Forum Discussion
Hyper-V Server 2022
- Mar 25, 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 Microsoftβs 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 βMicrosoft Hyper-V Serverβ 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
Let's just say we run 500 HyperV servers with Veeam to allow clients to replicate the main OS to a hot-spare cluster. If the plan is to EOL this product we need to start to plan the move away now and I will run you through why.
Let's do some numbers for all to see based on future processor core count averages. In the last quarter, we have seen a huge shift to AMD 32 based processors, specifically the extremely powerful AMD EPYC 7543.
Now we are from Australia where the price per core is $14 aud.
64 Cores x $14 = $896 per month
500 servers = $448k extra a month for servers that currently cost us just the Windows Servers SPLA licencing which as you have started still will continue to be charged.
Yes, we are a large cloud hosting provider in Australia the numbers are legit a concern. I am sure Veeam is going to have a big say about where they head and well everyone else. SPLA licencing was already a joke and now this is icing on the cake.
P.S Your SPLA licencing is also a joke where under the agreement clients are forced to licence all SOE Windows AND Linux VM's. It's epic trying to explain to clients that even though they are running a VMware server and they have 10 Linux VM's and a single Windows VM the clients are required to licence ALL SOE. Yes, that means all 11 virtual machines π
Happy to be corrected on any of the above
I suspect that open source will find more developers given that Redmond lacks any real sustained commitment for a technology.
I personally used Linux from the get go and BSD before that so open source has been on my radar for quite some time now.
Hyper-V will still work but maybe its time to dump it on github and let the community maintain it
- Bernd EckenfelsSep 24, 2021Copper Contributor
DavidYorkshire I did not misunderstand, I was replying to a question asked in this comment:
So let's get this clear.
Will any Hypr-V or future releases have charges associated with CPU Cores on top of the Windows Licencing?
A nice simple question π
so the pricing models for both OS which offer Hyper-V in the future are already core based and do not charge extra for their (core) function.
- DavidYorkshireSep 24, 2021Steel Contributor
Think you've misunderstood what is being discussed here - this isn't about running Hyper-V on the Standard/Datacenter versions of Windows Server (which as you say are licensed by core).
It is about Hyper-V Server, which is a separate SKU with its own installation media. It is free, but any Windows workloads on it have to be licensed as it does not include any licenses for clients. Hyper-V Server is very similar to a server core installation with the Hyper-V role installed (other roles are not permitted under the licensing terms).
Hyper-V Server appeared when Hyper-V itself did (2008?), and since then every release of Windows Server has had a corresponding version of Hyper-V Server - up to 2019, that is. As we have been told above, there will not be a 2022 version.
Azure Stack HCI is similar in many ways, but has paid-for subscription requirements for all client VMs, and can only operate as a cluster, not a standalone host.
- Bernd EckenfelsSep 24, 2021Copper ContributorAgree, but even easier would be allow (single) AzS HCI machines without Azure registration for Free.
- Bernd EckenfelsSep 24, 2021Copper Contributor
> Hyper-V also exists as a dedicated operating system.
The Operating System is called Microsoft βHyper-V Server 2016β (or 2019). Thats (confusingly) similar but not the same. it is different from Hyper-V the technology or the Hyper-V Role. (It is for that reason a good idea to always qualify by using the full name). - Bernd EckenfelsSep 24, 2021Copper Contributor
The Windows Server which is required for the Hyper-V Feature is licensed by core. This is true for 2016, 2019 and 2022.
- bmartindcsSep 10, 2021Iron ContributorAll of that is over complicated to achieve some semblance of balance. See my post about a simple way to solve the problem while driving Azure Stack adoption.... make HV Server a "free tier" in Azure Stack with basic HV functionality, with Stack bells and whistles reserved for licensed systems.
Best of both worlds and keeps it super simple. It drives Azure Stack adoption, keeps the lab folks and small fish happy, it also provides a direct upgrade path to Azure since the VM's are already in Azure Stack ecosystem. - athendrixSep 10, 2021Brass ContributorThat's what I meant though. Drivers already have to be signed by Microsoft at least by default on all 64 bit systems. So those would continue to work.
But I just meant to extend that so vendors have to get their approval for the free/locked down Hyper-V OS.
I recognize it's not necessarily a good thing for us admins, but it gives Microsoft the reassurance that people wouldn't use their Free OS in place of a server, while also providing a large measure of security, since it would presumably be very difficult to get malware approved by MS. - SGGGGSep 10, 2021Brass Contributorathendrix you almost had it except
#2 take take features away from an existing product and there might be some deployments where Hyper-V on fat install makes sense.
You're last point about being MS Signed, it would stop drivers and system utilities from working including RMM, taking away one of the prime reasons to have a windows based hypervisor not a Linux one. Let people use 3rd party backup, but having built in azure backup which only takes a few clicks or a script to set up, the azure account is already set up from activation, and is ready to put the backup into a Azure VM that can spin up within minutes would be a huge leg up on the competitors because of that integration, ease of use and low cost of storage, the only real cost would be if you actually end up spinning up that backup VM.
Also makes for pathways to encourage movement of VMs to Azure by having them be able to be tested locally first before going live - athendrixSep 10, 2021Brass Contributor
So now let me explain how you monetize this, and how Microsoft makes this a big win for everyone involved.
I suspect this change to Azure Stack HCI comes from a threefold goal of pushing people to Azure, Simplifying the development process, and more effectively monetizing Hyper-V.
So here's how you get all of those, and make everyone happy.
Step 1. Restore Hyper-V Server as a Free Platform (You can even put Azure in the name. Azure Hyper-V Server Or Azure Hyper-V Stack or similar) and make it a standalone flagship free product.
Step 2. Remove the Hyper-V role from Windows Server 2022, and deprecate all other versions of Hyper-V.
This makes Hyper-V Server THE definitive way to deploy Hyper-V, so development can be simplified, and EVERYONE benefits from having the reduced attack surface and reduced footprint on the host.
Step 3. Add Storage Spaces Direct to Hyper-V Server. It needs Hyper-converged Storage to be able to replace all versions of Hyper-V.
Step 4. Require a Microsoft/Azure account to install Hyper-V Server. This will rub some people a little bit the wrong way, but it'll be acceptable, so long as we can choose if we want to be able to harden the install so it can't be cloud *managed*
You still need to have people use the account to setup the install though, so Step 5 can work.
Step 5. Here's where Microsoft gets people in their cloud.
Fully integrated simple backups to Azure with the option of live monitoring, so Azure can spin up the backup if the on-site VM goes down.
Hyper-V Server lacks the Hyperconverged Storage Spaces Direct, and Hyper-V in general lacks a cohesive backup solution. So including a live cloud backup out of the box directly to Azure that will be guaranteed easy to setup since they'll already have to have an account will be the best way to get those VMs in the cloud.
Everybody wins here. Hyper-V becomes a separate free product with flagship functionality, simplified development process, and direct links to get VMs in Azure.
You could even alter the base Windows setup that Hyper-V Server uses to ONLY RUN MICROSOFT SIGNED EXECUTABLES. Both for security purposes, and to ensure that Azure remains the primary method of backup. - bmartindcsSep 08, 2021Iron ContributorI 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.