RSS
Логотип
Баннер в шапке 1
Баннер в шапке 2
Project

Apple refused software of VMware for benefit of open solutions

Customers: Apple

Cupertino; Electrical and Microelectronics

Product: KVM (Kernel-based Virtual Machine)
На базе: Linux

Project date: 2015/10

2015: Failure of Apple from virtualization of VMware for benefit of the open solution

On October 5, 2015 it became known that Apple refused use of means of virtualization of VMware for benefit of an alternative open source. Such step should help the American producer of electronics to save millions of dollars.

According to the CRN edition with reference to the informed sources, Apple did not begin to prolong the corporate license agreement (Enterprise License Agreement, ELA) with VMware as terms of the contract did not arrange corporation. What caused discontent of Apple, is not specified.

Apple is dissatisfied with license terms which were offered by VMware

It is noted that Apple uses in the IT infrastructure the means of virtualization of servers offered VMware and the software for management of cloud computing. The companies began to cooperate in 2011, and two years later extended the duration of the agreement for few years.

One interlocutors CRN says that if Apple was prolonged again by ELA, the company spent $20 million. However the Californian giant refused to do it and decided to stop using a hypervisor of VMware of ESXi which is established directly on the physical server and separates it into several virtual machines. Instead of this software Apple selected the solution Kernel Virtual Machine (KVM), similar in functionality, which advance IBM (the largest the partner of Apple in business market) and Red Hat (leading manufacturer of software on the basis of Linux).

Having selected software open source which KVM is, Apple can save millions of dollars on licensing taking into account huge scales of cloud infrastructure of corporation.

The requests for providing comments made by the edition to Apple and VMware were left without answer. VMware only noted that the company does not discuss confidential agreements and contracts with the clients.[1]

Notes