Hyper-V Server 2022

Hi Elden,

In terms of specific feedback on the shift from Hyper-V Server to Azure Stack HCI as the 'premier hypervisor platform', here's a viewpoint as someone who recommends hypervisor solutions for systems operated by multinational nonprofit sites.

Obviously Microsoft's focus is now 'cloud first', but from the perspective of entities that operate in the developing world, dependence on the cloud (with the dependence on reliable, low-latency, higher-bandwidth Internet connections to work well) is less of an option - there's no point having all your virtual machines in the cloud if you're running over an unreliable 3G or satellite link. Since budgets are limited the cost of a hypervisor is also a key ingredient.

Azure Stack HCI fails on a number of levels:
x Double licensing - we have to license the hypervisor, *and* the Windows Guest virtual machines. This just makes it a complete no-no for nonprofit deployments.
x Dependence on the cloud - if Internet connection is down for a significant period of time this could cause issues (the 30 day disconnect is probably OK - but would be important to ensure this is not reduced/removed at any point to keep it viable).
x Microsoft's do not provide discounts for Azure nonprofits in the same way as they are provided for 'perpetual' products such as Windows Server - instead of a per-item discount, all that is offered is a $3,500 grant. Unlike the perpetual nonprofit discount, this does not scale with the size of the deployment. I can understand why this is the case for normal 'cloud' products - there is no difference in the variable costs (power, connectivity, HVAC, hardware etc) Microsoft need to purchase when providing an Azure product to a nonprofit, whereas perpetual products represent a fixed cost to Microsoft as they are run on-premises - just licensing. However Azure Stack HCI is mostly a fixed cost to Microsoft - it is run on-premises - but for nonprofits it has no discount, like the other cloud products. To put it another way, we can afford to run 1x Azure Stack HCI instance as a non-profit - using the $3,500 annual grant - then we pay full whack for the rest. If Azure Stack HCI was offered at zero/low cost for individuals / nonprofits it would be massively more successful.
x In general you haven't taken into account the fact that Azure Stack HCI is an on-premises product, priced in a cloud fashion. Subscription pricing and the cloud model just don't work well in the scenarios I've described, and having looked into it we had to rule it out as an option, despite the fact it's obviously a good product.

Hope this helps in your future evaluations.

One other great use case was when working at a large hosting scale for an enterprise or even medium business.

Example -
If I have 5000 windows VM's and 2000 Linux VM's does it make sense to co-mingle those on the same hosting effectively reducing efficiencies in windows licensing capacity? Those linux VM's in great number are taking away spots where Windows Server VM's could be.

So Since I'm already hosting AD and Hyper-V clusters using Datacenter edition it would make sense at a larger scale to build a dedicated cluster for running Linux VM's with the (Free) version of Hyper-V with the capability to cluster and tie it to the same AD as what my Windows Server Datacenter cluster is running.

I might of had 8+ hosts for those VM's when all combined in one cluster but now I might have a cluster of 5 hosts for the Windows VM's and 3+ hosts for linux VM's using the free version of Hyper-V. I just saved myself in software licensing for something that shouldn't need Datacenter Edition licensing.

If Azure Stack HCI were to be a true replacement for that scenario it would still need clustering and the capability to utilize SAN storage through iSCSI, FC or SMB. If you are investigating Azure Stack HCI as being a free replacement to what Hyper-V server edition was please consider that scenario.

Hyper-V server free was also great if you had a VDI environment running Windows 7/10. you only had to license the Windows 7/10 machine's and you could use the free hypervisor to run them on.

also my homelab ran on 4 hyper-v boxes using the free software. on it where 180 day eval versions of Windows server that I re-deployed almost every week (hence: the lab)

that's gone now. I could still use 2019 server (support till 2029) but everybody knows that a really geek/nerd wants to run the LATEST software and not an older version.

'providing a free hypervisor to run linux on was not Microsofs business goal' ?

.. what's the OS of most of the VMs that run on azure then? linux... that's right. and most of my clients vm's on-prem where also linux

Hyper-V server was not perceived as completely free.

It was completely free.

Just like ESXi is completely free, in perpetuity, when not connected to vCenter or using certain features.

This is a direct competative disadvantage when trying to sell Hyper-V related architectures and solutions to clients. I can no longer propose "we'll start with the free Hyper-V server to get you started and add on Windows Server licensing, System Center licensing, and other related licensing as you grow".

Now, we basically have to price-compete with "well, you need datacenter licensing for everything so we just set the price floor at $5k licensing per host".