Hyper-V Server 2022

[DavidYorkshire]

Anyone know whether there will be a Hyper-V Server 2022? i.e. the free version which is just for running VMs and has no GUI?

I've seen mentions on forums that this SKU is being dropped, but not found anything official.

Thanks

[#2]

@athendrix 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

[#3]

That'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.

[#4]

All 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.

[#5]

This is extremely disappointing

[#6]

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.

[#7]

The Windows Server which is required for the Hyper-V Feature is licensed by core. This is true for 2016, 2019 and 2022.

[#8]

> Hyper-V also exists as a dedicated operating system.

The Operating System is called Microsoft „Hyper-V Server 2016“ (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).

[#9]

Agree, but even easier would be allow (single) AzS HCI machines without Azure registration for Free.

[#10]

@Bernd Eckenfels 

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.

[#11]

@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 :)

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.

[#12]

@Elden Christensen why not just answer the question

[#13]

Azure Stack HCI is NOT FREE as hyper-v server... stop talk about it.
We want our free hypervisor, it's the reason of this thread...
Find and understand why Microsoft wants we migrated to ESX... because ESX keep free...

[#14]

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.

[#15]

Great feedback, thank you for taking the time to provide such detailed and constructive feedback.  Education is also in this same category.  We are thinking about it, no announcements at this time... but THANK YOU

[#16]

You're welcome. I can see why Education would be in the same boat!

One other thing that I would add is the 'minimum two node per site' requirement for Azure Stack HCI also mitigates against using it in small, remote branch offices (again, a nonprofit may not have the space or cash to deploy two devices in a remote office and would just rely on redundant PSUs and resilient storage for basic failover) so while understanding this means less redundancy, would be good for Azure Stack HCI to be developed standalone as well.

[#17]

For me, much of the relevant sentiment has already been captured by@MinkusMe, @Brian Martin and @PeterBetyounan (as another fellow Skippy).

This is (for me) entirely about the commercial impact, which doesn't sound like it's been particularly well mapped out to date beyond the US/European context - particularly in the fiscally tight spaces of charities, not-for-profits, some government agencies and education (which has already been acknowledged).

They observation I want to add is that we live in an age where people in these spaces are as inclined to pay for a hypervisor as they are for the air they breathe, and they will scatter like mice at the mention of a permanent operational cost increase. And if Azure AD is anything to go by, that'll only be the "admission price" with select features pared out and charged extra for - much like microtransactions in gaming.

For these clients, technical bells and whistles have precisely zero value as it's purely about avoiding the purchase of multiple physical hosts (even if they're just basic business-grade desktops acting as servers).

The value proposition in having Hyper-V server was that Microsoft was perceived to be providing value, which feeds directly into brand trust. Not just Microsoft's brand, but ours as proponents of Microsoft's (former?) strategy.

As a self-employed consultant and MAPS customer, I'm in a similar position to such clients and maybe I haven't read enough yet, but I'm not seeing how I can retain my zero cost model for the hypervisor (licencing-wise). If I can't see a way, I clearly can't recommend a way to my customers, either, as it's not unheard of for them to be more frugal with their budgets than I am!

For corporates and other profitable entities with the budget and scale to relegate the operational cost into the "don't care" bucket, the Azure Stack HCI is a great fit if they're already an Azure customer. But your "mum and dad" businesses, charitable organisations and the likes frequently don't fit that profile in any way you care to measure it.

Definitely interested in how this topic develops.

[#18]

@Elden Christensen has there been any developments on this with respect to any changes of heart? We're planning next year and this is a big item on our overall infrastructure strategy planning for all managed systems we are responsible for. Migrating them all next year is the biggest item on our 2022 punch list which reminded me about this thread and I noticed there hasn't been anything further from MS on this pretty important topic.

I really don't want to switch platforms, but you are telling us all to effectively kick rocks with this puzzling move so.....

[#19]

Can we get, at least, one last patch for Hyper-V Server 2019 that allow AMD nested virtualization? I don't want to use my desktop Windows 11 hyper-v for Docker containers.

[#20]

Hi Brian, for you migration plans... is there a reason Azure Stack HCI or Windows Server 2022 Standard edition or Windows Server 2022 Datacenter edition are not viable? While I understand the attractiveness of free, I'm trying to understand what blockers you have from a technology perspective. There are many options with SKU's that have a rich Hyper-V platform.

Thanks!
Elden

[#21]

It's getting quite funny around here :) There are some serious answers and explanations and Elden asks why AS HCI or WinSrv Datacenter are not a good solution :)

I don't mean it in a rude way whatsoever, but it's getting clear... Pay or Move away. MS wants you're money.

I personally like Hyper-V SKU because of a smaller footprint.