vmware's little hypervisor kicks MS-bloated butt

The blogosphere's started to fill with references to the ongoing "who's smaller" hypervisor footprint-spat going on between MS & VMware. I've listed some relevant url's below, and made a (very) few comments:

MICROSOFT
http://blogs.technet.com/virtualization/archive/2009/08/12/hypervisor-footprint-debate-part-1-microsoft-hyper-v-server-2008-vmware-esxi-3-5.aspx

and part2 and part3.

Comments: YUK! shame on an MS program manager for scoring a big own-goal with some wish-they-were-reasonable arguments. fact: there are arguments for both sides. For example, should I use little slip-stream patches vs total image patches. After reading the reader comments on the MS blog & the VMware response below, I'm persuaded that VMware have the edge in both the argument and the methodology.

Interested parties owe it to themselves to review both sides of the argument before making up the mind.

VMWARE
http://blogs.vmware.com/virtualreality/2009/08/our-position-on-hypervisor-footprints-patching-vulnerabilities-and-whatever-else-microsoft-wants-to-throw-into-a-blog-post.html

and to think: I'm actually a Hyper-V fan!!! I just hate to see propoganda-rant filling up my RSS feeds.

cheers,
gray