Suggestions for small domain virtualization

ok, looking for community input / opinions.

I have a small domain with the following physical servers: (2 domain controllers, 1 exchange 2003 server, 1 file server, 2 SQL Server DB servers).

The domain is a windows 2003 domain with aging equipment.
There are approximately 100 workstations on this domain.

The file server is a windows 2008 box which is fairly new & will be kept.  All else will be replaced.

I am looking for suggestions on what the community would do meaning I am thinking of buying 2 physical servers (looking at PowerEdge R720 - which will serve as my DC's & running either VMware of Hyper-V on it to virtualize the other machines.

What do you all recommend hardware wise?
Preferences on going to 2008 vs 2012 server?
Thoughts on Hyper-V on VMware?

Any input would be hugely appreciated.  
Thank you.
Who is Participating?

Improve company productivity with a Business Account.Sign Up

piyushranusriConnect With a Mentor System Cloud SpecialistCommented:
this time dell has one scheme a bundle of vc cneter and dell power edge servers.

please ask the dell representative, he will give you the best info
piyushranusriSystem Cloud SpecialistCommented:
there is a discount from Dell that purchase new dell server power edge and they will serve with Vpshere 5.1 version.

 it is very true that virtualization will be very costly, but the outcome is very fantastic in terms on power, administration, manpower and the last   the user/management satisfaction.

please revert if any query
Lee W, MVPTechnology and Business Process AdvisorCommented:
I don't know why piyushranusri thinks it would be costly... Virtualization, when implemented properly will REDUCE costs, not be costly.

VMware ESPECIALLY now, is NOT a great solution for small business.  The free version is limited to 32 GB of RAM on the host server - this makes hosting multiple VM difficult when they need RAM.  Further, Hyper-V replica can provide a level of redundancy and in a sense, backup that you cannot get from VMWare's free solutions as far as I know.

It doesn't make any sense to use Hyper-V 2008 R2 when 2012 is available.  With 6 Server 2012 Licenses, you can setup a cluster or a hyper-V replica system.

Why are you ordering a DELL server from NewEgg and not Dell?  Call Dell directly (DON'T use their web site)
Problems using Powershell and Active Directory?

Managing Active Directory does not always have to be complicated.  If you are spending more time trying instead of doing, then it's time to look at something else. For nearly 20 years, AD admins around the world have used one tool for day-to-day AD management: Hyena. Discover why

webclickusaAuthor Commented:
What am I looking at cost wise typically to go VM ware?  You would recommend just going with enterprise edition and thus hyperv?
Lee W, MVPTechnology and Business Process AdvisorCommented:
I don't look at VMWare because it costs.  PERIOD.

Hyper-V is FREE.  Period.  If you use Windows Server, then you get a license to run it at no additional cost with GUI, otherwise, you can get the free version without GUI.  

There is no Enterprise Edition of Server 2012.  2012 is either Standard or Datacenter.  (Other editions exist but don't make sense for you - Foundation or Essentials).  The only difference (besides cost) between Standard and Datacenter is in the number of INCLUDED Windows VM Licenses you get.  Standard offers 2, Datacenter UNLIMITED.  They are functionally identical.  And the number of Windows licenses required will not change between Hyper-V and VMWare - you need the same number.

Just to be clear since some people don't understand this - Hyper-V does not (realistically, especially for a small business) limit the number of VMs you can run in Hyper-V (There is a limit but it's technological one in the hundreds - there is no license limit).  You can run 100 Linux VMs with NO additional licenses... or you can run 100 Windows Server VMs with 50 Standard licenses or 1 Data Center license - the OS installed requires the license (if it would normally require a license), the "virtual machine" provided by Hyper-V doesn't.
webclickusaAuthor Commented:
ok, so presently I have these physical machines.
domain controller #1
domain controller #2
DB server #1
DB server #2
File Server

& exchange running on one of the DC's which I wish to get off & onto its own VM.

If I were to:
keep the file server on its own
buy 2 new physical machines for DC's

What would I need licensing wise?

Thank you very much.
Lee W, MVPTechnology and Business Process AdvisorCommented:
Do you want to cluster?  Do you want use Hyper-V replica?  If the answer is NO - redundancy and failover is not important to you, then you need three Server 2012 Standard licenses.

Each Server 2012 standard license includes 1+2 licenses which means you can do ONE physical install which can ONLY RUN HYPER-V and on the physical install you can then install TWO copies of 2012 Standard in VMs.  One server would have TWO purchased licenses assigned to it allowing 4 VMs while they other would have only one allowing 2 VMs for a total of 6 virtualized servers.

If you implement a cluster or Hyper-V replica, then you need DOUBLE the licenses because licenses can only be moved once every 90 days (NOTE: OEM licenses CANNOT be moved EVER so buy VOLUME LICENSES!) and clusters and replica could be moved more often (especially clusters, they would likely be moved at least once per month on the update reboots).
Mike TLeading EngineerCommented:

Firstly, Hyper-V 3 (2012 version) beats VMware in almost every area. If you use the free version then it's a hands-down winner. VMware is either expensive or limited by RAM with the free version.

I would go Hyper-V Server 2012, with any vendor (Dell/HP/IBM) and as much RAM and disk as you can justify. Then you can run all servers virtual.

There's a cost calculator here:
(by Microsoft so maybe biased)

It seems VMware needs lots of separate layers which they charge for. It feels like if they were selling cars, they'd be selling it without any wheels, windows or a radiator.

Having used VMware and Hyper-V, I find Hyper-V more powerful. I run SCCM + SQL, a DC and a client machine on a 8GB laptop and it works OK/amazingly well.

webclickusaAuthor Commented:
Redundancy & availability is VERY important.  Downtime is a BIG problem.  That being said . . .
My layout currently is:

Physical Domain Controller #1 (exchange is running on it, would like to VM exchange)
Physical Domain Controller #2
Physical File Server #1
Physical DB Server #1
Physical DB Server #2

So I have 5 Physical servers.  Some roles are running on these physical machines which I would like to move off & instead have a VM for backups (using Storage Craft Shadow Protect), a VM for Antivirus (using F-Secure).

This being said & give my explanation of my layout . . . .

What would you kids do with this setup?  What would be your path to creating a high availability, fault tolerant setup?

In other words I would like people to weight in on how they would do it?

Thank you very much.
Lee W, MVPTechnology and Business Process AdvisorCommented:
Do you want the $100,000 solution or the $2000?  Or the $5000 solution?  Or the $10,000.  Or the $20,000 solution?

Need a budget.  You can cluster with one or more nodes, do hyper-V replica, do BOTH.  What you do depends GREATLY on the budget you have for this.  I'd rather not spend an hour detailing an elaborate expensive plan when you're only willing to spend $2000.
webclickusaAuthor Commented:
The somewhete betweeen 10 and 20k solution.  I have been looking at thr Dell vrtx solution which with 2 nodes and data center edition is 20k.   Thank you.
webclickusaAuthor Commented:
Any further input? Thank you.
webclickusaAuthor Commented:
Thank you
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.