4 ms·

Thank you for taking the time to explain. I was honestly a little shocked to hear about RH moving away from RHV, but glad to hear there is some interoperability

Thank you for taking the time to explain. I was honestly a little shocked to hear about RH moving away from RHV, but glad to hear there is some interoperability between some of these tools.

ghaff 2y ago
There never was a lot of interest in RHV as a like-to-like VMware alternative. But, when I left, there was quite a lot of interest (especially post-Broadcom acquisition) in a Kubernetes/cloud-native friendly VM alternative to VMware. And, yes, there are various migration tools though I was not involved in the details.
- sofixa 2y ago
  > There never was a lot of interest in RHV as a like-to-like VMware alternative That is because it was before Broadcom lit VMware on fire. Nowadays everyone is looking for a like for like VMware alternative. > Kubernetes/cloud-native friendly VM alternative to VMware Cloud-native and VMs for the people used to the VMware world are antithetical. Overwhelmingly we're talking about carefully managed pets, which is exactly the opposite of cloud-native.
  - rwmj 2y ago
    I agree, hence my idea about resurrecting oVirt (see up thread). Red Hat are all-in on Kubernetes, which is the wrong model for pet VMs, but a better model for gitops stuff.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      I'd argue it's still essentially backward facing. Yes. There are buyers who would essentially like a cheaper VMware clone today. But I'm not at all convinced that's a good business model for a company like Red Hat to invest in going forward.
      - sofixa 2y ago
        > There are buyers who would essentially like a cheaper VMware clone today. But I'm not at all convinced that's a good business model for a company like Red Hat to invest in going forward. Yes, they're buyers stuck in the past. If RH can bring them on and take them on a modernisation journey, it could be very lucrative (even if very time consuming).

4 ms·

Thank you for taking the time to explain. I was honestly a little shocked to hear about RH moving away from RHV, but glad to hear there is some interoperability

by jhickok 2y ago

Thank you for taking the time to explain. I was honestly a little shocked to hear about RH moving away from RHV, but glad to hear there is some interoperability between some of these tools.

ghaff 2y ago
There never was a lot of interest in RHV as a like-to-like VMware alternative. But, when I left, there was quite a lot of interest (especially post-Broadcom acquisition) in a Kubernetes/cloud-native friendly VM alternative to VMware. And, yes, there are various migration tools though I was not involved in the details.
- sofixa 2y ago
  > There never was a lot of interest in RHV as a like-to-like VMware alternative That is because it was before Broadcom lit VMware on fire. Nowadays everyone is looking for a like for like VMware alternative. > Kubernetes/cloud-native friendly VM alternative to VMware Cloud-native and VMs for the people used to the VMware world are antithetical. Overwhelmingly we're talking about carefully managed pets, which is exactly the opposite of cloud-native.
  - rwmj 2y ago
    I agree, hence my idea about resurrecting oVirt (see up thread). Red Hat are all-in on Kubernetes, which is the wrong model for pet VMs, but a better model for gitops stuff.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      I'd argue it's still essentially backward facing. Yes. There are buyers who would essentially like a cheaper VMware clone today. But I'm not at all convinced that's a good business model for a company like Red Hat to invest in going forward.
      - sofixa 2y ago
        > There are buyers who would essentially like a cheaper VMware clone today. But I'm not at all convinced that's a good business model for a company like Red Hat to invest in going forward. Yes, they're buyers stuck in the past. If RH can bring them on and take them on a modernisation journey, it could be very lucrative (even if very time consuming).