Hacker News Reader

Comment by phpisthebest | Hacker News Reader

RedHat / IBM had a huge opening to take some of this market share... but then for some inexplicable nonsensical move (common with IBM owned Redhat to be honest) they made the choice to just exit the Onprem Hypervisor space to focus on "Cloud".

I know a few organizations and vendors (like Veeam) were looking to RHV to be a good replacement, the announcement to discontinue the product seems to catch everyone by surprise.

I am still hoping Veeam will add support for a good 3rd option, proxmox, XCP, direct KVM, something...

View on HN

Red Hat didn't exit, they moved from RHEV to OpenShift Virt. Now it's kubernetes scheduling KVM VMs instead of ovirt-engine scheduling KVM VMs.

I can't imagine anyone would pay for such a thing. It's a product without a market. People want the VMWare experience, Red Hat just refuses to build it.

Red Hat built it in RHEV (or rather, bought it from Qumranet and rebuilt the .net in JBoss), but struggled in the market. They had an arguably better product than VMware, and better pricing, but VMware customers were hard to move, and Microsoft priced Hyper-V for Windows guests at cheaper than free.

>>>but VMware customers were hard to move

were being the key phrase. Timing is everything, they Announced they were shutting down RHEV. AFTER broadcom announced they were buying vmware, seems like a terrible move in that light given that many vmware customers will be looking for a replacement in the next couple of renewal cycles.

Virtualization is a multi-billion dollar market. Even if you're a distant #2, it should be financially viable. The reality was, it was an awful product that nobody wanted. It could be free and it's worse than rolling your own solution directly on top of libvirt.

As a former potential RHEV customer, we had been warned about it 3 years ago by RH themselves. It is not like it was a huge secret and the decision was made a long time before broadcom's announcement.

Maybe has customers but it did not seem to be widespread knowledge outside, if it was known for year widely then I can not image why Veeam would have devoted developer time to support a product that announced its EOL just a few months after they released their support for it.

Seems odd.

Sorry, nothing Red Hat built was ever better than VMWare in the virtualization space. They never built a cohesive product experience, they could not get out of their own way.

Yes, this. I generally quite like RH stuff but RHEV was nowhere near VMware. I think it was the right move to shut it down and push Openshift VMs for hybrid workloads.

OpenShift Virt is not RHEV with K8s add, it is a completely different thing, and running Traditional VM workloads on it is troublesome.

I have no use for kubernetes, I will never use kubernetes, I do not want kubernetes anywhere near me.

Most vmware customers I suspect have the same feelings

Set up a VM based workflow and it can run fairly well with minimal intervention for years.

Set up a k8s deployment and you're fiddling with deprecated APIs every couple months - if you don't pay close attention the whole deployment spec falls apart within two years.

The VM stuff works for the majority of companies - you can even sprinkle containers in fairly easily.

It's still a massive if mature market that needs some attention and care, it's a shame it's going to get squeezed and abused by broadcom.

> I have no use for kubernetes, I will never use kubernetes, I do not want kubernetes anywhere near me.

I never got this religious approach to tech when it comes to work. I have my preferences but ultimately I'll do whatever pays well.

Lol that sounds crazy, like when you would have an operating system with a web browser and then would be running complete applications in that brows… oh wait…

Reply on news.ycombinator.com