Yep, you guessed it , Yet Even More blogs on VMworld 2009!
I take no credit for any of this content, it go’s to the author, and I mean to only put the content here without having to weed through the varies blogs, I have both the blog link, and article title here, with a link to the article. Thanks to everyone for putting these together for everyone to read!
AN FRANCISCO — More than 200 products were considered in The Best of VMworld 2009 Awards in categories ranging from desktop virtualization to cloud computing. The awards, sponsored by TechTarget’s SearchServerVirtualization.com, highlight the most innovative technologies at the show.
In the Security and Virtualization category, the gold winner was HyTrust Inc. for its HyTrust Appliance. The finalist was Catbird Networks Inc. for Catbird vCompliance.
Watch video of some of the Best of VMworld 2009 Awards finalists and gold winners.
The HyTrust product "provides a single point of control for hypervisor access management, configuration, logging and compliance," according to a statement from the judging panel, which is anonymous.
In the Business Continuity and Data Protection Software category, Vizioncore Inc. took the gold for vRanger Pro 4.0.
There were two finalists in that category: Veeam Software Inc. for Veeam Backup & Replication and PHD Virtual Technologies for esXpress n 3.6.
"While contenders in this category were close rivals, the winner changed the most for the better," the judges wrote. "The gold winner provides a cleaner interface and all-around faster tool, speed being crucial in this category."
In Hardware for Virtualization, Cisco Systems Inc.’s Unified Computing System (UCS) won the gold.
Judges said that UCS "provides a unified platform for hardware and networking that radically reduces the number of devices requiring setup, management, power and cooling, and cabling. … This offering will be hugely impactful in the marketplace."
A group of engineers from the National Defense and Canadian Forces in Ontario who attended a super session on UCS Tuesday said the UCS system is ideal for dedicated technologies such as desktop virtualization.
"It looks like a good technology. … You could get the system and throw a bunch of desktops on the blades, and it would run great," said one of the engineers, who wished to remain anonymous.
The two finalists were Xsigo Systems for VP780 I/O Director 2.0 and AFORE Solutions Inc. for ASE3300
More than 40 companies entered in the Virtualization Management category, and Netuitive Inc. won for its Netuitive SI for Virtual Data Centers. The product impressed the judges by providing "broad management far beyond virtual environments and a self-learning capability that alerts you to problems hours before they happen," the judges said.
Finalists in the management category were Veeam Software for Veeam Management Suite and Embotics Corp. for V-Commander 3.0.
The gold winner in the desktop virtualization was AppSense for AppSense Environment Manager 8.0. The judges said AppSense "rocked our boat. … It offers the most complete user management environment system out there."
The two finalists in this category were Liquidware Labs for its desktop virtualization diagnostic tool Stratusphere and Virtual Computer Inc. for NxTop.
For Cloud Computing technologies, the gold went to Mellanox Technologies for its Intalio Cloud Appliance. Judges said Mellanox offered "the most impressive integrated private cloud system for building large-scale internal clouds."
The finalists were InContinuum Software for CloudController v 1.5 and Catbird Networks Inc. for Catbird V-Security Cloud Edition.
The best new technology at VMworld 2009 was VirtenSys’ VirtenSys IOV switch VMX-500LSR. Judges considered VirtenSys innovative because of its potential cost savings. "It eliminates an entire layer of switching," the judges wrote. "Without this product, you would have to buy big iron to get all this functionality."
The Best of Show award this year went to HyTrust for HyTrust Appliance because, according to the judges, it offers "the greatest potential to secure virtual environments by providing a single point of access control. It frees admins to set policies once that won’t be overridden by other tools."”
Video, VMworld Awards
Steve Herrod started off the keynote today discussing VDI, including the announcement of an agreement to embed RTO Software’s Virtual Profiles into View. Their goal is to provide end users the same rich experience no matter the situation (WAN, LAN or offline mobile). Like any good Herrod keynote, live demos ensued, including PCOIP and the Wyse iPhone View Client. The demo of the Mobile Virtualization Phone was pretty interesting, especially when he showed that the demo app was running in an android VM, completely seamless within the Windows CE environment. The keynote then switched over to the datacenter, where he came out swinging by describing why VMotion is more mature and proven (and a time-tested marriage saver) compared to other “live migration” offerings. Next, he discussed the fact that VMware is currently working towards I/O based DRS, which will include setting shares and IOPs limits per hard disk. He then covered the big features of vSphere, but didn’t cover anything new until the end when he introduced and gave a quick demo of vCenter ConfigControl. Next up was the cloud discussion, but nothing terribly groundbreaking, though he did mention long-distance VMotion as an upcoming feature. Following up on the cloud discussion, Mr. Herrod described IaaS, PaaS and Saas (Infrastructure, Platform and Software as a Service, respectively), and why SpringSource is so key to the cloud strategy. In essence, it helps to continue to break apart the different layers of the datacenter into individual pieces that can be manipulated independently from one another. The CEO of SpringSource then came out to demo their technology. All in all, another great keynote. Steve Herrod is not to be missed!
After the keynote I attended a session on vSphere deployments in the morning and an AppSpeed presentation in the afternoon. Both were okay, but informational. AppSpeed is definitely worth considering, but still has a lot of maturing to do.
Most of my day was spent in the Solutions Expo chatting with many different vendors. The most impressive product I saw was the new HP MDS600, which is a SAS direct storage solution. It holds 70 SAS drives in 5U. Very impressive when you consider some of the futures of the SAS switches in the c-class blade system. Go check it out; I believe they have one set up in the Melanox booth. I also spent some time with VDI related vendors, including the aforementioned RTO Software, AppSense and LiquidWare Labs. All have very interesting products that will need some lab time.
The highlight of the day was the vExpert lunch and meeting. It was a great opportunity to meet and chat with many familiar names. I can’t possibly list them here, but it was great meeting every one of you. We even got to hear from Steve Herrod who told us he was going to be the executive sponsor of the program going forward.
And then the party…
As always, the party was a great time. The food wasn’t great, but the drinks were free and the band was great, as was the company. Unfortunately, by the time the concert was done, we emerged to find that the entire party was shut down, which was very disappointing! We didn’t have near enough time to enjoy anything else that VMware had arranged for us. “
I arrived to this session a bit late as well (noticing a theme here?) but a lot of the basics of this session were very similar to one last year on remote user experience in virtual desktops.
The gist of it is VMware has done some internal benchmarking using the PCoIP beta code (not final!) on vSphere and compared it to PortICA 2.1 – not the newest with HDX stuff, this was asked in a question pretty early and they were (deservedly) given some guff for that – and RDP (to an XP VM so only RDP 5.1).
They talked forever about their testing methodology. Essentially they tested three things:
- A synthetic benchmark they created in-house called RPerf (which I saw last year in the similar session) that basically exercises a display protocol in as low-impact a way as possible to the underlying host (so you can measure how much CPU/memory the protocol takes and not how much CPU/RAM running the benchmark takes)
- A 320×240, 25fps video with mixtures of different types of video that range from fairly static, pans, zooms, areas of motion on still backgrounds, and random static.
- An AutoIT-based workload that tests actual VM performance in addition to the connection protocol.
The results were pretty favorable to PCoIP. In many cases it wasn’t the fastest, but it was never the worst. Sometimes it would barely lose to RDP in the LAN case, and barely lose to PortICA on the WAN case. It was never far behind the in any of the tests they showed results for, and in many cases was the fastest. The other big benefit was PCoIP had lower overhead in CPU and RAM than either PortICA or RDP. Tests were run entirely with the software PCoIP implementation – no hardware.”
I arrived late to this session, but it looks like the beginning was about how to plug into today’s View product and make automated changes or fire off scripts based on events and such. The basics of it was the integration points you have today are very very limited – you have the two CLI tools (SVIConfig and VDMAdmin), log file monitoring, and editing the ADAM LDAP directly.
In View 4 new features will include an event reporting central warehouse – a database with a rollup of events from all clients, agents, and servers. It will include an event database with information on what events mean what along with resolutions, and will allow for querying using VDMAdmin or SQL tools such as Crystal Reports.
The best news though is PowerShell automation support! That makes View the 3rd product (after vCenter and Update Manager) to get PowerShell support. Using PowerShell should obviate the need to ever directly edit the LDAP, which is good because PowerShell can validate your input and will be far less dangerous. You can use PowerShell to stand up an environment from scratch, everything from global config, pairing it with a vCenter server, and making pools and VMs. You can also query the event warehouse for reporting purposes, and perform actions on sessions and VMs managed by View. Some examples:
#Set View License Key
Set-license -key AA113-XXXXX...
#Set the Pre-Login Message
Update-GlobalConfig -PreloginMessage "message"
#Update the power policy of a pool so you can preboot VMs at 5AM to avoid boot storm
Update-AutomaticDesktop -id DesktopJoe -PowerPolicy AlwaysOn
#Create a new Individual Desktop by using PowerCLI to get VM Object and pipe it to View CLI
Add-IndividualDesktop -id DesktopJoe -DisplayName "Desktop" -vm (Get-VM -name JoeVM)
#Entitle a user to a desktop
Get-User ADUserName | Add-DesktopEntitlement -desktop_id DesktopJoe
#Disconnect an active session
Get-ActiveSession -User "Joe" | Send-SessionDisconnect
This was the best news I’d heard all day. Finally, I can do all the neato stuff I can do in standard vCenter in View!
They then went into a bunch of Microsoft SCOM integration stuff which seemed pretty useless to me, and I was so buzzed from the PowerShell stuff I barely paid attention.”
his session was about VMware’s Client Hypervisor Platform, or CVP. CVP was announced a while back by VMware. Here are the highlights of the session.
CVP is a powerful client hypervisor solution, which is part of the greater VMware View offering. It is not going to be offered standalone, it is a View product only. It helps create what the presenters called a “thin” thick client.
There are two approaches to doing a client hypervisor: Direct Assignment or Advanced Device Emulation.
In Direct Assignment, technologies like Intel VT-D or other software techniques are used to pass through a physical device (such as a video card) directly into the VM. This has some advantages such as lower overhead, and if you’re running Windows in your VM then all you need is a set of Windows drivers, which are easy to find. Passthrough is also much easier to program…
It has several downsides, however. For example, it ties your VM to that particular hardware which reduces portability. It also becomes difficult to interpose on that device. For example, if the video card is owned by the VM, there’s no way for the hypervisor to access it. Same goes for the network card. The point being – if all you’re doing is passing through your physical devices, why do you need a Client Hypervisor? Just run native. You can’t add value when using passthrough on everything. For some device types (such as USB) where the O/S is expecting hardware to appear and disappear, passthrough is okay.
VMware’s strategy is around Advanced Device Emulation. Client only needs a driver for the emulated hardware device, because the hypervisor itself contains the driver for the underlying physical hardware. The advantages here are that it divorces the VM from the hardware, making portability easy, as well as simplifying hardware upgrade and recovery. Also, the Hypervisor can add functionality by managing the devices, such as enforcing network security policies and the like. This does mean that the hypervisor needs to have complete drivers for the underlying hardware.
VMware’s CVP has the following features:
- Improved guest 3d support using a new type of virtual SVGA card. Supports DirectX 9.0L for Aero Glass.
- Paravirtualized Wireless device. This is important because unlike a wired NIC, a wireless NIC only has one radio, so your hypervisor and VM can’t both be tuned to different networks. You need to give control of the radio to someone, so they allow the guest to control (using its native management capabilities built into the OS) that radio through a special VMware WiFi virtual device. This also means it works with guest-based “supplicants” like iPass.
- USB is fully supported and is Passthrough like Workstation.
- External Display and MultiMonitor capable. Allows extended desktop, mirroring, rotation either in built-in OS control (Windows 7) or through a special tab from VMware (WinXP, Vista, analogous to the ATI/nVidia control panel applets that do the same)
- External Storage support for eSATA (!!) and built-in laptop card readers.
- Power Management awareness – respond to guest power state (i.e. allow the VM to suspend or shutdown the physical hardware). Respect the guest power policy and connect special events to guest like the lid switch or the sleep/power buttons on the physical hardware.
- Encryption support: the VMX and VMDKs are all encrypted using the onboard Intel vPro TXT and TPM capabilities. Uses 256-Bit AES encryption. When asked if this would be optional or modifiable, that is still to be determined.
- CVP is based on linux and in the pre-beta version they showed, it actually had a shell we could break out into. In the final version we were assured this would not be available.
So what good is all this supposed to do? The idea is the user checks out a Virtual Machine (or one is pre-provisioned for them) to their CVP device. That device is managed by View Manager, which accesses an embedded View Agent in the CVP. This is used for policy enforcement, heartbeats, configuration changes, endpoint statistic gathering, and managing transfers from the View Server. The VM can run offline and also is smart enough to adapt its virtual hardware (like number of CPUs, GB of RAM) to the underlying physical hardware. VMware is targetting only a 256MB overhead for CVP. Today the CVP can run one VM only, but could store more than one.
CVP is an embedded Linux Type 1 hypervisor with a minimal set of packages installed. It’s optimized for fast boot time, and will be fully qualified on individual hardware platforms (like ESX). It does not contain a general purpose OS, so no doing work in the CVP. VMware itself provides updates such as patches, bug fixes, and new hardware enablement. It will be updated monolithically like ESXi is (full firmware updates), and this is updated from the View Manager server. The codebase is really unrelated to ESX, it’s more based on Workstation for Linux.
CVP requires Intel’s vPro and integrates with it’s Active Management Technology (AMT) for a bunch of things like Inventory collection, remote power on/off, and configuration backup onto the AMT private storage. It will be compatible with all AMT-enabled management tools like Altiris, LANDesk, etc.
The CVP itself has no listening ports, so it should be impossible to break into via the network. The disks are encrypted, Intel TXT + Trusted Boot protects integrity of the hypervisor in hardware. After installation, laptop will only boot approved hypervisor (no booting to a rescue CD). Encryption keys are stored in the TPM module and are used to encrypt the drives.
I asked several questions at this session:
- The demo from last year involved booting from a USB Key. Will boot from flash be supported?
- Initial release installs on hard disk and runs there.
- Will the CVP also work as a remote View client (with PCoverIP support)?
- That is on the roadmap but will not be in version 1, only locally running VMs.
- At VMworld 2007, tech for streaming a virtual appliance and booting it while data was still in flight was demoed. Will this be in CVP?
- They have the code, but user issues kept it out of first release. How does user know when it’s safe to go offline? When they resolve this issue they will bring that code in.
Overall I am pretty excited about CVP. I understand the HCL may be fairly limited at launch, but it really does have tremendous potential for View environments.”
This was a really interesting session that really broke down a lot of the stuff that was improved in vSphere. VMware likes to talk about how vSphere has however many hundred new features, here’s an interesting list of the highlights:
- IO overhead has been cut in half. Also, IO for a VM can execute on a different core than the VM Monitor is running on. This means a single CPU VM can actually use two CPUs.
- The CPU scheduler is much better at scheduling SMP workloads. 4-way SMP VMs perform 20% petter, and 8-way is about 2x the performance of a 4-way with an Oracle OLTP workload, so performance scales well.
- EPT improves performance a LOT. Turning it on also enables Large Pages by default (which can negatively affect TPS). Applications need to have Large Pages turned on, like SQL (which gains 7% performance)
- Hardware iSCSI is 30% less overhead across the board, Software iSCSI is 30% better on reads, 60% better on writes!
- Storage VMotion is significantly faster, because of block change tracking and no need to do a self-VMotion (Which also means it doesn’t need 2x RAM)
- In vSphere performance between RDM and VMFS is less than 5%, and while this is the same as ESX3.5, performance of a VM on a VMFS volume where another operation (like a VM getting cloned) has improved.
- Big improvement in VDI workloads – a boot storm of 512 VMs is five times faster in vSphere. 20 minutes reduced to 4.
- PVSCSI does some very clever things like sharing the I/O queue depth with the underlying hypervisor, so you have one less queue.
- vSphere TCP stack is improved (I know from other sessions they’re using the new tcpip2 stack end-to-end.
- VMXNET3 gives big network I/O improvements, especially in Windows SMP VMs.
- Network throughput scales much better, 80% performance improvement with 16 VMs running full blast.
- VMotion 5x faster on active workloads, 2x faster at idle.
- 350K IOPS per ESX Host, 120K IOPS per VM.
All reasons to be running vSphere on your infrastructure today.”
Wednesday, September 2, 2009 in by slowe
There is no Internet connectivity in this session, so I’ll have to publish this after the session has concluded.
The Cisco Nexus 1000V is, of course, a Layer 2 distributed virtual switch for VMware vSphere built on Cisco NX-OS (the same operating system that drives the physical Nexus switches). It’s compatible with all switching platforms, meaning that it doesn’t require physical Nexus switches upstream in order to work. The Nexus 1000V brings policy-based VM connectivity, network and security property mobility, and a non-disruptive operational model.
The Nexus 1000V has two components: the Virtual Supervisor Module (VSM). Interestingly enough, the slide shows that the VSM can be a virtual or physical instance of NX-OS; there has been no formal announcement of which I know that has discussed using a physical instance of NX-OS as the VSM for the Nexus 1000V. The second component is the Virtual Ethernet Module (VEM), which is a per-host switching module that resides on each ESX/ESXi host. A VSM can support up to 64 VEMs in a distributed logical switch model, meaning that all VEMs are centrally managed by the VSM. Each VEM appears as a remote line card to the VSM.
The VEM is deployed using vCenter Update Manager (VUM) and supports both ESX and ESXi. The Nexus 1000V supports both 1Gbps and 10Gbps Ethernet uplinks and works with all types of servers (everything on the HCL) and upstream switches.
The Nexus 1000V supports a feature called virtual port channel host mode (vPC-HM). This feature allows the Nexus 1000V to use two uplinks (NICs in the server) connected to two different physical switches and treat them as a single logical uplink. This does not require any upstream switch support. Multiple instances of vPC-HM can be used; for example, you could use four Gigabit Ethernet uplinks, two to each physical switches, could be used to create two different vPC-HM uplinks for redundancy and separation of traffic.
For upstream switches that support VSS or VBS, you can configure the Nexus 1000V to use all uplinks as a single logical uplink. This requires upstream switch support but provides more bandwidth across all upstream switches. Of course, users can also create multiple port channels to upstream switches for traffic separation. There are lots of flexiblity in how the Nexus 1000V can be connected to the existing network infrastructure.
These network designs can be extrapolated to six NICs (uplinks), eight NICs, and more.
One interesting statement from the presenter was that Layer 8 (the Human layer) can create more problems than Layers 1 through 7.
Next, the presenter went through the use and configuration of the Cisco Nexus 1000V in DMZ environments. Key features for this use case include private VLANs (private VLANs can span both physical and virtual systems). Network professionals can also use access-conrol lists (ACLs) and remote port mirroring (ERSPAN) improve visibility and control over the virtual networking environment.
At this point, I left the session because it was clear that this session was more about educating users on the features of the Nexus 1000V and not about best practices on how to deploy the Nexus 1000V.”
Today was an interesting day. I sat and watched the Day 2 Keynote, looking at what VMware shows as the vision for the future.
I then went to watch a session on Virtualizing Exchange EA2631
I learned some things there:
Exchange has made itself (over time) better suited for Virtualization from Exchange 2003 –> Exchange 2007 –> Exchange 2010 due to less IO, and better design. Also, ESX has improved and the computers have evolved, so they have all joined together.
But on the MS Front, we have updated out sites with some new information from our Exchange and Virtualization Team on Virtualizing this Tier 1 application. Check out Zane’s Blog Post for more information.
After lunch I went to the VMware Head to Head comparison of VMware vSphere and ESX and Hyper-V with some SCVMM, and Citrix. It would have been a better conversation if it would actually have been more than one side. Their big comments on Architecture differences and memory overcommitment were old and tired. They were biased and based on conjecture. They commented that our “integrated” solution is a bunch of applications which we do need to work on, but when they showed them all, they showed many twice, and and some that you wouldn’t use except in some cases, but not when loading other apps that they showed.
They said we don’t have a Host Profile equivalent, when if you look at what System Center Configuration Manager does, it does a lot of what Host Profiles does. Of course they didn’t mention that to get Host Profiles, customers would have to buy the Enterprise Plus SKU.
They failed to mention that if you are comparing vSphere with Microsoft Solutions, you have to include all of the SMSD products, NOT just VMM and a little OM.
They failed to mention that you have to pay 3 times more to get a VMware Solution than you would have to pay to get the comparable solution from Microsoft, I wonder why?
Are we Enterprise Class? Yes, we are.
Do we have some work to do? Yes, we do.
Is VMware scared? Yes, they are.”
always enjoy Day 2 Keynotes at VMworld. You always get to see something new. Dr. Stephen Herrod started the keynote today by sliding VMware View over to the left emphasizing that it is the biggest focus for VMware right now. He says managing the desktops will be the same as managing the servers. I don’t think that is the right way to look at it. Yeah, I believe it resonates to Server guys, but there are many, MANY differences between how you have to manage the desktop and the datacenter. It seems to VMware, that (like one of our TSPs told me at a conference earlier):
Key agreement with rto Virtual Profiles coupled with the ThinApp “bubble”. Create a master image of the OS, plop it down and keep each app out there encapsulated on its own.
Best User Experience to All Endpoints – From a WAN to a LAN environment to Local so you can run it on the net, and on the local machine to leverage the “Media” devices (Graphics, etc). PCoIP releasing later this year.
Employee-Owned IT – rebrand, revamp of ACE – VM on a DVD, or running directly on the laptop No host OS, Client Hypervisor (Client Virtualization Platform (CVP)) with Intel vPro. They have Win7 x64 running in a VM with the CVP underneath.
VMware Mobile Strategy – VCMA – a mobile app to manage your vCenter and now VMware View environment
Mobile Phone to Mobile Personal Computer – “Device Freedom” Mobile Virtualization Platform (MVP), and “Application Freedom”
All of this client stuff, still makes me think that they are trying to adapt and fit VDI as the solution for everything. Really now, shouldn’t it be that the customer should use the whole toolbox and not just the hammer. VDI works for some cases, but Terminal Services is better for other, and App-V solves other solutions. If you have a local user that needs to run a policy encapsulated VM, MedV will give you this. Microsoft has the Desktop solution that you can use for the challenges you face.
VMotion the Foundation of the Giant Computer – First VMotion, then Storage VMotion, then Network VMotion (Distributed Virtual Switch), now Long Distance VMotion
New workload – HPC
DRS – Shuffling VMs around for best performance. Squeezing more out of your systems, extending soon to include IO not just CPU and Memory. Tiering the needs and the applications with the Resources around you.
This could be interesting if they DRS the VMs, and also the Storage as your storage IO patterns change.
AppSpeed – Nothing new
vApp – IT Service Policy Descriptor SLA as metadata to the group of VMs using OVF.
VMsafe – Always on Security and Compliance via APIs. Aware of the application running in the VM, not the VM, so it can be smart in what it protects and secures.
Choice – Lab Manager to allow for self service portals.
Long Distance vMotion – Proactively move the DC when certain events will occur. Cisco with it Data Center Interconnect up to 200 km. F5 uses BIG-IP Global Traffic Manager to move different iSessions around.
VMware vCloud API – Programmatic Access to resources, Self Service Portals, vSphere Client Plugin (one vCenter to view local and Cloud resources).
After moving View to the left, they now added vApps to the right as a fourth pillar. vSphere provides IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service). Software is Middleware and Tools that is combined and hooked underneath termed PaaS (Platform as a Service). The middle yellow bar is the Automated, Policy enforcement, scalability. Developers only need to know the application interface, they don’t need to be bothered with anything else, and then there is SaaS (Software as a Service).
PaaS – Open set of interfaces for Ruby on Rails, Python, .Net, PHP, Rod says we want the developers happy, we want them to know about this as little as possible but enough to be productive. Can be deployed internally and externally, wherever.
How popular are these different interfaces? Azure provides this to our Developer community.
Take advantage of the revolution…
I don’t see a revolution here, but I think some of the new capabilities are nice, and looking forward to see how we respond.”
Interesting comments from VMware’s competition.
Gabe and Brian are at VMworld 2009 in San Francisco this week. (Read Brian’s live blogs of the two keynotes – Day 1 and Day 2.) It’s been a busy few days with a lot of demos. We recorded enough video content for probably two or three weeks worth of shows.
Today’s episode includes the following highlights:
An interview with RTO Software CEO Kevin Goodman. (VMware just announced that they’re OEMing RTO’s "Virtual Profile" product for inclusion in a future version of View.)
A demo of VMware’s client hypervisor called "CVP" from VMware’s Robert Baesman.
A demo of VMware’s upcoming software version of Teradici’s PC-over-IP remote display protocol from Wyse’s Aditya Prasad.
And of course, Brian and Gabe’s thoughts and conversation about the show in general.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering, yes, that’s a custom NetApp shirt that I’m wearing. NetApp was the only vendor who met my challenge to use no PowerPoint in their BriForum 2009 breakout session. Thanks Mike Slisinger for making the great presentation!”
Visit the page for the video.
“We’re posting two videos from the conversation we had with Jon Toor, VP of Marketing for Xsigo. In this video, Jon talks about how virtual I/O works”
Visit the page for the video.
Recorded a interview with Dr John Troyer from VMware in the recording booth at VMworld today.”
Visit the page for the video.
More blog links