VMware to end support for third-party virtual switches VMware's let vSphere users know that it will end support for third-party virtual switches. Virtual switches let you handle traffic generated by virtual machines. They've been a part of vSphere for years, because it just makes sense to have a virtual switch connect VMs rather than send traffic out of a host, into a physical …
Really? For starters, I won't have my byline on native marketing. And it is Just Not Something We Do At The Reg. Indeed, we mark such stuff as PROMO every time. And we do precious little of that.
Secondly, I think you're glass-half-emptying this. I look at it this story as as finding a customer-only communique, pointing out it will mean a forced migration, identifying a market shift and offered some analysis on how this could be a deeper play.
@Simon --
> Really? For starters, I won't have my byline on native marketing.
As a reader, I can't be expected to do an in-depth analysis of every journalist's background, or even every news source. Obviously, I like El Reg. I'm here afterall... and I'm across the pond. You guys are good enough to have an international audience. And bluntly, I think you guys have more journalistic integrity and balanced reporting (albeit with a comedic twist) than most of what passes for "journalism" in my own country. Plus, I admire the self-deprecating humor that is so common to Britains; I have that myself, and it's a rarity in 'Murica. Maybe it's just the constant cloudyness and raining that does it, but I love it nonetheless.
But please, consider the position I'm in before getting outraged: This is becoming increasingly commonplace and many organizations either don't adhere to their own standards, or quietly change them, and it's just too much of a mess to expect anyone to sort out. It's an industry-wide problem -- be honest! I have to go with how it appears to be, which isn't always what it may actually be. This article stood out to me as unusually dry and free of the usual color commentary I expect (and love) from this publication.
I was wrong this time, I can admit that. But step out of your own shoes and ask yourself if a reasonable person could justify that suspicion. Every writer, and every organization, has a certain culture, style, and tone in their publications... and as a writer myself I'm sensitive to that cadence and when it's off I get suspicious. It *was* off on this one, be honest. I just got the reason wrong.
Former VCE employee here. As part of the vBlock design, Nexus 1000V was a requirement, even when it did not add material value, such as a VDI use case. Whether the hard requirement was to force more kit down a customer's throat, or to ensure a good support experience through compliance to the tested Release Compatibility Matrix, I will leave for people to form their own opinions. Nevertheless, this is another proof point that VCE, now EMC Converged Product Division, is no longer a focus on best of breed integrated technologies. Cisco will have less technology in the platform, and VCE customers will have a forced migration to VMWare......
Third party switches (the most common I came across was the 1000v) were a solution for their time, but largely one in need of a problem. In the early days of DvSwitches, they were worth a look, but as DvSwitches evolved, the need diminished. For many customers, standard switches were sufficient, with network teams preferring to manage at the physical layer.
Of course, VMware's focus is now on NSX, so the only surprise is that it's taken them this long to pull the plug.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
