My name is JP, I am from Anchorage Alaska and this is my first post. I am a long-time SME user and only found UCS in the last year, and the Samba4+AD is what really got me to look into it and now I am hooked.
I am a LOOOONNNNNG time virtualization user, I have used every major hypervisor, and recently moved to Hyper-V when it was released as a bare-metal for free and included replication (and got the replication without a windows DC down to a science). However, I have only hobbiest level experience with KVM, whereas I have had ESXi and XenServer in production for over a decade. What I would like to know specifically is whether there is any reason I should NOT put UCS on Hyper-V 2012. I have a client with 40 workstations running SBS2003 I will be moving to UCS (one DC and one fileserver on a host each, cross replicating) in the coming weeks, and my plan was to run it on Hyper-V 2012, so I am really hoping there isn't a 'omg, you can't because of xyz and abc will now work' or something like that.
Please let me know your thoughts. And if anyone on the board is in Anchorage I would love to meet up.
*edit: When I ask if Hyper-V is supported, I don't expect it to be on some certified list or something like that. I kind of consider the hypervisor to be kind of invisible, just generic hardware since in 17yrs of IT work I have never seen an issue that turned out to be an actual incompatibility simply because a system was virtualized. Just looking for concrete reasons to avoid it. Also if KVM is the bomb then I would be interested in knowing why.