Given that virtualization over hardware is cost-efficient, moving with the technology curve, dynamic hardware changes, snapshots in time, and is even sharing the polar bears with their reduction of the server's energy consumption and heat emission, it's hard to justify against the idea.

However, companies I come across always in recent times want to implement hardware servers for their production environment and discard the idea of virtual production.

It's indisputable that technology is constantly changes and because of that, companies become subjected to technological demands of the business. Employees now having the ability to BYOD is a great example. Employees now want to access their flashy presentation charts ASAP on their latest, over-priced ipad.

The demand from the end user can be nieve because of the immediate changes that's now in the picture. Interoperability and security considerations with unregistered devices would be the first to come into people's minds.

There's many reasons to support hardware over virtualization though by far, the biggest business decision has to be risk. Because it's an emerging market and still evolving and maturing, companies are just not ready to take the plunge and delegate the infrastructure to virtual Your current production environment and topology is architecturally designed to accommodate hardware devices

Even though the use of virtualization in production does not necessary require changes in the operating procedures and controls in order to effectively manage operational risk though however your current production topology is designed to accommodate hardware servers and not necessary for virtual OS devices, so why change?

Regardless of the substantial benefits, the big issue is the maturity of virtualization and the practices that come with the package. Management is quite simply not ready to take that virtual leap until the area matures

About the author