<?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 on: Has Virtualization Made Capacity Planning Obsolete?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/</link>
	<description>Open Source, Open Standards</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2013 13:48:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: davecb</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6698</link>
		<dc:creator>davecb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6698</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I strongly agree, and commented on it at&lt;br /&gt;
http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/07/do-you-need-capacity-planning.html&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;--dave
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I strongly agree, and commented on it at<br />
<a href="http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/07/do-you-need-capacity-planning.html" rel="nofollow">http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/07/do-you-need-capacity-planning.html</a></p>
<p>&#8211;dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bofh999</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6699</link>
		<dc:creator>bofh999</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6699</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;And im still believe deep in my Heart that Virtualization is Overrated.&lt;br /&gt;
In Fact calculations getting much more complex with virtualization.&lt;br /&gt;
But not only this. Alone the Planning of a good virtualizated Service is getting more komplex more Services you have.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And there is ONE Point on the other Hand you should not forget.&lt;br /&gt;
Without Virtualization you have to install the new System - means also a cleanup. A Big One.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With Virtualization we will have the Situation of System full of Garbage because many many mnay lazy Admins will say hey i just have to move my Machine so i just make Update but no reinstall.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So belive it or not one Time or another youll have to reinstall it anyway. It Really helps belive it or not.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And by the way Virtualization is still not 100% fully Useable in all Enviroments. If youve the Opotuninty to build a new Enviroment than fine you can build it around but if you have to press Virtualization  into the existing one its maybe getting into an dead end.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I know ife to wait at least another 1,5 years (maybe longer) and cannot use it yet on most of our Services.&lt;br /&gt;
And still i cannot understand the Hype.. but wait oh yes. Guess the industry barly need money thats why oh i understand lol
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And im still believe deep in my Heart that Virtualization is Overrated.<br />
In Fact calculations getting much more complex with virtualization.<br />
But not only this. Alone the Planning of a good virtualizated Service is getting more komplex more Services you have.</p>
<p>And there is ONE Point on the other Hand you should not forget.<br />
Without Virtualization you have to install the new System &#8211; means also a cleanup. A Big One.</p>
<p>With Virtualization we will have the Situation of System full of Garbage because many many mnay lazy Admins will say hey i just have to move my Machine so i just make Update but no reinstall.</p>
<p>So belive it or not one Time or another youll have to reinstall it anyway. It Really helps belive it or not.</p>
<p>And by the way Virtualization is still not 100% fully Useable in all Enviroments. If youve the Opotuninty to build a new Enviroment than fine you can build it around but if you have to press Virtualization  into the existing one its maybe getting into an dead end.</p>
<p>I know ife to wait at least another 1,5 years (maybe longer) and cannot use it yet on most of our Services.<br />
And still i cannot understand the Hype.. but wait oh yes. Guess the industry barly need money thats why oh i understand lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gromm</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6700</link>
		<dc:creator>gromm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6700</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;And here, I thought that underutilized systems were a failure of marketing, not a failure of IT planning. At least, if that\&#039;s your business model - to sell hosting space.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And here, I thought that underutilized systems were a failure of marketing, not a failure of IT planning. At least, if that\&#8217;s your business model &#8211; to sell hosting space.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: davecb</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6701</link>
		<dc:creator>davecb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7423/#comment-6701</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;If I\&#039;m selling hosting or cloud space, underutilized&lt;br /&gt;
servers are an opportunity to sell more services.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Without performance guarantees, mind you (;-))&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;--dave (with tongue firmly in cheek) c-b
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I\&#8217;m selling hosting or cloud space, underutilized<br />
servers are an opportunity to sell more services.</p>
<p>Without performance guarantees, mind you (;-))</p>
<p>&#8211;dave (with tongue firmly in cheek) c-b</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>