| Vendor | Claim to Fame | Key Products | Pros/Cons |
|
ManageIQ
|
Added high-level manager-of-managers approach to VM monitor and management. |
Management
|
Pros
Focused tightly on non-agent-based configuration management; monitors VM activity from a module outside the VM itself, tracking patches, applications, users and other factors. Cons
Only two years old; manager-of-managers approach requires extensive development and help from other vendors; introduction of Hyper-V will challenge ManageIQ's ability to keep up with rapid market shifts. |
|
Marathon Technologies
|
Released real-time replication and failover for virtual servers. |
Disaster recovery
|
Pros
As virtual servers host ever-more-critical applications, fail-over and recovery will become an absolute requirement Cons
Today, Marathon's technology works only with Xen-based hypervisors; no plans to work with VMware. |
|
Microsoft
|
Had to scramble in early 2000s to avoid being left behind as VMware caught a wave of server consolidation and centralized management. Used marketing, acquisitions and new emphasis in Windows Server development to fight back. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
Choosing Microsoft's Hyper-V hypervisor and Windows Server 2008 may offer some cost advantages compared to VMware; keep in mind products have yet to ship. Cons
64-bit only; runs only on x64 or via Server Core; VM management console is limited, most users will have to use VM-enabled version of System Center Virtual Machine Manager (VMM); no built-in failover capability; requires Windows drivers as platform; no bare-metal operation. |
|
Novell
|
In addition to developing and selling the Xen hypervisor with its own products, Novell has been a key ally of both Microsoft and VMware in the virtualization market. Its Linux-Windows virtualization-integration efforts and cross-platform management products have helped Microsoft keep its toehold in the market while waiting for the release of its own Hyper-V. Novell is one of the few virtualization vendors whose strategy clearly includes more than one OS. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
Relative neutrality in the virtualization market lets it play nice with both VMware and Microsoft; owns its own distribution of Linux and can tune it and its VM code to enhance each other; solid management tools of its own, plus recent acquisition of Platespin's physical-to-virtual (P2V) conversion tools to migrate Windows systems into XenSource's XenEnterprise Virtual Machines. Cons
Still a second-tier player among virtualization vendors; hypervisor is built into Novell's enterprise version of Linux, forcing customers to pay relatively high prices for Xen technology; startups and virtualization specialists could outstrip Novell's VM-management tools and leave it behind as market moves beyond simple migration to virtual servers. |
|
Opalis Software
|
Server provisioning and management for VMs |
Management
|
Pros
Experience and customer base in server provisioning; applies ITIL and ITSM to virtual servers; incident and change management and maintenance reduce hands-on-server time. Cons
Not the only fish in this particular sea; competition from Opsware got more intense when Opsware was acquired by HP. |
|
Oracle
|
A latecomer to the virtualization market, Oracle announced in November that it is offering its version of a Xen hypervisor, designed to run with Oracle Enterprise Linux servers, as a free download. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
Focus on adding virtualization support underneath Oracle products lets Oracle concentrate its development efforts; prices are relatively low for that reason; competition with Microsoft and VMware is purely titular -- Oracle's VM effort is designed to prevent either company from taking over the lowest-level software on a server running other Oracle products. Cons
Not an operating system or virtualization specialist; focus only on its databases and applications limits potential support for other uses of Oracle's VM; continuing effort to buy BEA Systems could interfere with BEA's Java deal with VMware; Oracle's tendency to go head-to-head with Microsoft whenever possible may draw its focus away from its core strengths and lead it into direct competition for VM OS market. |
|
Parallels
|
Mac-based virtualization. |
Infrastructure
|
Pros
Not much competition to put VMs on the Mac. Cons
Will there be broad-market demand for VMs on the Mac? That's still to be determined. |
|
Platespin
|
Provides disaster recovery and physical-to-virtual conversion for VMs. |
Disaster recovery
|
Pros
Relatively long history as a virtualization ISV; workload management, disaster recovery, physical-to-virtual server conversion will all continue to be important add-on management functions. Cons
Just bought by Novell; future of standalone products and alliances, pricing, licensing and other issues remain in question. |




