I'm working on a huge task for school which counts for my exams in june, but I'm stuck on a couple of questions and here's one of them:
So I have a school server with 200 computers and 500 users (virtual setup on 1 pc), but which Hypervisor should I use for virtualisation?
I have chosen for VMware, since that's the one which we're using in school right now. But, I need to explain why I have chosen for VMware and not for another (free/paid) hypervisor. That's the issue which I'm struggling with.
Should I go for the free version of VMware, for a paid version or should I pick another hypervisor like HyperV? And why should I go for that 1?
VMWare is a tier 1 virtual environment. HyperV is a tier 2 environment. VMware has a very, very small footprint and base kernel. HyperV runs on a Microsoft Windows which is more intensive on resources before you even begin to virtual systems. Additionally, the security offered by VMWare's kernel against Windows is a big factor.
That being said, VMWare is the best in the business. It is widely known, tried and true. HyperV is still new and will never fully utilitize the system resources as well.
You have a small environment. Look long term. If you believe the environment was going to expand to include more virtuals later on, go with VMware. If you think the environment is going to shrink, go with HyperV. The reason being that VMware will better handle large environments and has a strong user base out there. HyperV will require more resources and is a relative newcomer to virutalization - meaning you have less expertise out there and potential people to hire.
I'm not quite following with what you mean with tier 1 and tier 2, which seems to be the reverse of type 1 &2. If you meant type 1 and 2 then VMware workstation or similar is most definitively a type 2 by definition. The exception to this is their enterprise VMX solution (note solution, you can't just buy the program and be done with it) that uses type 1.
Given limited resources, in most cases you will want a type 2 simply because given proper maintenance it is by far easier to maintain and upgrade for less tech savvy.
For some research that I've done last semester and if you are considering opensource and clusters, proxmox might be down you ally. Usually running on freeBSD again as a type2.
Questions you will want to ask yourself, is how many CPU's do I have. How much storage do I need, how many NICs (virtual) do I require for my task. What host/client OS will I be running. Will I want scalable hardware for peak times?
Depending on your answers these questions will dictate your choice(s).
Personally I'm using VMware right now. It's convenient, scalable, fairly secure (my cybersec project last semester was all about breaking it), has great managment tools, and broad compatibility. There I should now be VMware sales person
But do try out different solutions, and different client OS's. You'll find that some work better than others for what you are trying to achieve. There is no one host to rule them all.
A tier 1/type 1 provides a very stripped down version of the OS - VMWare ESX. Whereas HyperV has a full blown OS running, thus being a Tier 2/type 2 hypervisor.
HyperV is considered a Tier 1 only because the Windows OS controls the hardware. by definition it fits in. Now, in the virtual world, do you want a stripped down linux kernal controlling the hardware or Windows OS? On paper, call it what you want. In the reality it is a second class virtual system mainly used when first entering into the virtual experience, having limited skillsets, testing/test environments and such. For someone who doesn't have the option of going with ESX, HyperV will do well.
If you take the top three main HVs, I'd like them in this order: