Virtualization Unmasked: The Ugly, the Bad and the Good

Be wary of virtualization. To make it truly cost effective, you must not ignore hidden costs and limitations, masked by the numerous benefits touted by providers.

The Ugly

You’ve probably heard virtualization is the most effective way to produce savings on business IT expenditures. While this maybe true in some cases, you really need to consider all the costs applicable to each virtual machine (VM). Have you thought, for example, that every time you spin up a VM you still must pay licensing fees for all the software layers located on that image? And, not only for the application software, but for vulnerability software, security software, and all the other tools supporting each image.

Bad

It is true that some savings is available by combining services, such as setting up network vulnerability in a single position servicing all of the underlying VMs. But, ultimately, if you're running an active process like a mail exchange environment, it does require its own antiviral protective layer.

Technically, as a capacity provisioning and management tool, virtualization might have some cost savings as well. One or two really knowledgeable techs can now support literally hundreds of virtual images according to most hardware providers’ strategies. They’ll tell you, if you can run 100–200 images on a single box, you have space/power savings. But, is this true if you’re considering all the hidden costs?

Good

Where virtualization pays real dividends is when your business model depends on rapid platform replication, as in the virtual world of SaaS. VMs can be spun up very fast and stopped just as easily.

 Everybody wants software as a service (SaaS), which may be more correctly called “solution as a service” since that's what you want. You’re in search of something to solve your problem without having to take on all the other issues like infrastructure, software licensing, and subject matter expertise. Plus, you’re happy because your cost per seat stays low even though the software provider makes no performance commitments, other than making this application available to you the vast majority of the time.

 This is where the SaaS guys play, since they only offer limited functionality. When you want to use their product in a better way, they provide forums on how people are using it. Or, they provide access to their certified consultants who, under contract, help you tune and tweak within their framework. All of a sudden, you only buy what you need as you feel you need to change.

What issues have you experienced with virtualization… ugly, bad or good?