6 ms·

So, I think the main sticking point here is the lock-in of Hyper-V. By making a new popular feature completely dependent on a technology that explicitly disable

by mrkstu 7y ago

So, I think the main sticking point here is the lock-in of Hyper-V. By making a new popular feature completely dependent on a technology that explicitly disables the use of competitive hypervisors, they're giving with one hand and taking with the other. If I was on VM-Ware's executive team, I'd be seriously thinking about filing an anti-trust complaint and the open source community should be thinking about whether submarining virtualbox is worth what Microsoft is doing here.

damnyou 7y ago
Don't all hypervisors disable other hypervisors?
- tym0 7y ago
  Hypervisor Framework and VirtualBox seem to cohabit just fine on MacOS.
  - runjake 7y ago
    Yeah. VirtualBox installs its own kernel extension at this point in time.
    - damnyou 7y ago
      But can you run VBox and (say) Docker at the same time?
      - AlphaSite 7y ago
        Yep. I ran docker and Fusion at the same time and it works great.
  - damnyou 7y ago
    https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/14217 https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/14217 seems to indicate not so much unless VirtualBox has switched to using it as a backend.
    - acdha 7y ago
      That ticket is just a wishlist request — there's no indication of a problem there.
- skrebbel 7y ago
  While running, yes. On Windows if you enable Hyper-V support, even when you're not using it at the moment, you can't use VirtualBox without reboots and shit.
  - morpheuskafka 7y ago
    This is because Hyper-V is a level 1 hypervisor (similar to Xen) while VirtualBox is a level 2 (similar to QEMU). Hyper-V is always running because the Windows "host" OS is actually running under it's control as well.
    - penagwin 7y ago
      > Hyper-V is always running because the Windows "host" OS is actually running under it's control as well. Wait really? That doesn't seem right, why would they have the host running under part of hyper v when hyper v is optional? This would mean the entire foundation shifts when you enable or disable hyper v
      - skrebbel 7y ago
        Hence the reboots.
      - morpheuskafka 7y ago
        Yeah, that's why the reboot is required, it's like changing kernels on linux. I think they are moving to have it on by default, and eventually they may just make it permanently part of the OS install. Kind of like how they take control of the TPM on install even if you don't setup BitLocker, I imagine they will just have the core hypervisor permanently enabled and then it's up to the user setting what actually uses its features.
    - david-s 7y ago
      This system has resulted in issues in the "host" and with an unresponsive control plane for me the few times I've tried to use it. Compared to no issues with type 2s. To say nothing of the madness of using it on a laptop with several network adapters when the guest OS only wants to acknowledge one.
- stephenr 7y ago
  No. I concurrently build vagrant boxes (using Packer) for VirtualBox, VMWare and Parallels on macOS.
  - damnyou 7y ago
    All of those are level 2 hypervisors. Hyper V is a level 1 hypervisor. My point is that it's fundamental to the way the tech works.
    - stephenr 7y ago
      Great, but that's a design decision Microsoft made when implementing a solution for desktops and workstations. Sure, a level 1 HV makes a lot of sense for a VM host. For this, not so much.
      - Analemma_ 7y ago
        It is a VM host: when Hyper-V is active, Windows itself is just another VM. (That's why you have to reboot when you turn Hyper-V on or off). NT isn't actually privileged compared to the Linux kernel in WSL2! Most likely in the next few years Hyper-V will become non-optional and Windows will always be virtualized when you run it. That's a big architectural shift that will enable lots of cool new scenarios, but it requires a level 1 hypervisor.
        WorldMaker 7y ago
        One interesting rumor that has been around for years is that Xbox games could always start requiring Hyper-V on Windows. On an Xbox One, Hyper-V is already in charge and games (mostly) run in extremely lightweight VMs. Supposedly there is interest in bringing those game VMs directly to Windows for power-user game performance.
        stephenr 7y ago
        When I said “vm host” I meant a server in a rack. But sure, keep down voting because someone said your dumpster fire OS is crap.
- matthew-wegner 7y ago
  No. It's a fairly common use case to i.e. virtualize several ESXi hypervisors underneath ESXi itself, in order to test clusters or other setups. VMWare calls the feature VHV, "virtual hardware-assisted virtualization". More generally, it's typically just "nested virtualization". It does look like it needs some CPU features, but which are now old enough to be essentially commodity. (and yes, ESXi is a type 1 hypervisor--it's definitely something Microsoft could enable more broadly, instead of limiting the scope to Hyper-V nested setups)
  - damnyou 7y ago
    Is it possible to run other hypervisors under Hyper-V as well? What about next to ESXi (as opposed to underneath it)? I'm learning a lot from this conversation, thanks.
    - mappu 7y ago
      You can run Hyper-V inside Hyper-V on Intel CPUs, but, not on AMD EPYC/Ryzen yet. (Not sure about nesting other hypervisors.)
    - AdrianB1 7y ago
      You are either in or under, not side by side. Yes, it is possible to run a hypervisor in a hypervisor, the limitation is usually in the parent hypervisor. In this particular case it would be useful to run side by side, but it is not possible and it also negates the idea of multiple hypervisors: why not have a single one running all the VM's?
ccurrens 7y ago
There is the Windows Hypervisor Platform[1] component recently added in windows, that at least allows other VMs to share the hypervisor using a common API. IIRC, VirtualBox 6 supports it. To me, it seems like the use of Hyper-V was probably necessary to get the tight integration they needed to make the use of WSL 2 as seamless as it is today with the lightweight containers. [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/api/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/api/
- TheChaplain 7y ago
  I tried VirtualBox with Hyper-V and it's really slooow. VBx also have some extra goodies like the built-in DHCP-server, host-only networking and so on which Hyper-V seems to be lacking.
  - mey 7y ago
    Those features do exist, but you may need a certain level of Windows licensing, and get ready to crack open a Powershell terminal to configure it.
- withinrafael 7y ago
  Heads up, as of Windows 10 1903 (latest update), VirtualBox QEMU, and friends will fail when attempting to use WHP. It appears to be critically broken in these builds of Windows. (It's fixed upstream in 20H1 builds.)
morpheuskafka 7y ago
Hyper-V is already required for many security features like memory isolation. Also, Windows has an open hypervisor API (iirc QEMU is working on support for it) to allow other apps to leverage Hyper-V. VirtualBox hasn't really been competitive with VMWare or Hyper-V for a long time and many of it's key features are under the nonfree extension pack anyway. As a level 1 hypervisior--which by definition is a core part of the OS--Hyper-V will always have the advantage over third-party level 2s.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  The Level 1/2 distinction is almost purely marketing, especially with hardware level virtualization abilities like VT-x and VT-d. In no meaningful way does the fact that Hyper-V is somehow a "level 1" hypervisor make it better at being a virtual machine host.
- mappu 7y ago
  > iirc QEMU is working on support for it It's great and seamless, just pass `-accel whqx` (instead of `-accel hax` or `-accel kvm`). There are working binaries here: https://shadycode.com/qemu-binaries-for-windows-64-bit-with-hyper-v-and-haxm-support/ https://shadycode.com/qemu-binaries-for-windows-64-bit-with-...
CWuestefeld 7y ago
This is our big problem. Our development "workstations" are virtualized in VMWare. That's incompatible with Hyper-V, so MS is locking us out of this technology.
- runevault 7y ago
  Modern VMWare still doesn't support Hyper-V? That's unfortunate to hear. My old version doesn't so I have to reboot anytime I want to get into my VMWare VMs, yet I'd made the (sounds to be incorrect) assumption that would be fixed in newer versions.
  - CWuestefeld 7y ago
    I'm referring to an architecture with ESX server running the VMs. I'm not sure exactly which version. But we've tested it recently and found that using Linux Docker on Windows 10 still doesn't work.
    - kijiki 7y ago
      It should work if you enable nested virtualization in ESX. They call it VHV (Virtual Hardware-Assisted Virtualization).
  - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
    My understanding is that it isn't so much "VMware doesn't support Hyper-V" but that "Hyper-V doesn't permit other virtualization platforms to run alongside it" and that may be less of a technical limitation than one might assume.
    - AdrianB1 7y ago
      Hyper-V works in nested virtualization, the limitation seems to be in VMware in this particular case.
- signal11 7y ago
  If your dev workstations are virtualized already, why not ask your tooling team to provide virtualized Linux workstations? If you deploy to Linux this is something they should provide anyway, for dev/prod parity.
m_mueller 7y ago
Aren't they replacing Hyper-V for the next version descriped in the post? I thought it now runs natively on top of WSL syscalls and the NT kernel.
- cpuguy83 7y ago
  WSL 2 is a full Linux kernel running in Hyper-V rather than an emulation layer on top of NT. The article is about two things: 1. WSL 1 was not enough to run docker on it 2. WSL 2 is what was needed and with it Docker can use it and replace the Linuxkit based bits it currently ships, and get other improvements along with it.
- wmf 7y ago
  WSL1 is syscall emulation on the NT kernel. Docker does not use WSL1. WSL2 is a Linux VM on Hyper-V which will be used by Docker Desktop.
tw04 7y ago
>If I was on VM-Ware's executive team You mean the product they've all but abandoned? https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/vmware-fusion-workstation-team-culled-in-company-restructure/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/vmwar... >submarining virtualbox Oracle will manage that on their own regardless of what Microsoft does. They already started by making the extension pack free to download but licensed so they can catch unsuspecting users in one of their famous audits.

by mrkstu 7y ago

damnyou 7y ago

Don't all hypervisors disable other hypervisors?

tym0 7y ago
Hypervisor Framework and VirtualBox seem to cohabit just fine on MacOS.
- runjake 7y ago
  Yeah. VirtualBox installs its own kernel extension at this point in time.
  - damnyou 7y ago
    But can you run VBox and (say) Docker at the same time?
    - AlphaSite 7y ago
      Yep. I ran docker and Fusion at the same time and it works great.
- damnyou 7y ago
  https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/14217 https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/14217 seems to indicate not so much unless VirtualBox has switched to using it as a backend.
  - acdha 7y ago
    That ticket is just a wishlist request — there's no indication of a problem there.
skrebbel 7y ago
While running, yes. On Windows if you enable Hyper-V support, even when you're not using it at the moment, you can't use VirtualBox without reboots and shit.
- morpheuskafka 7y ago
  This is because Hyper-V is a level 1 hypervisor (similar to Xen) while VirtualBox is a level 2 (similar to QEMU). Hyper-V is always running because the Windows "host" OS is actually running under it's control as well.
  - penagwin 7y ago
    > Hyper-V is always running because the Windows "host" OS is actually running under it's control as well. Wait really? That doesn't seem right, why would they have the host running under part of hyper v when hyper v is optional? This would mean the entire foundation shifts when you enable or disable hyper v
    - skrebbel 7y ago
      Hence the reboots.
    - morpheuskafka 7y ago
      Yeah, that's why the reboot is required, it's like changing kernels on linux. I think they are moving to have it on by default, and eventually they may just make it permanently part of the OS install. Kind of like how they take control of the TPM on install even if you don't setup BitLocker, I imagine they will just have the core hypervisor permanently enabled and then it's up to the user setting what actually uses its features.
  - david-s 7y ago
    This system has resulted in issues in the "host" and with an unresponsive control plane for me the few times I've tried to use it. Compared to no issues with type 2s. To say nothing of the madness of using it on a laptop with several network adapters when the guest OS only wants to acknowledge one.
stephenr 7y ago
No. I concurrently build vagrant boxes (using Packer) for VirtualBox, VMWare and Parallels on macOS.
- damnyou 7y ago
  All of those are level 2 hypervisors. Hyper V is a level 1 hypervisor. My point is that it's fundamental to the way the tech works.
  - stephenr 7y ago
    Great, but that's a design decision Microsoft made when implementing a solution for desktops and workstations. Sure, a level 1 HV makes a lot of sense for a VM host. For this, not so much.
    - Analemma_ 7y ago
      It is a VM host: when Hyper-V is active, Windows itself is just another VM. (That's why you have to reboot when you turn Hyper-V on or off). NT isn't actually privileged compared to the Linux kernel in WSL2! Most likely in the next few years Hyper-V will become non-optional and Windows will always be virtualized when you run it. That's a big architectural shift that will enable lots of cool new scenarios, but it requires a level 1 hypervisor.
      - WorldMaker 7y ago
        One interesting rumor that has been around for years is that Xbox games could always start requiring Hyper-V on Windows. On an Xbox One, Hyper-V is already in charge and games (mostly) run in extremely lightweight VMs. Supposedly there is interest in bringing those game VMs directly to Windows for power-user game performance.
      - stephenr 7y ago
        When I said “vm host” I meant a server in a rack. But sure, keep down voting because someone said your dumpster fire OS is crap.
matthew-wegner 7y ago
No. It's a fairly common use case to i.e. virtualize several ESXi hypervisors underneath ESXi itself, in order to test clusters or other setups. VMWare calls the feature VHV, "virtual hardware-assisted virtualization". More generally, it's typically just "nested virtualization". It does look like it needs some CPU features, but which are now old enough to be essentially commodity. (and yes, ESXi is a type 1 hypervisor--it's definitely something Microsoft could enable more broadly, instead of limiting the scope to Hyper-V nested setups)
- damnyou 7y ago
  Is it possible to run other hypervisors under Hyper-V as well? What about next to ESXi (as opposed to underneath it)? I'm learning a lot from this conversation, thanks.
  - mappu 7y ago
    You can run Hyper-V inside Hyper-V on Intel CPUs, but, not on AMD EPYC/Ryzen yet. (Not sure about nesting other hypervisors.)
  - AdrianB1 7y ago
    You are either in or under, not side by side. Yes, it is possible to run a hypervisor in a hypervisor, the limitation is usually in the parent hypervisor. In this particular case it would be useful to run side by side, but it is not possible and it also negates the idea of multiple hypervisors: why not have a single one running all the VM's?

ccurrens 7y ago

There is the Windows Hypervisor Platform[1] component recently added in windows, that at least allows other VMs to share the hypervisor using a common API. IIRC, VirtualBox 6 supports it. To me, it seems like the use of Hyper-V was probably necessary to get the tight integration they needed to make the use of WSL 2 as seamless as it is today with the lightweight containers. [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/api/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/api/

TheChaplain 7y ago
I tried VirtualBox with Hyper-V and it's really slooow. VBx also have some extra goodies like the built-in DHCP-server, host-only networking and so on which Hyper-V seems to be lacking.
- mey 7y ago
  Those features do exist, but you may need a certain level of Windows licensing, and get ready to crack open a Powershell terminal to configure it.
withinrafael 7y ago
Heads up, as of Windows 10 1903 (latest update), VirtualBox QEMU, and friends will fail when attempting to use WHP. It appears to be critically broken in these builds of Windows. (It's fixed upstream in 20H1 builds.)

morpheuskafka 7y ago

Hyper-V is already required for many security features like memory isolation. Also, Windows has an open hypervisor API (iirc QEMU is working on support for it) to allow other apps to leverage Hyper-V. VirtualBox hasn't really been competitive with VMWare or Hyper-V for a long time and many of it's key features are under the nonfree extension pack anyway. As a level 1 hypervisior--which by definition is a core part of the OS--Hyper-V will always have the advantage over third-party level 2s.

throwaway2048 7y ago
The Level 1/2 distinction is almost purely marketing, especially with hardware level virtualization abilities like VT-x and VT-d. In no meaningful way does the fact that Hyper-V is somehow a "level 1" hypervisor make it better at being a virtual machine host.
mappu 7y ago
> iirc QEMU is working on support for it It's great and seamless, just pass `-accel whqx` (instead of `-accel hax` or `-accel kvm`). There are working binaries here: https://shadycode.com/qemu-binaries-for-windows-64-bit-with-hyper-v-and-haxm-support/ https://shadycode.com/qemu-binaries-for-windows-64-bit-with-...

CWuestefeld 7y ago

This is our big problem. Our development "workstations" are virtualized in VMWare. That's incompatible with Hyper-V, so MS is locking us out of this technology.

runevault 7y ago
Modern VMWare still doesn't support Hyper-V? That's unfortunate to hear. My old version doesn't so I have to reboot anytime I want to get into my VMWare VMs, yet I'd made the (sounds to be incorrect) assumption that would be fixed in newer versions.
- CWuestefeld 7y ago
  I'm referring to an architecture with ESX server running the VMs. I'm not sure exactly which version. But we've tested it recently and found that using Linux Docker on Windows 10 still doesn't work.
  - kijiki 7y ago
    It should work if you enable nested virtualization in ESX. They call it VHV (Virtual Hardware-Assisted Virtualization).
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  My understanding is that it isn't so much "VMware doesn't support Hyper-V" but that "Hyper-V doesn't permit other virtualization platforms to run alongside it" and that may be less of a technical limitation than one might assume.
  - AdrianB1 7y ago
    Hyper-V works in nested virtualization, the limitation seems to be in VMware in this particular case.
signal11 7y ago
If your dev workstations are virtualized already, why not ask your tooling team to provide virtualized Linux workstations? If you deploy to Linux this is something they should provide anyway, for dev/prod parity.

m_mueller 7y ago

Aren't they replacing Hyper-V for the next version descriped in the post? I thought it now runs natively on top of WSL syscalls and the NT kernel.

cpuguy83 7y ago
WSL 2 is a full Linux kernel running in Hyper-V rather than an emulation layer on top of NT. The article is about two things: 1. WSL 1 was not enough to run docker on it 2. WSL 2 is what was needed and with it Docker can use it and replace the Linuxkit based bits it currently ships, and get other improvements along with it.
wmf 7y ago
WSL1 is syscall emulation on the NT kernel. Docker does not use WSL1. WSL2 is a Linux VM on Hyper-V which will be used by Docker Desktop.

tw04 7y ago

>If I was on VM-Ware's executive team You mean the product they've all but abandoned? https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/vmware-fusion-workstation-team-culled-in-company-restructure/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/vmwar... >submarining virtualbox Oracle will manage that on their own regardless of what Microsoft does. They already started by making the extension pack free to download but licensed so they can catch unsuspecting users in one of their famous audits.