Forum Discussion
Hyper-V Server 2022
Free 'Microsoft Hyper-V Server' product update
Since its introduction over a decade ago in Windows Server 2008, Hyper-V technology has been, and continues to be, the foundation of Microsoft’s hypervisor platform. Hyper-V is a strategic technology for Microsoft. Microsoft continues to invest heavily in Hyper-V for a variety of scenarios such as virtualization, security, containers, gaming, and more. Hyper-V is used in Azure, Azure Local, Windows Server, Windows Client, and Xbox among others.
Starting with Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2019, the free ‘Microsoft Hyper-V Server’ product has been deprecated and is the final version of that product. Hyper-V Server 2019 is a free product available for download from the Microsoft Evaluation Center: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2019
Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2019 will continue to be supported under its lifecycle policy until January 2029, see this link for additional information: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/hyperv-server-2019.
While Microsoft has made a business decision to no longer offer the free 'Microsoft Hyper-V Server' product, this has no impact to the many other products which include the Hyper-V feature and capabilities. This change has no impact to any customers who use Windows Server or Azure Local.
For customers looking to do test or evaluation of the Hyper-V feature, Azure Local includes a 60-day free trial and can be downloaded here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-local/ . Windows Server offers a free 180-day evaluation which can be downloaded from the Evaluation Center here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter
Microsoft remains committed to meeting customers where they are and delivering innovation for on-premises virtualization and bringing unique hybrid capabilities like no other can combined with the power of Azure Arc. We are announcing that Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2019 was the last version of the free download product and that customers begin transitioning to one of the several other products which include Hyper-V or consider Azure.
Thank you,
Elden Christensen
Principal Group PM Manager
Windows Server Development Team
MicrosoftThanks!
Elden
Elden_Christensen wrote:
what is being discussed here in this thread is the free 'Microsoft Hyper-V Server' SKU. Which is a free OS download just for running VMs.
I think that everyone in this thread already knows this, and this is what is upsetting.
Installing Windows Server core and then adding the Hyper-V role to that is functionally the same thing on a technical level.
But what we want is a break on the licensing structure so that we can continue to use this function without the onerous licensing requirements, especially when adding Linux VMs to the mix.
If you want to move us towards Azure Stack HCI, OK Great, make us a untimed free tier version of it which is functionally the same as the Hyper-V SKU, including single-host scenarios.
I can't speak for everyone, but personally I don't think that it would be too much of a trade-off to be expected for register an Azure account to be able to use the free Azure Stack HCI, and this would at least achieve some of your goals to get more users at least signed up for Azure and therefore have all the other (paid) offerings of Azure at our fingertips. Especially features like Azure Site Recovery could be super useful for our use case.
I would even go one step further, and be willing to meet you half way on this, where maybe you could offer Azure Stack HCI for free, on the condition that at least 1 VM per account is set up to a untimed free tier of Azure Site Recovery is set up, even if the Azure Site Recovery not incurring charges because it hasn't actually been activated to go live.
Yes I know that many will just set this up just to get the free Azure Stack HCI and not actually use it and therefore not paying any money at all, but at least you would be getting your foot in the door, especially if a disaster were to strike then it would already be set up and they could instantly become a paying customer.
I would also suggest that the Azure Stack HCI -> Azure Site Recovery linking process be as easy as possible.
The alternative here is that everyone in this thread is instead of sticking with a dead platform (2019 version) they are going to go with a completely free alternative like ESXi free tier, Proxmox or XCP-ng, which has no future potential for a connection to Azure.
We are the ones who would most likely start out on something free and then work our way up Microsoft the stack to the paid products (and my business spends many thousands a month on Microsoft licensing as it is, my bank account proves it). Your Azure Stack HCI has no chance of success without us being on board. It is a two-way street here.
- I wish people would understand how to respond to these kinds of moves. Flailing around isn't helpful by itself (I've long ago learned the hard way). Make the business case as to why this move isn't a good decision and what the impact is and any possible solutions you see. Anything else is just noise and/or possibly reinforcing the reason to shed all the whiners that throw tantrums.
The situation is quite clear now. We have no real answers why this SKU is being dropped.
M$ knows that hyper-v server is used quite a lot for non M$ VMs and does not generate any revenue. It's the said foot in the doors, but in homeless shelter, which they do not care about at all.
They want these VMs in Azure, period.SMB with a few hosts running WinSrv VMs is fine (core + hyper-v role), but what if they need another hosts for a few large Linux VMs as well? They would need licenced the servers and that's the issue here. Enterprises doesn't care that much about a few $ monthly fees for Azure Stack HCI, for SMB it's a deal breaker.
This is tech community and the drop of Hyper-V server SKU is money decision. All we can do is wait if M$ will stick to it's plan. They want SMBs to move to Azure (more money) and Copr/Ent to use HCI (more money).
- I recall when dual socket machines hit thestreet that some vendors wanted prices based on that. Microsoft on the other hand does not charge more for Windows desktop even the R9 5950X processor which is more cores than needed for gaming.
