Talk:VMware ESXi

message: Xen and Hyper-V are microkernelized hypervisors, that means they need to use the device drivers of the Dom0 operating system. KVM is monolithic, it comes with its own device drivers. In the article, it sais, VMware ESX does not need any operating system, and is also sais it is microkernelized hypervisor. Which claim is correct? User:ScotXWt@lk 17:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type microkernelized of monolithic 

message: I like the idea of a separated page for the ESX Server.
One question: In the first paragraph, there is written 'The basic server requires some form of persistent storage - typically an array of hard disk drives - for storing core system files and virtual machines.'  Why is there the emphasis on storage?  Also every ESX Server needs CPU, RAM, Network, ...?
--Sophis 08:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The intent here was to explain the main difference between ESX 3.0 and 3i in the first pargraph.  As I understand it, 3.0 needs to be installed on a persistent storage medium, like a hard disk array, whereas 3i will be integrated into the system's firmware.  I just reworded it slightly to better emphasize this difference.  If you can make this any clearer, then please do so. — EagleOne\Talk 02:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken a stab at clarifying the point Sophis was aiming at. The three IBM servers we have use a usb storage token with ESXi preinstalled. Not exactly firmware but close. ---TheDrew (talk) 03:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Idea & First Question 

message: Just an FYI - This section should probably be removed or at least moved to either the Workstation or VMware Server page since it is not related to ESX.  The terms Bridged and NAT'd are not applicable to the ESX architecture.  I am sure the original author was using one of the HOSTED (Workstation or Server) products which does employ these types of concepts/terms for the host NICs.  I'll leave this task for one of the more experienced WIKIPeople to handle though.  68.164.207.118 (talk) 05:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Network Protocol Section 

message: No list of supported guest OSes in the industry-leading hypervisor article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.104 (talk) 20:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of guest OSes supported 

message: Because there is so little information available about how ESX server differs from Linux+GSX server, I may be getting some things wrong here. It seems to me that even in V3, the linux kernel loads first, provides the proc FS and a base for what the article refers to as the service OS (redhat linux userpsace), and is also used for its network and storage drivers. Unless I am mistaken, this makes Linux the actual bare hardware kernel.
Without some serious modification there are only 2 places for code to run on a linux system, in userspace or in the kernel itself. That includes the drivers, which, because they are GPL licensed, virally GPL anything you attach them to. Unless VMware has massively modified the linux kernel, this vmkernel either runs in userspace or is itself a module and thus derivative of the Linux kernel.  
The whole thing looks like a license violation to me, and I'm not even that fond of the GPL.  I hope someone proves me wrong. Mrsteveman1 (talk) 05:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architecture 

message: VMware ESX Server(Whitebox HCL) doesn't have enough useful content that stands on its own; it should be merged here.--Oneiros (talk) 21:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Should that page even exist at all? not really a wikipedia class of material, more like tomshardware or vmware's FAQ.--Nonya 13:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It has been deleted.--Oneiros (talk) 21:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: The "neutral point of view" warning should be removed.  It is referencing the limitation section; apparently there is some confusion between academic discussions (where 'limitations' might be a prejorative notion) and technical ones (where it simply discusses the rated capability of a system in quantitative terms).
It is in no-way controversial to state that an ESX guest can only have 255GB of RAM, for instance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cseraphine (talk • contribs) 19:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The neutrality warning should be pulled. 

message: "VMware ESXi is server virtualization software written by VMware.  It can be either free (limited features) or full-featured."
I don't agree with this since VMware ESXi seems to be free of charge. The non-free version is called VMware vSphere.
Chrescht (talk) 14:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: VMware ESXi

message: ESX stands for Elastic Sky X (GSX, the older product, stands for Ground Storm X).. For the purpose of completion, should we include this piece of information? Numerous sources online mention this fact.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.162.148.199 (talk) 06:03, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, its generally good writing to have an explanation of an acronym when one introduces it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.121.161 (talk) 10:08, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ESX acronym 

message: It is worth separating ESX and ESXi or maybe moving this to EXSi. With Vmware ditching ESX in favour of ESXi it seems odd to update the ESXi section of this article when the product under the main title is defunct. --JetBlast (talk) 22:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since ESXi is an evolved, renamed version of ESX, I think we should move the article to VMware ESXi, and let VMware ESX redirect there. –Ringbang (talk) 22:05, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seperate ESX & ESXi? 

message: What justification is there for listing every point release?
--SimonBramfitt (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that it should be here, however. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I'd support an external link to a third-party listing of this information, but I believe it isn't encyclopedic and detracts from the article. —me_and 11:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release History 

message: Where is the licensing information for this release. Is it Open Source? Is this simply VMware promotion blurb?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.78.128 (talk) 10:57, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the licensing information for this release. Is it Open Source? Is this simply VMware promotion blurb? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on VMware ESX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070225163020/http://www.vi3book.com:80/esxatdg_ch2.pdf to http://www.vi3book.com/esxatdg_ch2.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on VMware ESX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070930004506/http://www13.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/lehre/seminare/WS0506/hauptsem/Ausarbeitung02.pdf to http://www13.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/lehre/seminare/WS0506/hauptsem/Ausarbeitung02.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070211072747/http://www.vmware.com:80/products/vi/esx/faqs.html to http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/esx/faqs.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The lawsuit mentioned in the article seems to have concluded on Feb 28 2019. I found only some short articles + the VMWare's statement here https://www.vmware.com/company/news/updates/march-2019-hellwig-legal-proceedings.html - and I don't want to edit the article based on only this but maybe someone can start here and find a court's ruling?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.162.8.158 (talk) 14:34, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The lawsuit