> Yesterday, I listened to a webcast on server consolidation via
> virtualization. The presenter was Andrew Kutz from Burton Group. It was
> a good presentation, but one thing stuck out to me that I wasn't sure
> which way to go. In the presentation he spoke of how some vendors are not
> open to using virtual servers for thier applications. This having to do
> with more of a stigma or the unknown than any technical limitations. He
> suggested, when speaking with vendors about specifications that are needed
> for their servers that you should NOT tell them the server will be
> virtualized instead of on physical hardware unless it is explicitly stated
> in the application specifications. This obviously falls through if they
> need specialized hardware etc..., but for a normal Windows, Linux et al.
> server you should not tell them about it being virtualized. I have run
> into this with our vendors where they tell me that they do not want a
> server virtualized. They cannot give me a reason except the ole we won't
> support it. Our response is usually, aren't you a software vendor?
> Doesn't your software run on Windows, Linux etc...?
>
> What do you think? Is not telling the vendor about the virtual platform
> there application will sit on a wise decision given your companies goal of
> server consolidation?
>
> Rob McShinsky
> http://virtuallyaware.spaces.live.com
>
>