpaced if VMware, Microsoft or others opt out of alliances. |
|
IBM
|
Ideally placed supplier of high-end hardware, systems and network management for virtual environments. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
Wide range of high-end servers, terminals, thin-client infrastructure and management products makes for a potent source for virtualization products. Cons
Relies, as does HP, on partners for most of its expertise in virtualization technology; risks being left behind by more nimble vendors. |
|
Intel
|
Tweaked microprocessors to make virtualization doable on x86 machines. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
IVT is a key enabler of virtualization; dual- and quad-core chips continue to add power to servers destined to run many VMs as their key task. Cons
Little expertise in virtualization beyond the chip; AMD nips as close on its heels in virtulization as in other areas of chipmaking. |
|
Leostream
|
P2V migration tools |
Management
|
Pros
Combination of migration tools and off-site hosting makes shift as easy as possible for customers. Cons
Handles primarily Linux servers; in the past has lagged in feature development behind competitor Platespin, whose development is now funded by new parent Novell. |





