This Question is Not Answered
1 "correct" answer available (4 pts) 2 "helpful" answers available (2 pts)
8 Replies
Last post:
Mar 25, 2008 5:22 AM by
Marcus Vollmer
Re: FastScale = Enterprise, rPath = SMB
Marcus,
FastScale is a completely different architecture which is not suitable for ISVs to use to deliver virtual appliances. It uses some custom kernel technology to page for files over the network based upon execution of the application. An interesting architecture for some workloads, but not at all suited to delivering virtual appliances.
Hope this helps.
Billy
Re: FastScale = Enterprise, rPath = SMB
Billy,
FastScale seems to be specifically designed to deliver large scale deployments of virtual appliances (vmware). It seems to offer a one pass build solution that looks interesting.
In new technology markets like appliances there are often multiple competing architectures. I am asking what makes your architecture better? Can you please explain why rPath's architecture is better?
Thanks
FastScale seems to be specifically designed to deliver large scale deployments of virtual appliances (vmware). It seems to offer a one pass build solution that looks interesting.
In new technology markets like appliances there are often multiple competing architectures. I am asking what makes your architecture better? Can you please explain why rPath's architecture is better?
Thanks
Re: FastScale = Enterprise, rPath = SMB
Marcus,
To my knowledge, FastScale does not claim to enable virtual appliances for ISVs. They claim to enable Dynamic Application Bundles for custom built enterprise applications. The reason they are focused on the latter and not the former is because they page over the network for files based on kernel technology that interupts application processing. It would not be appropriate to page over the Internet back to the ISV.
Different architectures for different implementations. Our technology enables a turnkey capability, including lifecycle management, for virtual appliances. Our solution does not dynamically page for files at runtime. We enable a complete solution definition, tested by the ISV, as part of the development process.
Billy
Re: FastScale = Enterprise, rPath = SMB
Billy,
Thanks for the quick reply. Could an ISV not deploy FastScale at a large customer deployment where many ISV virtual appliances are required? Would the ISV not have tested the application bundles under the virtualized environment? It would seem to me that FastScale would offer benefits to the ISV looking to deploy larger enterprise type environments?
With that in mind, can you tell me how rPath offers a better solution to FastScale? Maybe without the marketing buzz words? rPath is better because... ?
Thanks
Marcus
Thanks for the quick reply. Could an ISV not deploy FastScale at a large customer deployment where many ISV virtual appliances are required? Would the ISV not have tested the application bundles under the virtualized environment? It would seem to me that FastScale would offer benefits to the ISV looking to deploy larger enterprise type environments?
With that in mind, can you tell me how rPath offers a better solution to FastScale? Maybe without the marketing buzz words? rPath is better because... ?
Thanks
Marcus
Re: FastScale = Enterprise, rPath = SMB
Marcus,
I think my answer indicates that we are happy to do a competitive evaluation against FastScale. Put both horses on the track and see which one wins. Do you have an application that you intend to deliver as a virtual appliance? I look forward to hearing from your company about an evaluation.
Billy
