Any one want to guess who will really end up paying for the price hike?
It’s not AT&T.
Surely this is self defeating? Everyone seeing these insane price increases will scare off any potential new customers and drive away the customers they do have. Sure it might increase revenue in the short term but ultimately it’ll kill the product. Or is that the point? Make as much money as they can with as little effort as possible and then let it die?
It is the point, this is exactly what Broadcom does.
Standard private equity form behavior
The fact that it’s called Broadcom at all… They just bought the company a while back and started using the brand because it’s recognizable in the tech industry. It’s not really Broadcom, just a shell.
Yup, this is on form for them. This isn’t the first product they’ve done it to and surely won’t be the last.
The moment the news broke we started migration planning, a short while later their new pricing came through and immediately justified the project spend. Tens of thousands of VMs migrated, a ton of labour, and even some hardware refreshes thrown in - and still cheaper than renewing, by a looong shot.
Shame, I liked VMware.
Unfortunately our director just doesn’t pay attention to these things. When I try to bring them to him, suggest “hey this looks very bad, maybe we should plan on something now”, he brushes it off. Same thing happened when I pointed out how much VMWare we use and that it would be good to start a transition, or at least start shopping around for some alternatives to consider.
Now like a year later he’s only just starting to mutter stuff about Hyper-V.
Which just feels like…Hyper-V is fine I guess, but god damn, could we at least try not to sink further into Microsoft quicksand? There’s better options out there.
What platform your company (I assume) migrated to?
Probably Xen. Maybe proxmox. Both had tools to assist with migration.
Yay capitalism
What you’re seeing is the best economic system ever created in action
/s
think of it similar to consumer examples like adobe products. there are a lot of people/industries tied to it where they can start to charge ludicrous prices. while there are alternatives, there is also a cost attached to retooling and retraining people with the new tech.
They know customers will pay, but mostly they can lock in long term contracts on favorable terms.
Hock is scarily good at his job, depending on how you define his job.
HyperV looking like a good option for a lot of customers now. They are in the Microsoft noose anyway… so now they can go all in.
DiaperV can go die in a fire. I’d move to Nutanix
Thankfully Microsoft is a thrustworthy partner with the users best interests in mind. /s
At home Proxmox works reall well. When our VMWare licenses expire we’ll certainly evaluate that as option.
I’d start now… these transitions usually take a bit. And Broadcom will only get more predatory. Staying with VMware is not a realistic option… especially if you rely on a support partner. With these mega corps only the other mega corps will get proper support… the rest can crawl in a hole and die
So now is the time to figure out what replacement fits best, check your team for capability gaps and send your VMware people to courses to get intimate with the replacement.
That’s good advice, we will. Thank you.
Openshift is also a good competitor product if you’re interested in containers.
Microsoft is sunsetting Hyper-V Server (Not Hyper-V itself) so now you have to run Hyper-V on a bloated Windows Server install. Too bad because Hyper-V is actually a decent hypervisor and Microsoft is shutting out a lot of their smaller customers who don’t have the money for tons of exhorbitant licensing.
I even use Hyper-V for my self hosted setup but I’ll be forced to switch in a few years whenever my host server is ready for retirement.
They also offer the Azure Stack HCI platform, which is the modern version of hyper-v, but goddamn is it a pain in the ass (and requires active connection and subscription to azure for onprem workloads).
It’s alright, but it’s my least favorite of the 3 platforms we run.
I think administrative overhead is the hidden cost that a lot of technology vendors fail to consider. Microsoft is especially guilty of this. Is a “good” product that requires an obscene amount of esoteric knowledge and experience to maintain really that good?
Yeah, I’m definitely not the biggest fan of HCI, especially the reporting aspect of it. I had to write my own damn reports just to see how badly we over provisioned disks once we found out it only reports on actual utilization.
I tolerate Microsoft products and admin them, but damn they’re annoying to use at times.
Why would MS not use this opportunity to also hike the prices of their equivalent offerings? 1000% increase leaves a lot of room for an increase while still being cheaper.
They absolutely will. Maybe not tomorrow.
