this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
328 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59287 readers
6520 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

While open shift can somewhat accommodate VM workloads, it feels like an afterthought. Really the goal is to charge how your applications are run.

However, VMware presides over staunchly "old fashioned" ships that think in terms of "machines". So ProxMox is a bit more similar.

RedHat did have ovirt which would have been a closer platform, but they ditched that in favor of openstack, which was also VM centered but "cloudy", which also isn't the target model of on premise virtualization (openstack had other problems too), and now it's openshift, which is largely a "kubernetes is a buzz word, let's go, also as an afterthought some VM hosting to give some semblance of continuity for users we yanked through RHEV, openstack, and for now openshift"

It might play a role, but ProxMox may be better situated to be like for like. Microsoft is of course pushing their azure stack for those wiling to get tied up into azure a bit. I suspect openshift will continue to mainly focus on cloud hosted VMs rather than retool they're go to market to better capture those abandoning VMware. After all, since the story is "reduce costs", that's not an appealing scenario to red hat/IBM, since it inherently puts an obvious upper bound on revenue and the customers will be those that demonstrated they are the most ready to migrate when unhappy.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think this is very interesting. I've been investigating the solutions and found that a lot of other platforms like scale hci, virtuozzo, and oracle VM are all based on the oVirt/Openstack platforms but have been customized.

Openshift and Suse Harvester both have a very similar Kubernetes first approach which I think is interesting. Harvester seems to rely on KubeVirt to deploy "legacy workloads" (probably windows).

The reason I mention openshift though is because I've been paying attention to Wendell, level1techs, and the level1 forums and Wendell keeps hinting that Redhat/IBM openshift + intel is being used as a VDI platform featuring Intel flexGPUs for a secret customer (I wouldn't be surprised if it was a government facility like the national laboratory near Knoxville). I'm just trying to envision how that deployment looks.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I find it peculiar that everybody in this discussion is ignoring Hashicorp's stuff??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HashiCorp

I glanced at Proxmox vs Hashicorp's stuff, after seeing some discussions on here about 'em, & Hashicorp's stuff is oriented to clarity & simplicity.

Sorta Japanese take on it.

To me clarity is worth a significant amount of value.

Anyways, I'm just noting this, for anyone who's actually considering such things: I'm only a nobody who has avoided geeking for some years.

( :

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I never thought of hashicorps products as a replacement for VMware but more of an add on to it.