Why Virtualization is Hot – and Could Become Even Hotter
Why Virtualization is Hot – and Could Become Even Hotter
Posted 12/16/2009 at 5:24pm
| by Mark Edward Soper
9
Comments
Print
Virtualization has become one of the biggest buzzwords in IT during the last couple of years, and for good reason. Virtualization enables you to run more than one operating system at the same time on a single system, enabling you to run legacy applications in their preferred environment instead of the janky compatibility mode built into Windows. Virtualization enables you to use a single physical system to perform the jobs of two or more systems, each performing different tasks, and it makes migrating these tasks from system to system much easier, whether you're upgrading hardware or replacing a dying machine. Virtualization also enables you to create a safe "sandbox" environment for testing applications within an existing computer, so you no longer need to tie up a separate system for testing.
Because combinations of operating systems and applications can be packed into virtual hard disks (a file that contains a ready to run virtualization environment), you can also use virtualization technology to create and use ready-to-run trials of applications, such as Microsoft's Internet Explorer 7+Windows Vista and Internet Explorer 8+Windows Vista trials. And, virtualization enables you to use one physical system to provide tech support for different operating systems at the same time.
Virtualization's a Big Hit in Serverville
Virtualization is making deep inroads into the server room, because it provides a way to get more use out of the same number of servers, and thus makes possible significant reductions in hardware budgets, physical network infrastructure requirements, cooling requirements, and power consumption.
Estimates from IDC indicate that about 16.5% of physical servers sold in the first half of 2009 include virtualization software, compared with 14.5% in the same period of 2008.
Leading virtualization technologies for servers include Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2, which includes Hyper-V virtualization technology, a subset of which is also available free of charge in Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2008 R2. VMWare also offers free server virtualization with its VMWare Server and ESXi platforms. Commercial products include VMWare vSphere and its companion vCenter Server, and Citrix XenServer.
For several years, servers have featured all of the elements needed to make virtualization work well:
- The rise of 64-bit processors.
- Large amounts of RAM.
- Hardware virtualization support in the CPU
64-bit server processors such as Intel's Xeon and AMD's Opteron shatter the 3.25GB usable memory limit of 32-bit processors, enabling systems to use 4GB, 8GB, or more memory. Since each virtualized operating system uses a portion of total system memory, the more memory that's directly addressable in a system, the faster each virtualized OS and its applications can run. These processors also support hardware virtualization, providing much faster virtualized performance than is possible when the virtualization application is solely responsible for making virtualization work.
Virtualization for Desktops
Most new desktops and laptops now include 64-bit processors and 4GB or more of RAM, as well, fueled by low memory prices (DDR2 available for under $30/GB). There's no shortage of desktop virtualization tools available (and many of them are free).
Microsoft once charged for its Virtual PC desktop virtualization program, but now offers both Virtual PC 2007 (for Windows XP and Window Vista) and Windows Virtual PC (for Windows 7) free of charge. Windows Virtual PC enables Windows 7 Business Professional and Ultimate editions to run a free virtualized version of Windows XP (Windows XP Mode).
Free third-party virtualization tools for Windows desktops include VirtualBox and VMWare Player. VMWare also offers its commercial VMWare Workstation for those needing more powerful management features.
What Desktop Virtualization Needs Before It Can Take Off
With all that virtualization has going for it, why is it still regarded as an exotic use on the desktop? Many desktop and laptop systems in business are still running 32-bit versions of Windows XP with less than 2GB of RAM, a poor platform for virtualization. Although 64-bit processors from AMD and Intel have become widespread in the last few years, the lack (until recently) of mainstream 64-bit desktop operating systems and motherboards designed for 64-bit operation made a widespread move to virtualization dependent upon sweeping Windows XP-class systems out of the way.
Windows 7 is the broom that may do the job: it's making most users forget about Windows XP's presumed successor, Windows Vista, and most new desktop and laptops systems shipping with Windows 7 are running 64-bit versions with at least 4GB of RAM. So, is desktop virtualization about to make a big leap in popularity? In an upcoming column, you'll find out what pieces of the virtualization puzzle are missing from most of today's most popular small-business desktops and laptops.
About Mark Edward Soper
Mark's work has been featured in Maximum PC and MaximumPC.com, and he is the author/co-author of over 20 books on technology subjects, including these current titles: CompTIA A+ 220-701 and 220-702 Cert Guide, Easy Microsoft Windows 7, and The Shot Doctor: the Amateur's Guide to Great Digital Photos.
More like this
nekollx
December 17, 2009 at 9:56am
Windows Virtual PC enables Windows 7 Business and Ultimate editions to run a free virtualized version of Windows XP (Windows XP Mode).
You missed that Win 7 PROFESSIONAL also has XP mode.
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
Biceps
December 16, 2009 at 7:46pm
I understand why people think virtualization is so cool, but people are not taking into account the fact that every single packet has to travel over the internet from wherever your server is to your thin client. Every time the internet is having a bad day, or your local ISP has an issue, ALL of your computers go down.
My company has, in the past couple of years, saved maybe $500 through virtualization in the two branches I work in, and we are now phasing it out. I have personally seen us lose several thousand dollars more than once because we couldn't take a payment because our thin clients weren't working.
I think virtualization is very very overrated. Sending every mouseclick to a server on the other side of the country cannot be more efficient in the long run, IMHO. Call me old fashioned.
r7mr7m
December 17, 2009 at 1:14am
Ummm... You are assuming that people only use virtualization for thin clients accross internet connections. This is simply not true. One of the main points of virtualization is to have the capability of moving virtual machines across physical servers in maintenance or troubleshooting software or hardware issues for maximum uptime. Also, it is to use one physical server to run multiple server OSs with various functions so that you can get the most use out of the physical server (server consolidation) and saving power, which is becoming more and more expensive and with datacenters charging extra or limiting the number of physical servers per rack, virtualization is vital.
It is quite often used for onsite servers. I guarantee you can save more than $500 when implementing virtualization. Let's say you have 3 or 4 servers. First off, you don't have the cost associated with the purchase /maintenance of the hardware of 3 or more servers. With Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition, you can save money on licensing because you can run up to four running virtual instances on one server at no additional cost. Also, the power draw from one physical box despite being utilized quite a bit more than a single use server is significantly less than 3 or more servers with multiple power supplies. And if you factor the cost of uptime through an inherent fault tolerance (fewer dollars spent on recovery), you can almost certainly save tens of thousands, just in this scenario.
Biceps
December 17, 2009 at 9:24am
You are absolutely correct, but my opinion stands. You didn't mention anything about how virtualization is great for running legacy programs on a modern OS, either. Virtualization has its place, and has a lot of potential in some areas - like maximizing the ability of a single 'box'. We have saved a lot of money on servers at our company (a LOT more than $500, you are right) doing exactly as you mentioned.
My main gripe is specifically with thin clients - one of the most visible and most marketed (at least to company management) capabilities of virtualization. The $500 bucks we saved was actually the difference between what we paid for a few thin clients vs. what we would have paid for 'real' computers. What is not factored in is the fact that we had to upgrade our internet service from T1 to T3 to handle the additional bandwidth used by thin clients. We wouldn't need servers at all if some dip hadn't purchased a couple hundred thin clients. We could just run everything locally... or have 1 server for specific centralized database needs. Our entire company is now phasing out thin clients (in over 50 locations) because they are costing us more than normal PCs. That is telling, I think.
Biceps
December 17, 2009 at 2:12pm
Yes, except I am saying IMO thin clients are a phenomenal waste of money and resourses, but are marketed as money savers that increase efficiency. Thin clients are a giant part of the virtualization movement, so therefore virtualization is overrated. Hmf.
I suppose I have lost this battle, but I will be back! Next target --> cloud computing. :D
mattman059
December 16, 2009 at 6:09pm
Im currently using VirtualBox to host my freeNAS server and its awesome. I couldnt be happier with the benefits that a virtual envrionment offers.
On my main system I use VirtualBox to test out Operating Systems like Debian, Mandriva, BackTrack.
r7mr7m
December 16, 2009 at 9:49pm
Thumbs up on VirtualBox. The latest version is an amazing addition of features with teleportation and the updated snapshot branching. I have astaro, server 2003 r2 x64, ubuntu x64, Server 2008 guests and am trying to find a way to get freenas to recognize the drives of the host.
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
We introduce Intel's latest class of tablet killers and review 4 of the first Ultra...
Where have all the memorable videogame enemies gone?
This month's issue
Feature
11 Hardware Hacks
Feature
Overclock Your CPU
How-To
Supercharge Your Smartphone
Build It
A Powerful $830 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Analysts: 9-Inch Kindle Fire This Summer http://t.co/QDYApwCZ1 day 3 hours ago
- maximumpc: Micron: DRAM Prices Likely as Low as They're Going to Get http://t.co/fFUWuFOm1 day 6 hours ago
- maximumpc: Yar, Mateys! All Of Pirate Bay Made Available As A Single 90MB Zip File http://t.co/j5LHlXEZ1 day 8 hours ago
