<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for It&#039;s Just Another Layer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com</link>
	<description>Virtualization is a layer in software. What are you abstracting away from?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:56:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lab Manager is dead.. Long Live Lab Manager by Maish</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/08/lab-manager-is-dead-long-live-lab-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-1621</link>
		<dc:creator>Maish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=485#comment-1621</guid>
		<description>Hi Ian, I am not so sure that Lab Manager is dead. vCD will require Enterprise Plus Licenses for all ESX hosts in the cluster that is part of the Resource pool.

The SMB market will not have the resources / finances available for such a venture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ian, I am not so sure that Lab Manager is dead. vCD will require Enterprise Plus Licenses for all ESX hosts in the cluster that is part of the Resource pool.</p>
<p>The SMB market will not have the resources / finances available for such a venture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on VMworld 2010 &#8211; General Session &#8211; Live Blogging by iguy</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/08/vmworld-2010-general-session-live-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-1618</link>
		<dc:creator>iguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 21:16:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=499#comment-1618</guid>
		<description>Thanks.  I&#039;ve updated the post with the correct company name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks.  I&#8217;ve updated the post with the correct company name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on VMworld 2010 &#8211; General Session &#8211; Live Blogging by Eric Feistel</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/08/vmworld-2010-general-session-live-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-1617</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Feistel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:45:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=499#comment-1617</guid>
		<description>The company that VMware acquired was Integrien (www.integrien.com), not Integreon (www.integreon.com). Similar names, but totally different companies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The company that VMware acquired was Integrien (www.integrien.com), not Integreon (www.integreon.com). Similar names, but totally different companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lab Manager is dead.. Long Live Lab Manager by iguy</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/08/lab-manager-is-dead-long-live-lab-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-1616</link>
		<dc:creator>iguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 06:07:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=485#comment-1616</guid>
		<description>Correct.  You are talking about a marketing/licensing issue, not a technical issue.   So adding in linked clones, what else is needed?   If that is all I would rather have VMware spend their developer resources on a single product making it better and adding in feature parity to retire Lab Manager than splitting resources between two product lines that duplicate functionality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correct.  You are talking about a marketing/licensing issue, not a technical issue.   So adding in linked clones, what else is needed?   If that is all I would rather have VMware spend their developer resources on a single product making it better and adding in feature parity to retire Lab Manager than splitting resources between two product lines that duplicate functionality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lab Manager is dead.. Long Live Lab Manager by Jason Burrell</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/08/lab-manager-is-dead-long-live-lab-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-1615</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Burrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 20:40:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=485#comment-1615</guid>
		<description>One thing you do not mention is now vCD priced on a per-VM basis and requires enterprise plus making it very expensive compared to Lab Manager.  I can buy a 2 cpu license for LM and run 50 machines for the same cost as 25 vm&#039;s with vCD.  Also vCD does not support linked clones, a major advantage that Lab Manager has over it.  I know it&#039;s dead but there are many environments that will be hurt by vCD until it can come up to feature parity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing you do not mention is now vCD priced on a per-VM basis and requires enterprise plus making it very expensive compared to Lab Manager.  I can buy a 2 cpu license for LM and run 50 machines for the same cost as 25 vm&#8217;s with vCD.  Also vCD does not support linked clones, a major advantage that Lab Manager has over it.  I know it&#8217;s dead but there are many environments that will be hurt by vCD until it can come up to feature parity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lab Manager is dead.. Long Live Lab Manager by Virtual Intelligence Briefing &#187; VMworld 2010 Resources: Day 2</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/08/lab-manager-is-dead-long-live-lab-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-1613</link>
		<dc:creator>Virtual Intelligence Briefing &#187; VMworld 2010 Resources: Day 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 23:11:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=485#comment-1613</guid>
		<description>[...] Lab Manager is dead.. Long Live Lab Manager It&#8217;s just another Layer blog: VMware has announced the new product VMware vCloud Director (vCD from now on). Read more&gt; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Lab Manager is dead.. Long Live Lab Manager It&#8217;s just another Layer blog: VMware has announced the new product VMware vCloud Director (vCD from now on). Read more&gt; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Upgrading Firmware on ESXi by iguy</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/06/upgrading-firmware-on-esxi/comment-page-1/#comment-1602</link>
		<dc:creator>iguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 01:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=436#comment-1602</guid>
		<description>This didn&#039;t work initially.   I will do this test again and see if it works going forward.   The issue is now I need a secondary system to apply the updates from when doing a build.   That complicates automation quite a bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This didn&#8217;t work initially.   I will do this test again and see if it works going forward.   The issue is now I need a secondary system to apply the updates from when doing a build.   That complicates automation quite a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Upgrading Firmware on ESXi by Peter Van Geem</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2010/06/upgrading-firmware-on-esxi/comment-page-1/#comment-1599</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Van Geem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=436#comment-1599</guid>
		<description>You could still use HBAnywhere on ESXi, as the Emulex CIM providers are included in ESXi &amp; the HBAnywhere client contains the CIM components to talk to ESXi ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You could still use HBAnywhere on ESXi, as the Emulex CIM providers are included in ESXi &amp; the HBAnywhere client contains the CIM components to talk to ESXi &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Business Objects is Virtualization/MultiCore Stupid by iguy</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2009/09/business-objects-is-virtualizationmulticore-stupid/comment-page-1/#comment-1596</link>
		<dc:creator>iguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:16:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=291#comment-1596</guid>
		<description>I have an update to this that I will post on.   What we have finally gotten to the root here is to upgrade a contract from the CPU/core count to the virtualization rights by either User based or vCPU style based would cost us 2+x the maintenance fees.   Needless to say that is way over the cost of figuring out a rather ingenious way to stay within our CPU count AND still make them virtual with all the bonuses that come with that.  

I will revise my statement about BO not being entirely virtualization friendly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have an update to this that I will post on.   What we have finally gotten to the root here is to upgrade a contract from the CPU/core count to the virtualization rights by either User based or vCPU style based would cost us 2+x the maintenance fees.   Needless to say that is way over the cost of figuring out a rather ingenious way to stay within our CPU count AND still make them virtual with all the bonuses that come with that.  </p>
<p>I will revise my statement about BO not being entirely virtualization friendly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Business Objects is Virtualization/MultiCore Stupid by Bernd</title>
		<link>http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/2009/09/business-objects-is-virtualizationmulticore-stupid/comment-page-1/#comment-1592</link>
		<dc:creator>Bernd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:05:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsjustanotherlayer.com/?p=291#comment-1592</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a bit surprised to read this. Due to my understanding contracts signed in 2008 and later do have virtualization rights, means in a virtual environment SAP would count virtual CPUs/cores instead of physical. If you have an older contract, you can convert it to get virtualization rights.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a bit surprised to read this. Due to my understanding contracts signed in 2008 and later do have virtualization rights, means in a virtual environment SAP would count virtual CPUs/cores instead of physical. If you have an older contract, you can convert it to get virtualization rights.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
