From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Recent kvm and vmware server comparisons?
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:15:40 -0700
Message-ID: <200902181715.40738.tfjellstrom@shaw.ca>
References: <200902101919.06778.tfjellstrom@shaw.ca> <200902180540.15737.tfjellstrom@shaw.ca> <7B7881568CF40E4388B615CD06F87B98098AE1@clara.maurer-it.com>
Reply-To: tfjellstrom@shaw.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
To: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca ([24.71.223.10]:10864 "EHLO
	idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1757593AbZBSAPm convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:15:42 -0500
In-Reply-To: <7B7881568CF40E4388B615CD06F87B98098AE1@clara.maurer-it.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wednesday 18 February 2009, Martin Maurer wrote:
> > I suppose no-one has any?
>
> VMware includes in its EULA (End User License Agreement) a prohibitio=
n for
> any licensee to publish benchmark results without VMware's approval. =
(see
> https://www.vmware.com/tryvmware/eula.php)
>
> Maybe this is a reason why all published VMWare benchmarks looks quit=
e
> similar :-)
>
> I would love to see a comparison but due to this restrictions it=B4s =
hard to
> get independent results.
>
> Br, Martin


I hardly think it stops people from casually talking about their day to=
 day=20
experiences with vmware and how kvm matches up to it. And even if it di=
d, it=20
doesn't sound like something thats actually legally binding. Otherwise =
I can=20
start putting things like YOU MUST NEVER TALK AGAIN in my eulas.

--=20
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@shaw.ca