VMware

The Infrastructure Problem

by

the infrastructure problem

VMware’s pricing changes, cloud cost overruns, or the AI skills shortage are symptoms of the infrastructure problem: legacy environments that demand new layers of complexity with every new initiative. Each shift in strategy—whether it’s migrating to the cloud, deploying AI workloads, or navigating vendor transitions—exposes just how fragile and fragmented traditional architectures have become. IT teams are forced to bolt on new platforms, hire niche expertise, or overprovision resources just to keep up. The result isn’t innovation—it’s operational drag. It’s time to rethink infrastructure from the ground up.

Watch our on-demand industry briefing with ESG to learn the impact of these challenges and how to solve them

According to recent (May 2025) ESG research titled “Private AI, Virtualization, and Cloud: Transforming the Future of Infrastructure Modernization,” a survey of 380 mid-sized to large data centers, organizations everywhere are scrambling to address these top challenges:

  1. VMware’s acquisition by Broadcom has created uncertainty for the 80% of enterprises relying on their virtualization platform.
  2. Simultaneously, 75% of organizations are rethinking their cloud strategies as costs spiral beyond projections.
  3. And 53% of organizations plan to deploy private, on-premises AI infrastructure within the next two years, but 70% struggle to find qualified staff to manage increasingly complex infrastructure environments.

IT leaders are approaching these as separate crises requiring individual solutions. But what if there’s a single root cause driving all these problems?

The Symptoms of the Infrastructure Problem

the infrastructure problem

The evidence of the infrastructure problem is everywhere:

  • VMware’s disruption has left organizations hunting for hypervisor alternatives, only to discover that most options require new skill sets and architectural approaches.
  • Cloud repatriation is accelerating as the economics of long-term workloads in public cloud environments prove unsustainable—what promised operational flexibility has become a financial burden.
  • AI adoption is stalling because implementing on-premises AI is a must-have to mine proprietary data, but vendors are suggesting it requires building separate infrastructure stacks with specialized hardware, networking, and storage.
  • Talent acquisition has become nearly impossible as the complexity of managing modern infrastructure outpaces the available skill pool.

These issues dominate IT planning discussions, budget meetings, and strategic reviews. However, focusing on symptoms instead of causes leads to fragmented solutions that exacerbate the underlying problem.

Software is the Source of the Infrastructure Problem

The source of the infrastructure problem isn’t any single vendor, technology, or market force. It’s the acceptance of fundamentally flawed infrastructure software that forces fragmentation by design.

For over two decades, the industry has normalized building data centers by assembling disconnected components—hypervisors that require separate storage systems, networking hardware that needs additional security appliances, backup solutions that demand their own management consoles, and now AI platforms that require new and again isolated stacks.

This fragmented approach creates four compounding problems:

Hardware Vendor Lock-In: Traditional infrastructure software ties organizations to proprietary hardware ecosystems. Storage controllers costing 10X what they should, certified network switches, rigid hardware compatibility lists—all designed to extract maximum revenue rather than deliver maximum value.

Operational Silos: Every new initiative spawns its own infrastructure requirements. Virtualization teams, storage specialists, network engineers, backup administrators, and now AI infrastructure experts—each managing separate tools, consoles, and technologies that barely communicate with each other.

The Add-On Trap: Poor infrastructure software creates gaps that must be filled with additional vendor solutions. What starts as “adding backup capabilities” becomes an ecosystem of interconnected products, each requiring its own licensing, hardware, support contracts, and specialized expertise.

the infrastructure problem

Complexity Explosion: The staffing crisis isn’t just about finding qualified people—it’s about the exponential complexity created when organizations need specialists for every infrastructure domain, plus the integration expertise to make them work together.

How to Solve the Infrastructure Problem

Solving the infrastructure problem becomes possible when infrastructure software is designed correctly from the ground up. VergeOS demonstrates this approach by integrating virtualization, storage, networking, and AI capabilities into a single codebase, creating a unified platform.

Instead of assembling separate components, organizations get unified functionality that eliminates vendor lock-in, operational silos, add-on complexity, and excessive staffing requirements while leveraging existing hardware. A single platform addresses what organizations currently treat as separate problems: VMware alternatives, cloud cost optimization, AI infrastructure deployment, and skills shortage mitigation.

This isn’t theoretical—it’s happening today. Read our case studies to learn how organizations using VergeOS report reducing infrastructure costs, in some cases, by over 90%, eliminating multiple vendor relationships, and enabling single administrators to manage entire infrastructure stacks that previously required specialized teams.

The Path Forward

The infrastructure challenges consuming your planning cycles aren’t inevitable. They’re the predictable result of accepting software that forces fragmentation rather than enabling consolidation.

VMware disruption, cloud cost overruns, AI deployment complexity, and skills shortages are symptoms of a deeper architectural problem. Addressing symptoms individually—such as finding new hypervisors, optimizing cloud spend, building AI infrastructure, and hiring more specialists—treats the effects while leaving the cause untouched.

The solution requires recognizing that modern infrastructure demands modern architecture. Software that natively integrates all infrastructure functions. Platforms that work with commodity hardware rather than forcing proprietary purchases. Systems that simplify rather than complicate operations.

Organizations that recognize this shift now will gain significant advantages over those that focus on treating symptoms instead of addressing the underlying problem.

To learn more, download our white paper, “Four Forces Accelerating Infrastructure Modernization.”

A Secure VMware Alternative

by

According to the ESG study, “Private AI, Virtualization, and Cloud: Transforming the Future of Infrastructure Modernization“, 72% of organizations experienced a cost increase in their infrastructure software, and 41% of those organizations are looking for a secure VMware Alternative. While reducing those licensing fees was the top priority, security ranked higher than concerns about migration complexity or the learning curve of adopting a new hypervisor platform.

With cyber threats intensifying, especially those targeting IT infrastructure, organizations are actively seeking infrastructure that delivers stronger defenses, simpler management, and enhanced operational control.

How VergeOS Responds

The VergeIO development team built VergeOS from the ground up to be secure by design. It reduces attack surfaces by collapsing multiple infrastructure layers—virtualization, storage, and networking—into a single software platform with centralized control. From licensing to workload isolation, VergeOS delivers the capabilities organizations expect from a secure VMware alternative.


To learn more about building a secure, resilient infrastructure and how to manage ransomware threats effectively, join us for our upcoming webinar, The Four Forces Accelerating Infrastructure Modernization, on Thursday, June 26, 2025, at 1:00 PM ET. Join ESG and VergeIO for an industry briefing on the state of IT infrastructure.

What Secure Virtualization Infrastructure Requires

To qualify as a secure alternative to VMware, the infrastructure must go beyond access controls and patch schedules; it must be architecturally designed to be secure.

Key Requirements for Secure Virtualization:

  • Immutable Core: The infrastructure software must cryptographically verify its operating system (OS) and maintain it as read-only.
  • RAM-Resident Execution: Runs from memory to prevent tampering.
  • Integrated Recovery Paths: Support fast rollback to clean states in the event of compromise.
  • Seamless Patch Updates: Organizations need regular updates to stay ahead of attackers; administrators must patch systems quickly, safely, and without disruption.

How VergeOS Implements Secure Virtualization

VergeOS boots into RAM using a read-only, cryptographically verified core image. This prevents unauthorized modifications and dramatically reduces the window for persistent threats. In the event of an attack, administrators can reload a known-good state in minutes—no reinstallation, no rehydration, and no downtime.

A Secure VMware Alternative

VergeOS also supports non-disruptive rolling updates, allowing organizations to patch their infrastructure without taking workloads offline. This keeps security current without introducing operational risk. As a result, 90% of VergeIO customers upgrade to the latest VergeOS version within 30 days of its availability—a proof point of both the platform’s reliability and the confidence customers have in its update process.

These are baseline features of a secure VMware alternative.

Secure Virtualization Requires Workload Isolation

Preventing lateral movement within infrastructure is just as important as securing the perimeter. VergeOS uses Virtual Data Centers (VDCs) to enforce strict boundaries between workloads.

Benefits of VDC-Based Isolation:

  • Each VDC can include its own compute, storage, and networking settings
  • Administrators can separate mission-critical applications from general user workloads
  • A breach in one VDC does not expose the rest of the environment

How VergeOS Makes It Work

VergeOS enables IT teams to assign VDCs based on application, department, or compliance boundary. VergeOS isolates each VDC not only by policy but by resource scope and access control. This capability is foundational for delivering a secure VMware alternative that limits risk and supports compliance.

Secure Virtualization Requires Detection and Recovery

Even with the strongest defensive measures—such as firewalls, endpoint protection, and rigorous security training—ransomware attacks find their way into an organization’s infrastructure. This can occur through sophisticated social engineering attacks, zero-day exploits, compromised third-party vendors, or advanced persistent threats (APTs) designed to bypass traditional defenses.

When an attack inevitably slips through these safeguards, the organization needs an immediate and reliable recovery strategy to minimize operational disruption and data loss. Effective ransomware recovery is as essential as prevention, requiring tools that detect infiltration swiftly, isolate affected areas, and rapidly restore systems to a safe state.

ioFortify: Early Detection through Deduplication Monitoring

VergeOS includes ioFortify, which continuously monitors deduplication efficiency. A sudden drop in deduplication is a warning sign of ransomware encryption. ioFortify alerts administrators early and recommends taking a snapshot of the environment before damage spreads.

VergeFS Snapshots: Fast, Clean Rollbacks

VergeOS’ ioClone technology enables read-only snapshots. Because of its integration into VergeOS, there is no limit on the number or the age of snapshots. VergeOS snapshots allow rapid rollback to clean, pre-attack states with minimal or no data loss and near-zero recovery time.

Together, ioClone, ioFortify, and Virtual Data Centers deliver what organizations expect from a secure VMware alternative: a ransomware-resilient architecture that combines early warning, data protection, and fast rollback.

A Secure VMware Alternative

Final Thoughts: Choose a VMware Alternative That Puts Security First

Weak security and vulnerability to ransomware represent significant infrastructure challenges. Organizations must adopt a comprehensive approach to address these issues. A secure VMware alternative can help achieve this goal. VergeOS provides a forward-thinking infrastructure platform that not only replaces VMware but also enhances the organization’s security posture.

If you’re evaluating VMware alternatives, ask:

  • Was this platform built to survive an attack?
  • Can it recover fast without introducing new risks?
  • Does it give me more control with fewer add-ons?

VergeOS is a secure VMware alternative that protects what comes next. Schedule a technical whiteboard session and deep dive into our architecture.

The Hidden Costs of HCI

by

The hidden costs of HCI often prevent IT professionals, who are looking to exit VMware, from seriously considering the architecture as a viable alternative. Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI) vendors capitalize on this scenario, positioning their solutions as streamlined platforms that seamlessly unify virtualization, compute, storage, and networking. However, this initial promise of simplified infrastructure management frequently masks significant hidden costs and complexities.

The hidden costs of HCI

Initially intended to unify infrastructure components, traditional HCI has failed to deliver true integration. Compute, storage, and networking resources remain operationally separate, requiring distinct layers in the form of virtual machines (VMs) communicating with the hypervisor. Commonly deployed solutions utilize separate VMs for storage management (e.g., Nutanix’s CVM or VMware’s vSAN), distinct networking stacks (Nutanix Flow, VMware NSX), and individual management VMs (Nutanix Prism, VMware vCenter). True operational simplification remains elusive; what began as convergence is merely the virtualization of legacy three-tier architectures.

How VergeOS Solves the Convergence Problem

VergeOS achieves true convergence through its ultraconverged design. By integrating storage, networking, virtualization, and data services directly into a unified operating environment, VergeOS eliminates silos and redundant communication layers. This cohesive design simplifies operations, reducing complexity, administrative overhead, and resource inefficiency.

Dive deeper with our on-demand webinar: “Comparing HCI as VMware Alternatives.”

The Efficiency Problem

The hidden costs of HCI include its inability to deliver meaningful infrastructure efficiency. Despite sharing hardware, HCI components remain distinct entities, each consuming substantial resources. Dedicated storage VMs, management VMs, separate networking stacks, and additional abstraction layers cumulatively drain compute cycles and memory. Application VMs running within these infrastructures consequently suffer degraded performance and higher latency, forcing organizations to compensate with additional hardware investment rather than benefiting from the initially promised efficiency gains.

For instance, a typical I/O operation in an HCI environment begins at the hypervisor level, proceeds through a storage controller (virtualized as a separate VM), traverses network infrastructure, and finally reaches physical storage media. Each extra step consumes CPU resources, adds latency, and reduces performance efficiency. As workloads scale, the cumulative impact of these inefficiencies affects application responsiveness and resource utilization.

Some HCI vendors utilize data locality to mitigate some of these issues; however, this technology further complicates operations and negatively impacts performance during node or drive failure.

The hidden costs of HCI

How VergeOS Solves the Efficiency Problem

VergeOS integrates all services, including storage and networking, directly into its operating system, eliminating performance overhead associated with separate management virtual machines or additional software layers. Its lightweight architecture ensures maximum resource efficiency, optimizing performance and dramatically reducing hardware requirements and infrastructure costs.

The High Cost of HCI Inefficiency

The hidden costs of HCI inefficiencies necessitate significant investment in higher-performance hardware to compensate for architectural shortcomings. IT must procure more powerful servers, increased core counts, expanded memory, and faster networking. Furthermore, licensing models that charge per CPU core or capacity exacerbate costs, forcing organizations into substantial capital expenditures. These license models compel customers to purchase less optimal hardware to contain software licensing costs.

How VergeOS Reduces the Cost of Inefficiency

With a streamlined architecture, VergeOS maximizes hardware resource utilization. Its efficient code base and integrated design enable organizations to achieve optimal performance using commodity or existing hardware, reducing initial capital expenditures and ongoing operational expenses. VergeIO licenses VergeOS per-server without penalties for using high-core-count or high-capacity servers.

The High Cost of HCI Data Availability

HCI solutions employ synchronous mirroring—continuous real-time data duplication across nodes—to protect against hardware failures. Vendors commonly refer to redundancy levels as Replication Factor (RF) or Fault Tolerance Level (“failures to tolerate” or FTT). Nutanix refers to protection from one node failure as Replication Factor 2 (RF2), meaning two copies of data are maintained. VMware terms this configuration Failures to Tolerate of 1 (FTT=1).

To protect from two simultaneous node failures or multiple drive failures across nodes, Nutanix uses Replication Factor 3 (RF3)—three data copies—while VMware uses FTT=2. This triple redundancy greatly increases storage capacity and resource requirements. RF3 requires at least five nodes, becoming prohibitively expensive for smaller deployments. In larger environments, limiting resiliency to two node failures is insufficient, as risk increases with node count.

These requirements force prioritizing specific workloads for enhanced protection (RF3), relegating others to standard availability (RF2). Limited redundancy beyond RF3 leads organizations to increase the cluster count per site, resulting in cluster sprawl, which in turn causes additional administrative complexity, higher costs, and uneven availability guarantees.

To maintain performance during node failures, Nutanix and VMware require reserving a portion of resources on each server equal to the capacity of one full node. In a four-server environment, 25% of each server’s resources are reserved for failover, which substantially reduces the available capacity during regular production operations.

How VergeOS Delivers Cost-Effective Data Availability

VergeOS leverages ioGuardian, a deduplicated third-copy data protection method. This efficiently safeguards against multiple simultaneous hardware failures without excessive storage overhead or node count requirements of traditional RF3 implementations. ioGuardian provides robust availability at an economical cost, without requiring workload prioritization, delivering superior resilience at a lower price and complexity.

No reservation of server resources is required. If a node fails, VergeIO’s ioOptimize technology intelligently and automatically reallocates affected VMs to other nodes based on each VM’s resource demands and available server capacities.

The High Cost of HCI Data Protection

The Practice of Snapshotting

Snapshotting commonly provides additional recovery points beyond the capabilities of backup software. However, snapshot-intensive environments impose severe performance penalties, resulting in increased storage I/O and network resource demands. Frequent snapshots or long-term snapshot retention require complex metadata management, demanding more powerful servers, additional memory, and faster storage media. This results in escalated hardware and licensing costs, especially in per-core or per-capacity licensing models common to HCI.

Snapshot chains or numerous simultaneous snapshots greatly increase complexity, hindering disaster recovery processes. Restoring across heterogeneous hardware or hypervisor environments becomes challenging, restricting operational flexibility.

How VergeOS Simplifies Data Protection

VergeOS utilizes ioClone technology, integrated with its global inline deduplication, to create space-efficient, independent snapshots with minimal metadata overhead. ioClone’s architecture supports near-continuous snapshot execution and indefinite retention without performance degradation, enabling rapid and efficient data protection without the need for costly hardware upgrades or complex snapshot management. The combination of ioGuardian and ioClone also reduces the organization’s dependency on backup, lowering the costs of backup software licensing and backup hardware infrastructure.

The High Cost of HCI Inflexibility

The hidden costs of HCI architectures imposing strict hardware compatibility and homogeneity requirements are significant. Expanding storage or compute resources mandates identical hardware, limiting flexibility and increasing long-term infrastructure costs. Adding nodes of different brands, generations, or capabilities creates additional clusters, which fragment management and reduce efficiency.

How VergeOS Enhances Infrastructure Flexibility

VergeOS supports heterogeneous hardware environments, enabling organizations to integrate diverse hardware configurations into unified, scalable clusters seamlessly. This flexibility reduces costs, simplifies expansion, and maximizes investment longevity, enabling adaptive infrastructure growth without imposed constraints on homogeneity.

overcome the hidden costs of HCI inflexibility

An Example of The Hidden Costs of HCI vs. VergeOS

Consider a three-node infrastructure using traditional Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI), where the organization’s goal is to maintain continuous data availability even after two simultaneous node failures. Traditional HCI solutions, such as Nutanix or VMware vSAN, require at least five nodes configured with Replication Factor 3 (RF3), or a Fault Tolerance Level of 2 (FTT=2), ensuring continuous availability despite two node failures. In addition, these solutions require maintaining sufficient free storage capacity at all times to accommodate a complete rebuild in the event of node failures, thereby reserving capacity equivalent to an entire node, which further reduces usable storage space.

Because the customer wants to leverage their existing hardware—a heterogeneous mix of Dell and HPE servers—traditional HCI platforms present immediate compatibility and cost challenges. Traditional HCI requires uniform hardware for seamless operation, which adds complexity and cost.

Cost Analysis for Traditional HCI

Achieving protection from two simultaneous node failures requires:

  • Minimum Node Count: 5 nodes (uniform hardware required).
  • Replication Method: RF3 or FTT=2 (three synchronous copies of all data).
  • Usable Capacity: Reduced to approximately 33% due to triple mirroring overhead.
  • Reserved Free Capacity: Additional storage space equal to one node’s full storage capacity, always kept available to allow immediate rebuilds after failures.

In this scenario, the customer faces:

  • The necessity of purchasing additional uniform hardware due to vendor compatibility guidelines.
  • Higher software licensing costs, typically calculated per CPU core.
  • Significant reserved resources on each node (compute and storage) are allocated exclusively for node failure scenarios.

This dramatically increases capital and operational expenses, requiring significant investment in new hardware and licenses, thereby negating the anticipated HCI savings.

Cost Analysis with VergeOS

In the same scenario, VergeOS offers substantial advantages:

  • Minimum Node Count: 3 nodes (uses existing Dell and HPE hardware).
  • Replication Method: Integrated distributed mirroring combined with VergeOS’s independent, deduplicated third data copy via ioGuardian, which can be installed on any available standby server.
  • Usable Capacity: Approximately 50% (due to two-way mirroring), augmented by ioGuardian’s deduplication efficiency.
  • Reserved Free Capacity: Minimal additional storage capacity needed due to ioGuardian’s efficient data protection strategy, reducing rebuild space requirements compared to traditional RF3 architectures.

With VergeOS, you benefit from:

  • No need for uniform hardware, allowing immediate use of existing Dell and HPE servers.
  • Reduced licensing and hardware costs, as no additional nodes or extensive resource reservations are required.
  • Enhanced data availability beyond traditional two-node failure protection without extensive reserved storage, reducing overhead and complexity.

Summary of Cost Benefits

Traditional HCI requires two additional nodes (totaling five) and mandates uniform hardware, increasing both capital and operational expenses, compounded by large reserved capacity requirements for rebuilding data. VergeOS provides superior resilience, operational continuity, and cost efficiency by leveraging existing heterogeneous hardware and substantially reducing the need for reserved rebuild capacity.

Conclusion

While hyperconverged infrastructure initially promises simplicity, efficiency, and cost savings, underlying architectural limitations quickly surface as substantial hidden costs. Challenges such as insufficient convergence, operational inefficiencies, costly availability and protection schemes, and restrictive infrastructure flexibility erode promised benefits. Organizations should carefully assess these hidden costs when evaluating HCI solutions, prioritizing converged, integrated infrastructures like VergeOS that fundamentally address these critical challenges, enabling efficient, cost-effective, and future-ready IT environments.

Register for our HCI Data Availability Analysis

Triple Mirroring — Hidden Challenges in VMware Alternatives

by

Triple mirroring, or Replication Factor 3 (RF3), presents hidden challenges when evaluating VMware alternatives and hyperconverged architectures. Although RF3 enhances data resiliency beyond single drive or node failures, many organizations face unexpected costs, operational complexity, and scalability constraints, which are pronounced in smaller or larger deployments, where resource efficiency and manageability become critical issues. These unexpected triple mirroring challenges force most IT professionals to avoid the technology completely, but with the right design, a triple mirror can provide better availability at a lower cost.

The Basics of Triple Mirroring

Triple mirroring replicates data across three separate nodes or storage devices. This approach ensures data availability even if two nodes, or drives with those nodes, fail simultaneously, providing a higher degree of redundancy and resilience compared to dual replication (RF2). On the surface, this redundancy sounds ideal for critical workloads, but deeper examination reveals several substantial drawbacks.

Costly and Impractical for Small Environments

One major limitation of triple mirroring is its inefficiency in smaller environments. RF3 configurations require a minimum of five nodes to maintain adequate redundancy and quorum, even though the storage and computing demands may not necessitate this level of investment. For small data centers or departmental deployments, this requirement results in a prohibitively high entry cost, as the infrastructure must be oversized to achieve adequate redundancy.

Triple Mirroring requires five nodes

In these scenarios, the high infrastructure cost, coupled with a reduced usable storage capacity—approximately a 66% reduction compared to single-copy storage—can be problematic, as it inflates the total cost of ownership without providing proportional operational value.

Scalability Challenges for Large Deployments

At the opposite end of the spectrum, large-scale deployments find triple mirroring delivers diminishing returns. In environments spanning dozens or more nodes, the risk of multiple simultaneous failures increases. For instance, protecting against dual node failures in a 32-node cluster may prove insufficient, as larger clusters inherently present greater statistical risks. Consequently, the likelihood of multiple concurrent failures can quickly exceed what RF3 is designed to handle. Moreover, even if an organization was willing to implement a higher redundancy level, such as “quad-mirroring,” available solutions do not offer this capability.

As environments scale, the inefficiency of triple mirroring grows exponentially. It requires a substantial upfront investment in storage and computing capacity to maintain adequate redundancy across all nodes. These demands escalate infrastructure complexity, increasing management overhead and resource consumption.

The Hidden Costs of Triple Mirroring

Triple mirroring introduces hidden long-term costs that extend beyond maintaining a third copy of data. First, the third data copy requires deployment on identical, production-class servers and storage media, as triple mirroring technologies cannot dedicate specific nodes solely for data storage without also utilizing them for compute tasks.

Secondly, the significant expense associated with triple mirroring forces IT teams into complex trade-offs, as they manage multiple storage volumes with varying resiliency levels, with some set at RF2 and others at RF3. This dual-resiliency model increases complexity and compels IT to prioritize specific applications, granting them higher availability while relegating less critical applications to lower protection levels. Additionally, many solutions employing RF3 lack the flexibility to revert seamlessly from RF3 to RF2 or upgrade from RF2 to RF3 without requiring a complete recovery of VM data from backup, which adds further operational burdens, limits flexibility, and increases the risk of downtime.

A More Efficient Alternative with VergeIO ioGuardian

A far more efficient and powerful solution is VergeIO’s ioGuardian technology, which delivers the resiliency advantages of triple mirroring without the associated overhead and complexity. ioGuardian maintains an independent, deduplicated third copy of data on a single, cost-effective storage server, reducing storage overhead and increasing resiliency beyond two node failures.

Triple mirroring on a secondary server that extends beyond the capabilities of a triple mirror.

For smaller environments, ioGuardian offers an optimal approach by requiring only one additional, affordable storage server, eliminating the need for multiple fully provisioned nodes. In larger environments, ioGuardian provides extensive protection against numerous simultaneous node failures by delivering a robust, real-time, and accessible backup repository that is independent of the primary operational infrastructure. With ioGuardian, organizations no longer need to selectively allocate protection levels, ensuring comprehensive availability for all applications.

Simplified Management and Lower Costs with ioGuardian

VergeIO’s ioGuardian simplifies infrastructure management, reduces complexity, and lowers costs. Its dedicated storage server approach minimizes resource consumption, as the server focuses solely on secure data storage and recovery, rather than hosting active virtual workloads. Furthermore, ioGuardian’s global inline deduplication dramatically reduces storage capacity requirements, directly decreasing both capital and operational expenses.

How ioGuardian Works

By decoupling redundancy from operational nodes and centralizing it into ioGuardian’s dedicated backup repository, organizations achieve superior data resiliency. In scenarios involving multiple simultaneous node or drive failures—situations that even exceed the protections provided by RF3—ioGuardian immediately ensures continuous data availability through real-time redirection of requests. When production nodes detect missing or unavailable data blocks due to hardware failures, VergeOS transparently redirects these requests to redundant data blocks stored within the independent ioGuardian server, enabling uninterrupted application performance and seamless user access.

Eliminate Triple Mirroring. Backup and Data Availability in one simple solution.

Critically, ioGuardian maintains operational efficiency by deferring data migration back into primary production nodes until failed drives or nodes are physically replaced or explicitly marked for replacement. When the drives are replaced, ioGuardian automatically repopulates data onto the repaired or newly replaced hardware, minimizing unnecessary data movement and preserving the performance of the production infrastructure.

Additionally, ioGuardian serves as a comprehensive traditional backup solution. It enables organizations to restore virtual machines, individual files, or specific data versions directly from their repository when needed, providing reliable access to historical data snapshots. This capability simplifies recovery processes following data corruption events, accidental deletions, or ransomware attacks, thereby enhancing overall data integrity and reducing costs further.

Conclusion: Rethinking Triple Mirroring with VergeIO

While triple mirroring initially appears straightforward for ensuring data availability and redundancy, its hidden complexities, high costs, and scalability limitations often overshadow its intended benefits. Modern IT infrastructures demand more flexible, efficient, and scalable redundancy solutions. VergeIO’s ioGuardian offers organizations—from small departmental setups to large enterprise clusters—a simplified, robust, and cost-effective approach to data protection, surpassing traditional triple-mirroring strategies. Data redundancy is one aspect of a VMware Alternative’s capabilities that IT should consider. They should look for solutions that encompass all aspects of data availability as part of their selection process.

To explore these advantages further, join our upcoming live webinar, Comparing HCI Architecture.

The Bare Metal Dilemma

by

A world without VMware is the bare metal dilemma. This service provider variant delivers dedicated physical servers—without virtualization layers—giving customers complete control over hardware resources, performance, and isolation, with on-demand availability for as long or as short as needed. These organizations have long struggled to balance performance and flexibility against cost control. Their customers demand the raw power of dedicated physical servers—but increasingly want the agility and convenience of virtual infrastructure layered on top. Many bare metal service providers (BMSP) relied on VMware for years to provide that virtualization layer, but times have changed.

State of the Bare Metal Service Provider

With escalating licensing costs, hardware lock-in, and support delays—especially after VMware’s acquisition by Broadcom—many BMSPs are rethinking their foundation. Customers themselves are exploring alternatives to VMware and frequently rely on their bare metal service providers for guidance and recommendations. Providers are therefore looking for a new platform not just to keep their own margins healthy and streamline operations but also to recommend a viable VMware alternative to their customers confidently. That’s where VergeOS comes in.

Bare Metal Challenge #1: Per-Core Licensing Penalizes Modern Hardware

BMSPs run high-density infrastructure to deliver better performance per watt and reduce space, power, and cooling costs. However, VMware’s per-core licensing structure punishes that efficiency. A dual-socket server with 64 cores? That’s a premium license fee—even if you use a fraction of those cores for each customer. The bare metal dilemma is whether they allow VMware licensing practices to adjust their hardware buying strategies or just pay the VMware tax.

VergeOS solves this with flat, per-server licensing. You pay the same regardless of how many cores you have. That means you can finally take full advantage of modern, high-core-count servers without being penalized at the software level. This is a differentiator for providers looking to do more with less hardware.

“With VMware, we constantly compromised on hardware to manage licensing costs. Now, with VergeOS, we buy the servers that make sense for our business, not for VMware’s licensing model.” — Jeff Hinkle, CEO of NETdepot

Bare Metal Challenge #2: Infrastructure Fragmentation Increases Complexity

VMware environments require separate components for virtualization (ESXi), storage (vSAN), and networking (NSX), each with its own licensing, support contracts, and management overhead. Add vCenter for management, and you’ll have a sprawling control plane to deliver basic services.

VergeOS unifies virtualization, storage, and networking into a single software platform. There is no need for external SANs, third-party firewalls, or expensive software-defined networking tools. It simplifies everything for BMSPs who want to reduce their management overhead and deploy faster.

“VergeOS allowed us to eliminate VMware licensing, Microsoft SQL Server licensing, and external storage arrays, dramatically simplifying operations.” — Kelley Allen, CEO, CCSI

Bare Metal Challenge #3: Hardware Compatibility Requirements Limit Flexibility

BMSPs pride themselves on being able to run a wide variety of server configurations to meet different performance tiers and customer needs. However, VMware’s restrictive Hardware Compatibility List (HCL) puts artificial limits on what you can deploy and what you can intermix. The bare metal dilemma is whether to risk repurposing older servers still functioning or having to continuously refresh with new hardware.

VergeOS runs on almost any x86 hardware. It’s designed to be lightweight and flexible, allowing you to repurpose existing hardware or test newer form factors without fear of breaking support or violating license terms. For providers looking to extend hardware lifecycles or reduce CapEx, that’s a huge win. Plus, with VergeIO’s advanced availability capabilities, BMSPs can run this older hardware configuration without risking customer outages.

Bare Metal Challenge #4: Support That Feels Like a Ticket Queue

In a 24/7 provider environment, waiting hours for a support engineer is not acceptable. Many BMSPs report increasing delays in VMware’s support responsiveness as their environment grows more complex. The bare metal dilemma is whether to build internal expertise, which is expensive, or find a product that is easier to support.

VergeIO delivers high-touch, fast-turnaround support. In customer reports, VergeIO support teams often respond to emails in under five minutes and spin up Zoom sessions within fifteen. That’s the partner BMSPs need when uptime and SLAs are on the line.

“VergeIO provides the best vendor technical support I’ve ever experienced in the industry. They helped us solve issues quickly and thoroughly, making our VMware transition seamless and secure.” — Yogi Yeager, President, BEAR Technologies

Bare Metal Challenge #5: Maintaining Isolation and Simplicity

BMSPs sometimes become Cloud Service Providers (CSPs), serving multiple customers on shared hardware. Without proper isolation, noisy neighbors, security breaches, or compliance violations are a risk. But many traditional stacks weren’t built with multi-tenant isolation in mind.

Solving the The Bare Metal Dilemma

VergeOS supports isolated Virtual Data Centers (VDCs) for each customer—even on shared physical hosts. Each VDC has virtual networking, storage, compute, and management controls. This allows BMSPs to offer secure, flexible, and self-managed tenant environments without deploying new hardware for each customer.

Bare Metal Challenge #6: Automation and Observability are Essential

Modern BMSPs must operate at scale without scaling their staff. That means automation and observability aren’t optional—they’re essential.

Solving the The Bare Metal Dilemma

VergeOS integrates seamlessly with industry-standard tools like Terraform, Ansible, and Grafana. BMSPs can use Terraform to deploy new tenant environments as code, Ansible to manage updates and patching workflows, and Grafana dashboards powered by ioMetrics to monitor real-time infrastructure health.

This allows providers to:

  • Provision and scale customer workloads programmatically
  • Standardize deployments across environments
  • Reduce configuration drift and human error
  • Visualize usage, forecast capacity, and detect anomalies early

Join VergeIO for a live webinar, during which we will demonstrate how our Terraform provider and ioMetrics can take your infrastructure to the next level.

Bare Metal Challenge #7: Ensuring a Fast, Reliable VMware Migration

Providers and their customers want minimal disruption and risk when transitioning from VMware.

Solving The Bare Metal Dilemma

VergeIO’s ioMigrate provides rapid, low-risk migrations. It connects directly to VMware via the backup API, enabling a near-instant initial migration and thorough testing under VergeOS. Incremental updates from the production VMware environment are continuously synced to VergeOS during testing. When testing is complete, the final update and cutover typically take less than one minute, minimizing customer downtime and disruption.

Bare Metal Challenge #8: Protecting Against Ransomware

Ransomware is a top concern for BMSPs because a single customer’s compromised environment can rapidly impact others. The bare metal dilemma is whether they build another stack of software to adequately protect their environment or look for infrastructure that can defend itself.

Solving The Bare Metal Dilemma

VergeOS mitigates ransomware risks through comprehensive isolation provided by VDCs, enabling each tenant to be completely isolated from the others. ioClone provides read-only snapshots that can be taken every few minutes without impacting performance. These snapshots are unlimited and don’t impact system resources. ioFortify complements this by offering early notifications of ransomware attacks, detecting suspicious activity within minutes, and enabling rapid recovery.

The Financial Impact: Real-World Savings

Providers making the switch to VergeOS consistently report significant cost savings:

  • NETdepot: Approximately 80% reduction in infrastructure software costs due to VergeOS’s flat licensing model and dense server utilization.
  • CCSI: Significant reductions in licensing and infrastructure costs, reducing per-desktop expenses dramatically by eliminating VMware, Microsoft SQL Server, and external storage licensing.

“We’ve lowered our cost per virtual desktop dramatically.” — Kelley Allen, CEO, CCSI

The Bottom Line

The bare metal dilemma is how to address their unique requirements when considering a VMware alternative while dealing with mounting pressure from customers who want the performance of metal and the convenience of virtualization without the complexity or cost. VMware once helped bridge that gap, but it’s no longer aligned with provider economics.

VergeOS is purpose-built to empower BMSPs. It delivers a unified, cost-efficient, and flexible platform that simplifies operations and unlocks profitability. Whether transitioning off VMware or designing a new infrastructure stack from scratch, VergeOS gives you the foundation to compete—and win—in a rapidly changing market.

ioMetrics is now available on GitHub Releases, complete with full documentation and setup instructions.

Ready to experience VergeOS firsthand?
Join our hands-on lab to see VergeOS in action and explore how easy your transition from VMware could be.
Sign up for the hands-on lab now.

Solving VDI Boot Storms

by

Solving VDI Boot Storms is the number one requirement to driving Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) adoption. VDI has become essential for organizations supporting remote workforces, educational institutions, healthcare providers, and engineering firms. However, despite its advantages, VDI deployments frequently face significant storage challenges—especially during boot storms.

Why Do VDI Boot Storms Occur?

Boot storms happen when many virtual desktops simultaneously boot up or log in, causing a sudden surge of storage activity. Traditional storage architectures, including most virtual SAN (vSAN) solutions, struggle to handle these simultaneous I/O demands, resulting in significant latency and reduced performance.

The vSAN Bottleneck

Although vSANs are appealing for their potential cost savings, their architecture typically relies on running storage as an application inside a virtual machine (VM) under the control of the hypervisor. This additional software layer introduces significant overhead and performance inefficiencies, particularly under heavy workloads like a boot storm.

Examples of this approach include VMware vSAN and Nutanix AOS Storage. This architecture involves multiple steps for each storage request:

Solving VDI Boot Storms
  1. The application VM sends an I/O request to the hypervisor.
  2. The hypervisor routes the request to the storage VM.
  3. The storage VM processes the request and communicates back to the hypervisor.
  4. The hypervisor delivers the response back to the application VM.

This multi-step interaction introduces latency, increases hypervisor dependency, and degrades overall performance, especially during intensive scenarios like boot storms. Moreover, vSAN-based solutions require storage VMs to frequently coordinate metadata and resiliency across nodes, creating additional network load and complexity.

The Scale Problem

Boot storms are particularly problematic in environments with hundreds or thousands of virtual desktops booting simultaneously. Each desktop generates a surge of storage I/O requests that must be processed in real-time. In large VDI environments, this I/O demand can overwhelm vSAN-based systems, leading to:

  • Slow login times, with users experiencing delays of 2-5 minutes when starting their desktops.
  • Unresponsive applications, as latency spikes impact application launch times and in-session performance.
  • Infrastructure strain, as overloaded storage controllers and network congestion slow down overall system responsiveness.

Imagine this I/O back-and-forth between the virtual desktop, the hypervisor, and the storage VM happening 1,000 times per second while hundreds of virtual desktops are simultaneously booting. Even all-flash vSAN solutions cannot eliminate this inefficiency, as the multi-layered architecture and the need for metadata synchronization across nodes still constrain them.

The High Cost of Solving VDI Boot Storms with AFAs

Due to these limitations, many organizations resort to dedicated all-flash arrays (AFA) to handle the storage-intensive nature of boot storms. While AFAs improve performance, they significantly raise the cost per desktop, making VDI a much more expensive proposition. A storage infrastructure that should enable cost savings instead becomes one of the biggest budget concerns for IT teams.

For a more detailed breakdown of vSAN limitations and how they impact performance, read the whitepaper:
Understanding vSAN Limitations in High-Demand Environments

The Problem with Deduplication and RAID in VDI

Many storage solutions use deduplication and RAID for efficiency and data protection. However, these technologies introduce additional challenges during boot storms.

  • Deduplication Bottlenecks: Deduplication optimizes storage by reducing redundant data blocks. However, during a boot storm, hundreds of virtual desktops simultaneously access the same deduplicated blocks, creating a bottleneck. A single storage controller is forced to serve thousands of requests from the same physical block, leading to I/O contention and severe performance degradation.
  • RAID Parity Overhead: Traditional RAID architectures, particularly RAID 5 and RAID 6, use parity calculations to provide data protection. These calculations add substantial processing overhead. During a boot storm, the storage system must handle thousands of simultaneous read operations, forcing RAID controllers to decode parity data rapidly. This not only slows boot times but also creates an imbalance in read/write workloads.

These factors make traditional storage solutions fundamentally unfit for high-scale VDI environments.

Introducing VergeFS: A Better Approach

Solving VDI boot storms requires a highly integrated, performance-oriented storage solution to effectively overcome these challenges. VergeFS, integrated directly into VergeOS, offers a compelling alternative to traditional vSAN architectures and avoids the high cost per desktop of dedicated all-flash arrays. Unlike typical vSAN solutions that require additional software layers or dedicated storage hardware, VergeFS is built directly into VergeOS, eliminating unnecessary overhead and complexity.

Solving VDI Boot Storms with VergeFS

VergeFS’s integrated architecture ensures exceptionally efficient I/O handling, allowing it to handle boot storms seamlessly. It achieves bare-metal-level performance by simplifying data paths, eliminating the overhead commonly associated with external storage arrays, vSANs, or complex RAID configurations.

  • Integrated Storage and Compute: VergeFS and the hypervisor runs within the same code base, eliminating the need for separate storage VMs and removing unnecessary I/O hops.
  • Efficient I/O Distribution: Instead of centralizing I/O requests to a storage VM, VergeFS distributes them across multiple storage nodes, allowing the entire infrastructure to handle storage loads efficiently.
  • Efficient Deduplication: Integrated within the same code base as VergeOS, it enhances all facets of the infrastructure and incurs immeasurable additional overhead due to sharing identical metadata.
  • No RAID Bottlenecks: VergeFS replaces RAID parity calculations with a distributed mirroring approach, significantly reducing latency and improving boot performance.

The Advantages of VergeOS Deduplication

VergeOS eliminates the deduplication issue by integrating it natively within the core of its architecture. Because VergeFS and VergeOS share a common code base, deduplication is not a bolted-on feature or post-processing task—it is part of the storage fabric itself. Metadata used for deduplication is the same metadata leveraged for managing the file system and data distribution, incurring negligible overhead. This efficient design enables VergeFS to deliver the capacity-saving benefits of deduplication without compromising I/O performance during even the most demanding boot storms.

Solving VDI Boot Storms with Distributed Mirroring

One of VergeFS’s key advantages is its use of distributed mirroring, enabling multiple drives to feed data requests simultaneously. Unlike RAID configurations that require parity decoding, distributed mirroring directly serves data from multiple mirrored copies across storage drives, drastically reducing latency and increasing throughput during intensive I/O operations.

Additionally, VergeOS’ integrated deduplication offsets the capacity penalty common with other mirrored data protection models. This means IT teams get the benefits of high-performance mirroring without excessive storage overhead.

Real-World Results with VergeFS

Solving VDI boot storms with VergeFS has been independently verified by reputable third parties and at customer deployments. These proof points demonstrate the significant performance advantages of VergeFS.

  • Storage Review Validation: Independent testing by Storage Review confirmed that VergeOS, leveraging VergeFS, successfully booted 1,000 virtual machines in under 70 seconds—far beyond what is possible with traditional vSAN architectures.
  • 6X Faster than VMware and Omnissa: CCSI, a Desktop-as-a-Service provider and VergeIO customer, found that virtual desktops running on VergeFS booted up to six times faster compared to equivalent environments using VMware Horizon or Omnissa.

This real-world validation shows that VergeFS delivers tangible performance benefits that translate directly into improved user experience and reduced IT overhead.

The Cost Advantage

By eliminating costly add-ons like AFAs, reducing hardware requirements, and removing RAID-based performance bottlenecks, VergeFS significantly lowers the cost per virtual desktop. A VergeFS deployment is 10X less expensive than using a dedicated AFA. IT teams can scale VDI deployments more affordably while maintaining high-performance standards.

For more insights into choosing the right VDI infrastructure, download the whitepaper:
Choosing The Right Alternative to VMware Horizon and Citrix for VDI Solutions.

Conclusion

Organizations facing VDI storage challenges, especially boot storms, should strongly consider solutions designed explicitly for efficiency and performance. VergeFS, fully integrated into VergeOS, provides a proven alternative to traditional VDI storage architectures, ensuring rapid, predictable boot performance even under heavy load conditions.

By adopting VergeFS, IT teams can eliminate RAID bottlenecks, reduce complexity, avoid the high cost of dedicated all-flash storage and eliminate future storage refreshes, all while delivering a seamless user experience.

Learn more by attending our live webinar:
Register for the VDI Alternatives Webinar on March 27, 2025

Want a Free Architecture Diagram?

See how VergeOS will fit into your datacenter

Close the CTA