*Along with the termination of perpetual licensing, Broadcom has also decided to discontinue the Free ESXi Hypervisor, marking it as EOGA (End of General Availability).
Regrettably, there is currently no substitute product offered.*
You can feel that the employee that wrote this knows this is a sinking ship.
It runs in Server Core mode and the learning curve is much steeper outside an AD domain or for non-Windows turbonerds; but once set up properly it is extremely powerful and I prefer it over VMware. Linux support for Hyper-V is built-in and outstanding.
Well, obviously, there is "currently no substitude product offered unless you are willing to move to something else"
In which case, of course, Proxmox is there since years. So why would you encrap yourself with hyper-v and postpone the show for only a couple of years when you could implement a robust solution ?
Hyper-V isn't so bad in traditional enterprise. You can buy a perpetual license on something which includes patches for the next 10 years (despite people saying for the last 10 years Microsoft is imminently going to force new products to subscription only), that license can cover the guest VM Window licensing, and support comes through the same contract you manage your desktop/laptop clients from. It integrates with the management of the rest of your domain and is, generally, actually pretty decent what it does for the given customer use case.
If you're building a hip new product with a bunch of Linux VMs you defined yourself greenfield then it probably seems a little ridiculous, especially since most of your stuff is likely containers or at least hybrid cloud conscious out of the gate. At that point you can grab a low cost subscription for your couple of servers and call it a day for a few grand a year.
Nutanix is probably the option most people looking at (or currently using) Hyper-V would be weighing right now.
wdym not crippled and powerful? it was always a literal cripleware that not only lacks of basic VM flexibility (usb/devices passthru etc) and cant run any guest except windows and linux, but also hard to mange due to lack of basic cli / gui. It has no advanced features that were added for datacenter edition back in 2016 and in fact pretty much dead as windows server itself
microsoft virtualization is long stuck in the past and forgotten, iykwim
if you need something more or less sane luke esxi, proxmox or even xen are way to go.
Let’s clear some things up here if you don’t mind.
All HyperV hosts can only run Windows and certain Linux distros, this is not a limitation of the free offering.
Passthrough is also not available for most types of hardware in all versions of HyperV. An imperfect workaround is to use passthrough with Remote Desktop. I’m not telling you it’s good I’m telling you it exists.
HyperV server has a basic cli interface and it is indeed harder to manage than Windows Server with a desktop experience. When using the Server Core versions which do not have the desktop experience or the LTSC versions, the ui is the same. Some commands are not available.
Yes there has not been a release of the dedicated HyperV offering since 2016. It does not mean Microsoft will not release another one.
> All HyperV hosts can only run Windows and certain Linux distros, this is not a limitation of the free offering.
I'm not sure where y'all are picking this up from, FreeBSD is even officially supported. I've run Redox and Haiku in it as well.
For non-production use cases though I recommend grabbing the latest Windows Server via a trial instead. The downside is you get 180 days per period and it can be renewed for 3 periods before it expires. The upside is you can just install Server Datacenter and get the kitchen sink, including full desktop. You do one VM migration and re-install and then the when that trial fully expires it's time to upgrade to the newer version of Windows Server anyways.
A hot tip is that Datacenter licensing allows you to activate VMs using a special CD key, so you can run a cluster of fully licensed Windows Server Standard VMs. Not sure if the Datacenter trial also works in the same way but I'd be kind of surprised if it didn't.
Very quick summary as I can't talk about it much yet (maybe in a few months). I was on bail at my home in Chicago. I was getting arrested every day by the police for no reason. They would come cuff me up, drag me outside, uncuff me. The press caught onto it. I did interviews. The public defender's office tweeted a link to one of the newspaper articles. I retweeted. The police arrested me for it. The judge agreed that I shouldn't be tweeting about police harassment, especially not under a "fake name" (my Twitter username is my first name, and the tweet literally is a newspaper article about me). It took me three months of being in jail to even get in front of the judge to argue it. And we reargued it and lost again. After that I just sucked it up. I got out six months later after three months in a supermax.
What is "Linux-y stuff"? Is Linux defined by having to use a terminal?
Android is basically an entirely different OS stack running on top of a Linux kernel. ChromeOS used to have it's own rendering and window management pipeline among other things, but as time has progressed their stack has gotten progressively more FOSS. You can run Linux apps, open a terminal, play Steam games via Proton, all from the default window manager/UI.
It's rootfs is locked down by default, but so is Fedora Silverblue or SteamOS. It can be optionally locked down further and turned into a managed system, but so can any distro. In terms of UX it's much more Ubuntu than it is Android.
I would include footguns, conf/dotfiles, hardware incompatibilities and workarounds (why does mpv need 1000 flags? ffmpeg? this is hardly even exaggeration!), multiple ways to reach the same goal (e.g. install software), often missing some peripheral support, CUPS, systemd, package conflicts, poor availability of most paid software, need for more technical knowledge (e.g. the standard Linux directory tree, how to install dependencies, run levels), usually less power efficient OS than MS/Apple, and so on.
When I ran ChromeOS (years ago) I recall having only a few intuitively named folders with most everything in "Downloads". I never needed to build my own stylus Wacom definition or switch operating systems to get the entire audio system functional. (In fact, the Gallium team had a lot of trouble getting the ChromeOS audio to "just work" on some platforms, such as Sentry.). Everything that came with the laptop worked. You could always pop up the shortcut overlay to remember how keys were mapped, Chrome browser didn't need weird codec or GPU flags or dependencies, I didn't need any obscure addition to the bootloader, the thing would run for over ten hours on a charge, I had no issues connecting to my school's networked printers.
Sure, ChromeOS still has dotfiles for things like editors, but it's not nearly as newbie-hostile as xorg.conf, /etc/profile, fstab, /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist.conf, GRUB, and all of the other service/module/daemon configurations needed to get something like Arch running on a random old 486 PC or laptop.
Then, the ChromeOS community started to make code editors and compilers accessible without needing crouton and needing to remove a screw from the motherboard.
Around this time, I started using a Dell XPS and stopped using the Chromebook. It developed some sort of memory problem sitting on a shelf. It still starts up but will crash anywhere between a few seconds and ten minutes, otherwise I'd repurpose it as a MIDI player/recorder for my digital piano.
From my recollection of ChromeOS, it seemed more stable and performant a decade ago than Windows 11 today.
Linux? I had rough times with Ubuntu around 10.04, it was much improved by the time I had it on the XPS in 2017, and now when I run Ubuntu on a ThinkPad Z13 or NUC Enthusiast 11, it has far more software and hardware issues than 16.04 and 18.04 on the XPS.
Making Linux stuff invisible isn't what fixes it and prepares it for end consumer usage, though. If you get rid of the Linux terminal, and still have many under-the-hood and polish issues that the user could only fix if they had a terminal, you have a bad product.
I assume they changed facetime to not infringe the patent (which was later found invalid anyway) in response so couldn't they just have opened up the changed version?
If that lawsuit affected their ability to go forward with facetime, facetime surely wouldn't exist at all so I don't understand why it explains facetime continuing to exist but not being open.
It's since exploded into things beyond just FaceTime. The FaceTime one though, Apple ultimately lost their appeal in 2019 and paid out $440M for FaceTime infringement (so, yes, legally speaking, VirnetX won). It's now over VPN patents which had some patents cancelled.
With FaceTime being legally infringing... hard to make an open standard. Plus, why would they now? Not only would it primarily benefit the competition; but it would also undermine FaceTime's security. The beauty of FaceTime is that it is very much tied to physical devices, making it very expensive and difficult to spam call without detection. An open standard would likely lose that ability, causing spam video calls everywhere.
Space is going to be industrialized, sooner or later. Since it takes massive amount of capital to do so, you can pretty much limit this kind of thing to wealthy nations or multi-billionaires such as Musk, Bezos and Branson.
I think this is absolutely part of it, I was just trying to separate whether the correlation between being a billionaire and enjoying space for non-industrialization reasons is correlated
Because most ISPs are also offering TV services and Netflix is eating their lunch, so they figured that asking for a "Cord cutter" tax was bad PR, but asking for a "Bandwidth tax" was somehow fair.
Regrettably, there is currently no substitute product offered.*
You can feel that the employee that wrote this knows this is a sinking ship.