hypervisor

If your hypervisor is KVM then Linux is scheduling your resources, so that last argument does not apply.

After all, you don't need EC2 to host your containers, if you can run them directly with a hypervisor.

Also Win 8.1 ultimate has hyperv role so you can use that as a hypervisor as well.

It's one of those cases when an emulator or hypervisor outperforms bare metal under some workloads.

Furthmore, is it possible to break out of the hypervisor and into the host operating system?

On the other hand, MirageOS has no hardware drivers and depends entirely on a Xen hypervisor.

Fleet et al force the application to deal with hardware failures, whereas Vmware and KVm handle it in the hypervisor.

You just want another box to run a hypervisor on, so you don't have to juggle VMs on your main box?

So the computers are based on FreeBSD (which manages the hypervisor -- and soon container daemon!), and appliances only are based on OpenBSD.

As for the Platonic realm, well, that's just the hypervisor he's referring to.

We saw hypervisor and paravirtualization work that made the OS itself untrusted.

Does anybody know much about the EC2 hyper-visor schedulers or in the case of large instances, does it even run with a serious hypervisor?

You shut down a VM and instruct the hypervisor system to take a "snapshot" which locks the original VHD file and creates a new one.

> There is only one kind of "hardware" in the universe: the supported hypervisor.

I would only do active sec research on untrusted materials within a decent hypervisor's VM on a virtual desktop (VDI) which has "nonpersistence" on all storage, so it's clean on every power cycle.

In my experience (as one of those "big boys"), it's usually more traditional virtualization, typically on top of a bare-metal hypervisor like Xen (nowadays via Amazon EC2, though there are plenty of bigger companies that run their own Xen hosts), ESXi, SmartOS, or something similar.