VMware Really Hurting? Or Just Really Bad Timing For A Simple Mistake?
Virtualization Critical Evaluation – Chapter 06
Is VMware really hurting, meaning are they coming a part of the seams? Or was the latest licensing bug issue just bad timing? It was a minor code mistake, but a major perception mistake. For something that happens all the time in a code development shop, more often than a non-coder would care to understand. Just imagine you are the one that make the mistake? Just imagine you are the one that missed catching the mistake? There will be some careers that will end or at least be derailed for a while, at best, at worst, change lives of some with dramatic impact. Is this fair? No. Is it really reasonable, maybe it is given what VMware must now do to recover from this perception of running a lose development shop. No one is perfect, but the world expects perfection, and more than the perception of perfect. VMware is not perfect. No software publisher is. However, the real issue here is not the mistake that was made. But why the mistake was made. Perception has real significant impact. Why do I say this?
Some time ago, just short of a year ago, VMware promised a specific group of enterprise customers that the licensing model would be, and I believe I quote, “we are discussing options for making the licensing model more informational, rather than enforcement oriented.” Those in the room, there were some 50 or 100 of us that heard this asked almost in one voice…When? Where? How will this passive licensing model be implemented? VMware at that point became very vague. In fact the topic never came up again. This is the real issue, because if VMware had owned up to this promise, at least I saw it as a promise as a time, as good as a promise, and then the impact of the August 12th bug would not have been the fire drill it was. VMware seems to be doing damage control as a matter or routine throughout 2008. Was the exit of Greene not a type of damage control?
Even the evaluation version of VMware ESX OS has a 60 day try it window before features are disabled. Now what an interesting idea! The commercial version of License Server would generate events and warnings but not actually disable functions for 60 days; this would have avoided the issue no? Never mind the fact that I think that the Flex License Manager solution is horrible, I am just not a fan of restrictive licensing, and I have never been impressed with Flex, it has a very long and negative history depending on who or whom you ask. And, yes I know all the issues and debatable points that surround software piracy and theft. So the following questions come to mind? First, just how many Lawyers will get sacked at VMware for the August 12 issue? Lawyers, yes lawyers. This is terrible, sad even, because I am sure some heads will roll across the floor and down the stairs, out the door of VMware. I hope the heads migration, includes the entire brain trust that thought proactive enforcement of licensing was a good idea, I bet it was a lawyer that initiated the idea! Am I wrong? VMware say something if I am.
Just how many of senior management will get nailed? After all, there are serious issues with VMware quality if this is a trend. Blaming Greene is a cheap shot at this point. Lets be honest, there is a growing trend in the entire information technology (IT) industry to release solutions to the customer that are flat out incomplete, broken, or worse pushed out the door because of a fixed deadline. The quality assurance process, I believe, is seen by the marketing, sales, and even top management, as an evil thing, that holds back solutions from being released. After all, most customers pay for support, so we, the customers pay twice? Once for the product as concept that is incomplete, and again for getting issues fixed that never should have gotten out to us in the first place? You bet, your sweet posterior, you do. Just how long should a list of known issues be, to be deemed reasonable? My eyes almost bugged out of my head when I read the release notes for ESX 3.5 Update 2, very long, does not install a sense of confidence? All I could think of was… If the known issues list is this long, how long was the issues list that they actually fixed? And what did they miss?
Guess the issue was not big enough for the CEO of VMware to make a public statement? Maybe at VMworld 2008, in the key note address, someone at VMware will do the right thing, and state that VMware will and has improved quality assurance methods and processes, so customers are not impacted in a similar manner in the future? How about a known issues list that is only 5 items long in total, or less than 10 items in total? That would answer a lot of critics, including me. And go a significant way in the positive direction to answering the question…Is this the end of a bad series of missteps for VMware? Or I sincerely hope this is not the case…Is this just the next incremental step in a longer trend, before VMware goes down in flames?
1 comment September 2nd, 2008
