@storageninja said in VMware on Azure?:
@nerdydad said in VMware on Azure?:
Kind of interesting in concept. Charges has to be outrageous though because one would be paying for both Azure and VMware licenses at the same time. Suppose Azure annually would be comparable to physical hardware on-prem throughout its lifetime.
Recently I discovered that I can restore a VM from Veeam on a VMware workload to Azure. I thought that was a twist.
The issue with doing a restore like that is it's typically a one way trip as...
Transit costs OUT of azure suck.
You would have to switch to doing agent-based backups to get data out.
In the case of this announcement, it's unilateral (With VMware saying they were not consulted). Considering VMware licensing for hosting providers is a special program and Microsoft is not in it this leads to speculation that...
Are they trying to get another partner to deploy/manage it? This would likely breach the EULA on the hosting program as it prevented co-marketing/white label stuff like this the last time I read it.
Microsoft thinks it can offer vSphere as a service without joining the VMware Cloud Provider Program (This will likely be met with legal).
Azure is known to run on custom hardware servers. Unless they've got DL380's or something certified this will not be supported.
Wow, just wow.
