New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
It's not $140/per node always.
There are cheaper licensing structures from them, you should research some more.
A proper host would not buy a unlimited license.
DETIO your failing again like you did when you first came here on trying to "sell" us "bluffs" and think we will fall for it. if you are going to try to make your "product" cheaper in comparison to competing products when it isn't and expect us to believe that please try again with your strategy....foul is trying to tell you this but you seem to not notice that as you do realize LET is almost all very skilled & technical correct? we know how to compare products ourself and know when people are trying to "bluff" us....your "bluffs" didn't work when you first came here it won't work now....please try another marketing strategy please because LET can tell when you're trying to "pull our leg" and expect us to believe it
the point is this you cannot expect a community like LET where we all are almost skilled & very technical to fall for silly marketing "fluff" we have seen it before we know how to spot it and know how to spot "fishy" marketing as well.
and yes like foul is trying to tell you use common sense why would a host to start with buy unlimited license to start with on Virtuozzo?
The reason I compare our product VirtEngine's pricing with Virtuozzo is because our features come head-to-head and both solutions are similar.
For example, Virtuozzo supports: Containers, KVM, Storage (HA), Bitnami Apps (Catalog apps), Docker.
If you check https://docs.virtengine.com/ you will see we also support all the above and more (PaaS - Custom Applications), Scaling..
We have been developing our platform for a while now to make it reach a stable stage,
Everything we do is OpenSource: VirtEngine Front-End you can launch it for free.
So can you explain how we are trying to 'bluff'? Assuming you are: 'skilled & technical correct' aren't you able to launch the platform on-premise through our GitHub Repository and judge accordingly?
yea but to be honest none of us expected you to "launch" your platform on github until your "official" launch....eg actually have it on github.
We've stopped developing the opensource edition for the last month+, and have been focusing on the Public Cloud edition instead (which is private).
Contribution from the community to the opensource edition will also be merged into our Public Cloud Edition.
We don't charge anything for opensource, opensource can be used to launch private clouds.
We will have instructions on our website (https://docs.virtengine.com) on how to launch the opensource edition soon!
Anyway, I think this post is a bit derailed now.
lets check back in March eh.
We use Virtuozzo and if you are trying to compete here on LET, where low price seems to reign above all else, then yes it is hard to compete or be profitable. But this is kind of only true and the lower ends of scale.
On a per VM basis, the license cost is not that high for any VMs that could potentially replace a dedicated server. For 1 - 4GB RAM plans, maybe you will just break even or barely see a profit. But once you start hitting 8GB or larger VMs, then you can really start to see the potential.
In our case, where we have our own data center, and so we pay for the actual power we use, on average a server is costing us around US$10 - $20 in electricity ALONE. But we also save on physical space, and greater density also means spending less on infrastructure such as switches, cables and maintenance.
Okay we then need more beefy hardware so the upfront cost is higher, but long term the benefits are clear.
From the host (our) perspective, we save on power, infrastructure, and long term, we save on actual servers. We also benefit from greater density and less waste. Most dedicated servers are basically sitting idle with mostly empty disks. Cloud Storage allows you to over-provision disk space without running the risk of actually running out of disk space since you can easily scale up as needed.
From the client perspective, the client will see faster provisioning of servers, high availability, and potentially superior performance for a similar or same cost as a dedicated server.
Long story short, once you get to mid - high end VMs, the licensing costs really are not all that bad. The savings on labor required to maintain certain systems is more than offset the licensing costs.
OpenStack can orchestrate Virtuozzo open source (OpenVZ is now Virtuozzo open source), KVM, Hyper-V and others.
Here's the full list of hypervisors supported by OpenStack:
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/support-matrix.html
Ironic project manages bare metal servers (via PXE, DHCP, IPMI etc.): https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Ironic
OpenStack is not an alternative to SolusVM. SolusVM has a limited set of features, is not designed for large scale deployments, but for small deployments.
This makes SolusVM easier to install and manage.
Managing an OpenStack cloud is not a walk in the park, but you get a cloud in the league of Amazon (AWS) feature wise and scale wise.
You can still switch from SolusVM to OpenStack, just that you need some investment for this.
To start an OpenStack cloud you need to choose one of these options:
@DETio first you say everything you do is open-source on GitHub, one post later you're saying you're not working on the open-source version anymore and working on a closed-source product...
Our commercial edition is not free & OSS, however most of its functionality comes from our opensource edition.
Thus any contribution that goes to our OpenSource edition will make its way to our commercial edition.
We are prioritizing the commercial edition at this moment in order to meet our timeline and launch the product to hosting providers by November 1st.
This does not mean we will not be continuing development in the opensource edition, if you look at the project - you will see how much we have developed it over the last 12 month, whereas our commercial edition has been only recently prioritized.
Launching to 'new not yet in the market' hosting providers, and the rest of us that actually pay money to other people will have a look at the trial version then wait for a migration path.
Don't get us wrong, we are prioritizing migration. We just need a stable version out first, by the way - you don't need to do a complete migration (or any migration) at all to get our product to your customers.
You simply either continue selling VPS's & Also sell Cloud Servers, or Phase out VPS (Out of stock) and sell Cloud Servers
If you & your customers like our platform, then comes our migration tools and you can now make a straight up decision if it's worth migrating over your previous customers who have a service in solusvm/panel you use. You never know, our software can be horrible (it's not) so Migration shouldn't be rushed like that.
I don't think that approach is likely to be a popular one, not one I would consider.
Are we on track for tomorrow?
Also @fleio how far off are you on having a full release?
Agree. A few months down the road, it goes bad and you're stuck with a percentage of your customer based on a platform that's not good.
Well my thinking is that solusvm is clearly not a commercial priority at all for OnApp, I have literally zero confidence in the OnApp brand at all now, they don't respond to complaints, they don't provide meaningful responses to support requests any more and literally do nothing about potential data loss or security related situations.
So I think its about time to rally support for an alternative, virtualizor is a poor imitation of solusvm, it feels like it peaked at substandard, so if @fleio @DETio are stepping up to the plate then I think its time to give them a chance.
Even if they don't directly support migration on first release I am sure if enough of us do a conditional pledge based on meeting xyz criteria we can push it in the right direction, perhaps get a private feedback and support community together for the initial 12 months of release etc.
Worst case scenario is you discontinue using VirtEngine, and customers who've utilized VirtEngine to Orchestrate instances can be provided direct access to use OpenNebula to manage their Instances.
That is not an acceptable solution for anyone who is remotely serious.
Anyway.. Updates?
@DETio ?
lol, I hope that was a joke.
We're just preparing everything,
Our platform itself is mostly ready, we're just currently finishing up & testing our 'Onboard Cloud' project which is what allows providers to launch and scale the platform automatically.
Ok, your target date was the 1st is all, it is late with no explanation or New ETA which is a bit underwhelming
No proper roadmap is sad.
They been postponing the launch since febraury, I dont think it's anywhere production ready...
Starting to sound like a shamble.
it is like I and some other people said when @DETio first joined.
This is not a official cubedata comment(I just forgot I was logged into the company account again...would have posted it as my personal account but forgot as I said I was on the company account again.)
You are now a week overdue on delivery.
Business 101, under promise and over deliver, don't over promise and under deliver.
I am going to go ahead and chalk this up as a pipe dream/ vapourware until proven otherwise now.
Compare that to SolusVM's promise for version 2.0
OnApp have an active product and market share, det.io has none and is letting people down before they even have a day 1
First stable should be out in the 2017 Q1.
And another alpha release will be out in the following days.