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
MicrosoftIf Azure Stack HCI does not meet your needs, would love the feedback in how we can make it better.
Thanks!
Elden
Hi Elden,
I think you should clarify your message as people are linking here thinking if they license a Hyper-V server with Standard Edition you can run unlimited Linux VMs.
The license for 2 VMs is per OSE
Microsoft define an OSE as:
Operating system environment (OSE) means all or part of an operating system instance, or all
or part of a virtual (or otherwise emulated) operating system instance which enables separate
machine identity
By that definition when licensing Windows Server for Hyper-V you neede to license it for each Windows Server VM and any other OS such as Linux.
Love to hear your take - thanks,Alex
- Elden_Christensen
Guest OS licenses depends on the edition you choose. If you have Standard, then it includes 2 guest OS licenses. If Datacenter, then it includes unlimited guest OS licenses.
So yes, you can install the Hyper-V role on your Windows Server. Then create a VM and install another instance of Windows Server in the VM. You can also run all the Linux VMs you want.
Thanks!
Elden ChrisAtMafElden_ChristensenI, too, am curious about this. I purchased Windows Server 2022 without SA or CALs because I am the sole user. I needed some integration that my Linux servers do not fully provide/support.
My understanding is that I cannot simply install the Hyper-V feature without GUI and use it as a type 1 hypervisor, like Hyper-V server, and run my Windows Server 2022 as a VM. I would need to purchase another Windows Server 2022 license to do this, correct? I will look into Azure Local. My biggest frustration is cloud dependency. My home is my office and my NOC, and the only fail over internet access I could get would be 5G/LTE. Switching to Spectrum Business would be the exact same SLA and equipment path to the backbone. I have my rack because I prefer on-prem with policy routing for split tunnel wire guard/OSPF site-to-site for some special needs.
So as to not derail the thread, is there a way to discuss more separately, either via thread or .... Teams? I've pulled away from MS server/azure since around earlier 2019 and I am curious what sort of integration with Azure hybrid might work for me. Utilizing my free tier Azure is fine, but one reason for on-prem is that azure/AWS/gcp/IBM/Oracle data buckets with hybrid failurover/HA compute machines would likely result in a net loss. I still need to look at HCI
Thanks for your dedication to this thread, even if none of us are happy with the elimination of Hyper-V server.
I am not sure if Linux as a base OS for the platform is released, is it? As of today it requires Azure Local PAYG for active cores per month or Windows Server Datacenter with SA (Enterprise Agreement only!) or CSP Subscription (MCA).
Azure Local and Azure Stack HCI is the same product but it adds more capabilities now and in the future and so the name didn't fit any longer.
More information on Azure Local
On the topic yes it uses Hyper-V as virtualization platform, just like Azure itself does - with exception of dedicated HW in Azure with VMware or Azure VMware solution offering.
I don’t think Azure Local and Azure Stack HCI are the same thing. Azure Stack HCI is an operating system, while Azure Local is a service that allows you to connect your local server and remotely access it through the Azure portal. With Azure Local, you also have the option to install Linux instead of Azure Stack HCI.
I've not read the documentation in any detail, but isn't Azure Local just Azure Stack HCI with a new name? That was what I assumed from the news items.
Azure local is pretty awesome! $10/core is deal breaker 😟 my cpu is not even that good. Core doesnt mean anything my budget for microserver is $10 a month at most.
Elden_ChristensenI just saw the https://youtu.be/yxlAfS9mh2E?si=M5OJuYcf4eDFwIl3, and the Low Cost wording really had my attention.
I was so excited, thinking MS listened to all of us MSP's about how abandoning Hyper-V server left SMB in the lurch. Then I watched the video... it looked perfect, like an introduction/entry-level Stack HCL, with budget server gear. Only to flip over to the Product Page and discover this isn't any change or new SKU at all. The licensing is still the same $10/core. Who can afford to pay for Stack, but then uses cheap hardware? 🤔
Announcement: 'Good news - Stack now runs on budget hardware!' Translation: 'After buying Stack licenses, budget hardware is all you'll be able to afford!' 🙃 I kid I kid.Jokes aside, the reality is that price model absolutely does not work for SMB. There is no chance our clients in the SMB space will pay hundreds of dollars a month just for the OS platform - let alone the OS/CAL's too. I can see it being of value in a min-datacenter at a corp HQ, but not for SMB. We MSP's control our client's hardware/infra to a pretty significant level. We don't want to go back to bare metal with HV role. There are numerous advantages to having a thin hypervisor OS with all the servers being VM's. Your retreat from SMB and VMware jumping the shark has led to ancillary software vendors taking notice and embrace XCP-NG and Proxmox. Veeam is one example and now has full support. This pushes us in those directions - away from MS. We don't want to do this and I don't understand why MS wants us to.
Why not make it easy for SMB and maintain vendor-lock-in? A free "light tier" is warranted and solves everything. Make it limited to 3 hosts restricted at the Azure Tenant level or something. Doing this does not cannibalize any Stack sales in this scenario, as anyone interested in this would never have paid for Stack - they would use a different platform (which is our current plan for all clients). This gets everyone into the Stack/Azure ecosystem as well as achieve vendor-lock-in. As they grow they logically move right into "Full Stack" via Key change, and/or Azure itself. This also would solve all the home-lab folks wanting to learn/tinker and help us all eat our own dogfood doing so.
You don't need to abandon the SMB space, so please don't. I will give you exactly 3 goats for making this a reality. Can't resist that kind of logic, and carrot, right?
- From the perspective of the topic of this thread: Every single one of our business partners, who was running Hyper-V Server 2019, is either still running that, moved the machine to Server 202X Core (where the license terms allowed), or is moving to other hypervisors.
AFAIK only single one was seriously considering "upgrading" from Hyper-V Server 2019 to Azure Stack HCI, and, from what I'm told, the Microsoft reseller representative was laughed out of the building after presenting the quote.
But we are very small ISV so don't consider our experiences to be a representative sample. - Almost found a role for it, but costs/performance ended up on a standard converged solution. It’s an awesome solution on paper and the future concepts but I haven’t found the golden egg yet. Keeping in mind that when spec’ing for HCI you need to over-spec. the servers to account for the CPU and RAM the SAN would provide for the cluster. Storage optimization does not always correlate with something like SQL server compute optimization. So you have to balance, which can mean either, not always, or even often, compromise.
TBH, after rearranging the hardware/software lifecycle, (which I’ve spent the last several years doing), the lack of Hyper-V server vs core+role has diminished to nothing. So over it by now… This (years old) product change from MS should no longer be a factor in any solution design by this point. How is anyone finding Azure Stack HCI? Am aware that it’s the recommended alternative - but the reviews are awful (and for me, credible as anyone who’s tried to use a new Microsoft product since they moved to Azure first and early releases can testify) - released too early, updates break basic functionality due to a lack of testing, slow, ignorant, terrible support).
https://www.reddit.com/r/AZURE/comments/1cu3mtl/has_anyone_migrated_from_vmware_to_azure_stack_hci/https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1auuzmj/azure_stack_hci/
If it wasn’t for the Azure Hybrid Benefit, there’s no reason to move from Windows Server + Hyper-V role for me. Anyone happy with it?
- Elden_Christensen
Hey Zak, this is a really big long thread. For Imschmidt's sanity and the huge numbers of others who get email spam notifications about it, let's not hijack this thread to another topic. Please start a new thread, and I'm happy to talk about Windows Server UI strategy.
Thanks!
Elden - ChrisAtMaf thanks for the speedy reply, I'll have a look but I think I may have looked some time ago and again it doesn't give me a very good preview of the console without killing a background connection to the vm
ZakGhani I’m not from Microsoft, but have seen one report of a rule not to update any legacy MMCs in Windows Server and that jives with my experience.
However Windows Admin Center can manage Hyper-V and can be installed on Windows Server for free. It’s under active development so you could raise feedback about that if it doesn’t do what you want. Have you tried it?
Elden_Christensen or anyone else in MS for that matter.
Apologies for hijacking the thread/announcement, was just wondering if any love is to be given to Hyper-V manager for those of us that use it. Any chance we can have a much larger preview window of the VM within the summary windows in the default view. I'm struggling to see what's on the screen at any given time. If I connect to the console to get a better look, I kill the connection coming in from packer during the build stages.I'm currently sat here pondering if my machine is building or not but am reluctant to launch the console just in case it is building and I break it mid flight. I mean for context the Virtual Machines sub window and Checkpoints sub-Window directly Above the Summary window is 2-3 times larger yet all the information delivered there is either obtainable by other means within the app or not required for my needs, none of the sub-windows are resizable.
Would appreciate a change or feedback
regards
Zak
OMG,
Why is this conversation even still something that ding's in my email... Let's lay it out real quick (ok, turned out long) for people not caught up on the last 3+ years or so of conversation. (Yes I had issues with hardware vs software lifecycles I had to deal with... (in 2021!?); done... Years ago)..?
1) If you do not have a single Windows Server VM in your environment, Don't run Hyper-V. That's it... just don't do it? Why would you? Move along...best wishes?
2) If you have Windows VM's in your environment that are not S2022, run HV2019, done... You've already done the hard part and licensed the S2003-S2019 VM's 'Somehow'(right?)...
3) If you have S2022 VM's in your environment; run S2022 core w/HV role installed. DO NOT count this HV as a Server in your licensing for Windows Server VM's. The HV with no other roles installed Does Not count towards your S2022 workloads. It Doesn't Exist from a licensing perspective if it's Only a HV role is installed. (which is exactly the same as HV2008,HV2012, R2, HV2016, & HV2019) Nothing Has Changed.? (why are we still talking about this?!?!?)
4) License your Windows Server is based on the number of physical cores that can be assigned to Any VM on a HV (16c minimum). You get two VM's per Server Standard Lic. (don't count the HV server doing HV ONLY), by the time you cross ~7 vm's, you're better to go with Datacenter and get unlimited VM's on the physical box. (Clarity, a physical server with 16 or less physical cores, can run S2022 with nothing but the HV role, that serves no purpose than running up to two Windows Server 2022 VM's, with unlimited Linux VM's. All with a default Server Standard 2022 license for the physical box)
5) In any scenario beyond #1, where you do not have any single Windows Server VM above S2019, go ahead and run 39,6732 VM's of any other operating system (arbitrary number). You ONLY LICENSE YOUR WINDOWS VM's.
==========
If you are "Testing", "Lab", "Pre-production", "doing something anywhere that is not in production, making money, learning, or anything other than using Windows Server to run a functioning organization. Download and install an evaluation and run that... Bonus, every three year you are forced to learn about how to do a new migration to the next version of Windows Server Eval, which you need to practice anyways if you're an IT professional....
===========***You Do Not Pay for the physical box running your VM's. The Hypervisor role is, and Always Has Been "Included" (not free because you pay for the VM's). You pay for the Production VM's running workloads that your business (or client businesses) need.
This is not a "cash grab", this is not the end of the world, this is day to day changes in IT infrastructure. License your sh*t, NOTHING has actually changed if you're running Windows VM's in your environment beyond how you install the hypervisor.OMFG
F*kJacobW1195 uhh that was a weird flex but ok.
- "It's the year of give us your money and shut up. Follow us like the sheep you are!"
Which is why I use Linux virtualization. It has the added benefit of supporting containers
(Freedom of speech is a protected right) - I am quite familiar with XCP-NG and it was my next choice but there are DR reasons holding us back at the moment. Veeam recently announced support for Proxmox is coming, so that's likely what we'll be moving to after validating it etc.
bmartindcs Great - glad you’re aware of that. In terms of your security concerns, I’m sure you’re aware that having roles and features ‘available to install’, is not the same as having them ‘installed by default’. To compare with other alternatives that you’ve suggested, Proxmox is also based on and uses the ‘standard’ Debian repositories for security updates - it is therefore similarly ‘vulnerable’ to additional feature installs as Windows Server Core + Hyper-V role, assuming that the hypervisor has access to those repos (which is necessary to keep patched)
https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Package_Repositories#_repositories_in_proxmox_ve
XCP-NG is better - it appears it uses dedicated repos with only the relevant packages enabled - but they still allow you to install packages from other repositories using the enablerepo switch in yum - so again, if you’re looking for a hypervisor which is ‘unable’ to have an increased attack surface, rather than having a reduced surface ‘by default’, that may not entirely fit the bill either.
- Yes, we can "just deploy Server Core". Not looking for free licensing necessarily, everyone is licensed. As I stated, using Core is not the same though as it has additional features and roles in full Server OS (even in Core) vs HVS. As I also stated, we can probably through a combination of a bunch of GPO and local sec policy, restrict those roles/features but that seems to be cobbling together a way to get small attack surface like HVS had. My idea/solution was just an option like Core is during installation, for "HyperVisor" only, in that it strips all that out for us out of the box - eliminating the need to make it entirely custom to get that small attack surface that HVS had.
Hi bmartindcs thank your extending on your point and use case it is very important to learn about that and I believe that thread is not only read by us admins and consultants.
Certainly see that those that just host Linux or VDI and nothing else feel unhappy with the change of dropping the SKU. If this relates into Azure Stack HCI, I doubt this. Windows Server is technically as good as for these use cases, when you are not looking into cloud hybrid / #adaptivecloud and AVD.
Frankly have to disagree on Azure Stack HCI being the target for your use case provided.
And my strong feeling is founded by the massive change we have with Azure Stack HCI.
Without proper licensing, skilling, and / or externalization - Azure Stack HCI - today - is not that same Windows Server+ added by Azure billing and some good stuff, anymore. It needs more careful considerations.
Feel invited to read on: https://multicloud.is/tags/azure-stack-hci
Second to feel your pain that licensing Windows Server for the use of Hyper-V feels wrong when just hosting Linux or Windows Client (VDI).
ChrisAtMaf brought up a good point though.
Cheapest is Windows Server 2022 Standard OEM, until you reach the Datacenter Break Even.
In EU licenses are transferable when hardware dies or decomissioned. This is EU only, due to regulations.
Pro Tip: With Windows Server 2022 through OEM you could also license just active cores opposed to the default licensing rules. Check the OEM terms when installing they are not on Product Terms.
If this applies to your OEM license, what prevents you to license just 8 pCPUs and disable more CPUs in BIOS if these pCores are good enough for VDI hosting Windows Clients? Make notes or fetch logs for licensing compliance when you enable or disable CPUs.
As soon you have volume licensing or CSP, this is a different game.
Default licensing rules apply so usual 16 cores min. per box. And again, why not Windows Server 2022 Standard OEM in Core install mode?
It is a smaller extra fee for support via OEM. Gives a bit peace of mind of you require support, you obtain through the OEM.
Grand game could be Windows Server Standard CSP Subscription, which includes SA, or any other Volume Licensing programme your are eligible to.
Datacenter when required.
Unfortunately after reading the Licensing terms linked by Chris, there is no WS Standard allowed to run any number of VMs with Windows Client OS. As each VM is a VOSE or at least running instance by definition. Thank you Chris, because often one hears it is one or two Windows Server VMs per licensed stack. It is clear now this spans to any OS running. Bad luck.
If you have Windows Server licensed through EA or similar volume licensing programs, please mind your commitment obligations before buying CSP or OEM.bmartindcs You’re saying that you wish Microsoft would just offer Windows Server Core w/ Hyper-V role as a ‘free’ license - but for the clients you mentioned, aren’t they licensed for this anyway?
Earlier you said: ‘These users all own licenses of Windows Server’.
So can’t you just deploy Server Core for them?
https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/terms/productoffering/WindowsServerStandardDatacenterEssentials/OL#LicenseModel
'Standard edition permits use of one Running Instance of the server software in the Physical OSE on the Licensed Server (in addition to two Virtual OSEs), if the Physical OSE is used solely to host and manage the Virtual OSEs.'We virtualize all client servers as we onboard them. The reason being for portability ease when changing hardware, for ease of backups/restores, and for ease of DR. We keep loaner servers that we can spit a restored VM onto and have clients up in no time in the event of a significant DR situation.
We could run the VM's on a Pro machine. I am aware we can use GPO's etc to harden it, but it's overall just a stupid step backwards. MS goal is to push us all to Stack or Azure. MS has not considered the fact that the former is not an option for most of the SMB space, and the later is cost prohibited for many and also not practical for others if you have any kind of data/throughput/latency heavy LOB app. That seems to imply that MS position is that if Azure or Stack are not a fit, then you should run bare metal and/or buy Server all over again just to run the hypervisor - all of which is a step backwards.
They could have converted HV Server into Server Core with HV as a Role, without licensing required, and they can block the other features from being installed to avoid gaming the system. That would collapse the sku chain from a code standpoint.
Just seems to be another poke in the eye. I'm still bitter about NCE, so this is another fun change.
DavidYorkshire thanks for sharing your usecases.
Linux only.
Agreed Windows Server makes no sense. Windows Client is a good option.
It is not less stable or needs more updates. Same core OS, same Hyper-V. Eventually some special features missing like GPU pooling, now with Windows Server 2025.
VDI
Windows Client as a host might work if there is nothing in licensing terms that does not allow it.
Testing
Both Windows Client and Windows Server are best fit with github mslab which offer easy and near automated lab deployments. Try this with Proxmox. You cannot due lack of PowerShell Host to VM communication.
Hardware
Windows Client OS will work with Server hardware. You can put your RAID Controller into Bypass Mode and use Storage Spaces instead. Best with Windows Enterprise (needs Qualified OS + Enterprise addon or M365) With Windows 11 Enterprise you can leverage ReFS which is superb with storage Spaces and performance. The the only thing missing compared to Server is dedup and compression.
If you used Windows Server 2019 Hyper-V SKU with SAN, well not that good with Windows Client. It can use iSCSI though.
I don't want to appear stubborn, but seriously changing platform, I see no benefits, except higher complexity. Am I happy about Hyper-V SKU gone? Nope.
As soon you are hosting Windows Server VM this change does not affect anyone. It's an unfortunate side effect.
