Comments on: Graphical Front-End for Storage VMotion http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/ The weblog of an IT pro specializing in virtualization, storage, and servers Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:13:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: slowe http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/comment-page-1/#comment-39278 slowe Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:59:44 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/#comment-39278 Conrad, Thanks for your perspective. It's easy to forget the other considerations that come into play sometimes. Conrad,

Thanks for your perspective. It’s easy to forget the other considerations that come into play sometimes.

]]> By: Conrad Golightly http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/comment-page-1/#comment-39274 Conrad Golightly Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:09:57 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/#comment-39274 By the way, I don't pretend to work for or speak for VMware, just presenting a different (if not necessarily correct, in this case) perspective. By the way, I don’t pretend to work for or speak for VMware, just presenting a different (if not necessarily correct, in this case) perspective.

]]> By: Conrad Golightly http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/comment-page-1/#comment-39273 Conrad Golightly Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:08:04 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/#comment-39273 IT lifecycle management is one of the things I do at my primary job, and after some discussions with engineers at numerous companies that make excellent software I frequently use, my answer to your question "Now, if a single developer could write a GUI for Storage VMotion, why didn’t VMware take care of this themselves?" is this: VMware's engineers probably did not feel that they could provide the quality of code in this release that their customers are used to seeing in the normal interface. The organizations on the leading edge of IT are the ones with users comfortable with doing extensive technical troubleshooting, and CLI tools are the best usage of developer time for major features that are new to a product; adding VMware-grade GUI support to this tool in this release would likely have added significant time to the release. If you really do need storage VMotion right now, chances are good that the people in your organization responsible for storage can use the CLI. IT lifecycle management is one of the things I do at my primary job, and after some discussions with engineers at numerous companies that make excellent software I frequently use, my answer to your question “Now, if a single developer could write a GUI for Storage VMotion, why didn’t VMware take care of this themselves?” is this: VMware’s engineers probably did not feel that they could provide the quality of code in this release that their customers are used to seeing in the normal interface. The organizations on the leading edge of IT are the ones with users comfortable with doing extensive technical troubleshooting, and CLI tools are the best usage of developer time for major features that are new to a product; adding VMware-grade GUI support to this tool in this release would likely have added significant time to the release. If you really do need storage VMotion right now, chances are good that the people in your organization responsible for storage can use the CLI.

]]> By: Natiboy http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/comment-page-1/#comment-39214 Natiboy Thu, 05 Jun 2008 17:35:48 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/#comment-39214 Because since EMC's aquisition the VC product development has shifted to the similar models of EMC --'The Software Company' -- junky. ECC, Navisphere, and other tools all have less and less Enterprise feel every time they release. I think it should just work. Like the hypervisor. Because since EMC’s aquisition the VC product development has shifted to the similar models of EMC –’The Software Company’ — junky.

ECC, Navisphere, and other tools all have less and less Enterprise feel every time they release. I think it should just work. Like the hypervisor.

]]> By: Clint http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/comment-page-1/#comment-35384 Clint Sun, 10 Feb 2008 06:54:26 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/#comment-35384 It has been my opinion for a while as great as Virtualization and in particular VMware is, it seems that VMware does not always think Enterprise when developing some of their tools. It would seem that little things like a solid GUI for a GREAT feature would be a no brainer. As Rich mentioned hopefully they will add this in a patch, but to me it seems that they are getting a reputation of needing a few patches after each major release before it is ready for prime time. It has been my opinion for a while as great as Virtualization and in particular VMware is, it seems that VMware does not always think Enterprise when developing some of their tools.

It would seem that little things like a solid GUI for a GREAT feature would be a no brainer.

As Rich mentioned hopefully they will add this in a patch, but to me it seems that they are getting a reputation of needing a few patches after each major release before it is ready for prime time.

]]> By: Rich http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/comment-page-1/#comment-35366 Rich Sat, 09 Feb 2008 13:02:18 +0000 http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/02/09/graphical-front-end-for-storage-vmotion/#comment-35366 Scott, I agree. Even if adding the Windows Remote CLI install to the VC 2.5 install was all that was done, well, that would make sense. Then building a GUI for it, or hooks that call svmotion from the VI client would be too easy. I have to believe that an upcoming patch will add this feature. Please, VMware ?! Scott,

I agree. Even if adding the Windows Remote CLI install to the VC 2.5 install was all that was done, well, that would make sense. Then building a GUI for it, or hooks that call svmotion from the VI client would be too easy. I have to believe that an upcoming patch will add this feature. Please, VMware ?!

]]>