What could you lose by sticking with VMware?

The Current Landscape of VMware and Virtualization in 2025

There’s no doubt that virtualization is essential to modern IT management, thanks to benefits such as:

• Resource optimization, for example, running multiple operating systems on the same physical machine.
• Cost savings, not just in hardware and maintenance, but also in energy, data center space, etc.
• Flexibility and scalability, creating VMs on demand or handling spikes during seasonal workloads.
• Simplified management, including migrations, backups, monitoring, etc.

Not to mention improved security (when done right), the ease of testing environments, and more.

In that context, VMware has long been the undisputed leader, and Captain Picard from Star Trek TNG once said:

“The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.”

But VMware doesn’t watch Star Trek.

Instead, it has shattered that quote with unsustainable price hikes and drastic contractual changes, such as:

• Longer contract commitments.
• Higher penalties for late renewals.
• Pure subscription model, eliminating perpetual licenses, etc.

Why VMware Prices Have Skyrocketed

The main reason is Broadcom’s acquisition of VMware.

And here I must refer to one of the subjects I studied long ago: Economics (yes, we all make mistakes).

Broadcom’s shareholders—led by investment funds like Vanguard and BlackRock—are doing what they usually do: extract the highest possible return from their recent purchase.

An investor is a blind force; it seeks profit and moves wherever it expects the most return—then leaves just as quickly.

That’s why VMware has decided to focus on the largest and most profitable clients (so-called “whales” in economics), figuring out how much they can charge them before they jump ship.

Many organizations have invested so much in VMware’s ecosystem that they feel trapped—and in many cases, leaving would be more expensive than staying. Ripping VMware out of their infrastructure would damage it like the Alien parasite bursting from a host.

Of course, this strategy leaves smaller organizations priced out, unable to keep up.

Worse still, VMware offers nothing new for the higher price.

There are no added features, benefits, or improved support. You’re simply paying more—for the same product.

VMware’s Response to These Price Increases

In response to the negative reactions, VMware’s CTO gave a response similar to Steve Jobs’s when a certain iPhone version had poor audio:

We’re using VMware wrong.

According to him, it’s not a matter of cost but of value received, and to increase and optimize that value, we should take better advantage of VMware’s bundles and additional features instead of relying on fragmented clouds and tools.

In short, he suggests diving deeper into their ecosystem to create synergies and enhance that “value.”

In other words, increase your vendor lock-in with VMware by adopting even more of their products. No comment.

The Main Risks of Staying with VMware

Whether you can’t migrate now or the short-term costs of leaving would be higher, the risks of staying with VMware are clear.

1. Rising costs and new licensing models

This is the key risk, because no one knows how many more price hikes or licensing changes will come. Staying might still be cheaper today, but who knows what tomorrow will bring.

In Economics, they teach you on the first day that the goal of any company is to maximize shareholder value.

It’s not about creating value for users or providing services for society — so VMware’s price increases may continue as long as the numbers allow, in order to maximize investor returns.

2. Technological dependency

In other words, the classic vendor lock-in problem — with the associated risk of becoming trapped in their ecosystem.

VMware could also restrict interoperability, limit compatibility with non-VMware solutions, or complicate data migration.

Unfortunately, these aren’t just assumptions.

As discussed in the article about alternatives to VMware, the Dutch Water Agency (RWS) worked with them and saw its bill double overnight from 2 to 4 million euros.

RWS began a migration, but VMware hindered and restricted support during the process, despite having a paid contract.

They had to go to court to force Broadcom’s company to comply, so we can confirm that the risk of vendor lock-in is very real.

3. Loss of flexibility

At any time, hybrid or multi-cloud operations and scalability may be affected by new conditions, feature restrictions, or pricing changes when working with VMware Cloud on AWS or Azure, for example.

And considering that VMware hasn’t exactly been the fastest to adopt cloud innovations, this could leave us lagging behind competitors that move faster and take advantage of alternative technologies.

In short, VMware is injecting the most harmful poison for IT management and organizations: uncertainty.

Good luck trying to sleep or plan your IT budgets and investments.

4. The “golden goose” risk

I’m the first to avoid bringing Economics back to the stage (those memories still hurt), but although no one can predict the future, Economics does tend to forecast probabilities rather well.

As mentioned, companies are often bought and sold purely for profit, not because of belief in their mission.

That’s why the “golden goose” phenomenon is not uncommon. Acquisitions like this are squeezed dry; the goose is broken, and once there’s nothing left to exploit, investors sell off what remains and move on to the next profitable target.

Of course, I’m not saying this will happen, nor that there are current signs of it (after all, Broadcom wants it to stay profitable as long as possible), but the risk isn’t zero.

If it did happen, we’d end up with declining product and service quality until one day, a “Closed” sign appears on the door.

Again, this is just a possibility.

5. Other risks

Litigation like the RWS case, product discontinuations of tools we rely on but they no longer find profitable, loss of competitiveness…

Undoubtedly, VMware remains a solid and undisputed leader today — but its current approach creates risks and uncertainty for tomorrow.

Real Cases of Problems Caused by VMware’s Price Hikes

RWS isn’t the only one affected by all this. Browsing communities like Sysadmin on Reddit or VMware’s own subreddit reveals a collection of horror stories such as:

• 3180% price increase in 20 months.
• Costs doubled again, for the second consecutive year.
• From $750,000 to $6.5 million.

And if we turn to the news, things aren’t any better. AT&T reported increases of 1050%, while members of CISPE (an association of 37 European cloud providers) saw hikes ranging from 800% to 1500%.

Comparison of Alternatives to VMware

Fortunately, there’s life beyond VMware, and if you’re considering migration, it’s worth checking out this in-depth comparison of alternatives I mentioned earlier.

However, let’s briefly recap the current landscape and summarize the most viable options.

Proxmox VE: the open-source choice

Proxmox Virtual Environment is a mature open-source alternative, ideal for organizations committed to open code and that frequently work with Linux.

Proxmox fully leverages Linux’s virtualization capabilities through KVM (allowing, for example, the virtualization of Windows systems) and also supports LXC containers. This option is optimized for performance and resource efficiency, though it can only virtualize Linux.

Its ecosystem is increasingly mature, integrates well with key tools such as Pandora FMS, and while Proxmox itself is free, you can always contract official support if needed.

Microsoft Hyper-V: the Windows alternative

If your IT environment is full of Windows systems, then Hyper-V is Microsoft’s option. It’s increasingly robust and mature, and today it represents a real enterprise-level alternative to VMware.

You’re probably already familiar with Windows environment administration, so you know what to expect from Redmond. It works, it’s supported, and its licensing model is more sensible (Hyper-V comes bundled with Microsoft Server, so you only need to license the OS, not Hyper-V itself).

Also, no one is likely to acquire Microsoft anytime soon—but that doesn’t mean they won’t still keep us on our toes.

Nutanix AHV

This solution is characterized by hyperconvergence, meaning an all-in-one approach combining storage, computing, and networking subsystems to reduce complexity and improve scalability.

If you’re attracted to the idea of hyperconvergence and want to avoid stitching together Frankenstein systems, Acropolis (AOS) is its integrated solution that includes storage, hypervisor, and more.

Its licensing model differs from others: it’s not based on cores or CPUs but on cluster nodes, regardless of how many processors each cluster contains.

That can be ideal for certain organizations, allowing more predictable resource and cost planning.

Red Hat Virtualization (OpenShift)

Red Hat has discontinued its Virtualization platform, and the “alternative” is OpenShift. If your requirements are modest, it can work, but if you’re deeply integrated into the VMware ecosystem, you should keep looking.

OpenShift is actually a Kubernetes-based application platform, essentially a direct alternative to VMware’s Tanzu.

Citrix XenServer

Citrix is another frequently mentioned option that can be valid if all you need is a hypervisor. However, if you need more, you’d be better off with one of the first three options.

These are the most mature and reliable alternatives—but let’s be honest, VMware is the leader for a reason. Its ecosystem and maturity are still superior in many respects.

Even so, many competitors have narrowed the gap significantly, and some might surprise you with their ability to replace—or even outperform—VMware.

Strategies to Minimize Risks and Increase Flexibility

We all fear change—and VMware knows it. They also know that trying to remove their ecosystem from your IT infrastructure won’t be easy if you use more than just a few VMs.

That’s why your migration strategy should be gradual, and the first step is always:

1. Infrastructure audit and evaluation of options

You need to review your infrastructure and see just how often the VMware logo appears.

If you only virtualize a few machines or run a test server, you can quickly experiment with Hyper-V (if you already use Windows Server, for example) or install Proxmox and acknowledge Linux’s supremacy (ahem).

But if VMware is deeply embedded, then you need a step-by-step migration strategy.

It’s a good idea to visit the websites and documentation of alternative solutions, as many offer migration guides or tools from VMware. These can give you an idea of how complex the process will be in your specific case.

2. Pilot testing and progressive migration

At this stage, you can migrate some non-critical virtualization workloads, such as a couple of non-essential machines, to test how well they work on alternative platforms.

For these tests, monitoring is essential, as it provides objective metrics to compare against VMware.

This is where a monitoring system like Pandora FMS comes into play, since it supports both VMware and the alternatives.

That allows you to objectively analyze test results and continue monitoring your chosen alternative without implementing a new system.

In this way, you maintain centralized control and visibility—regardless of the hypervisor’s name.

3. Gradually replace VMware

If Pandora FMS metrics show that the new option performs well, it’s time to replace that VMware component with the alternative.

You may not be able to do this across the board—at least not right away—but you can gradually loosen VMware’s grip. And in the meantime…

4. Implement measures to soften cost increases

If you can’t leave VMware in the short term, look into alternatives that don’t involve immediate migration.

For example, Telefónica Deutschland managed to avoid most of the price hikes by using second-hand licenses or contracting third-party expert support instead of going directly through VMware.

There’s no doubt VMware is shaking things up with its new pricing and licensing policies. For many organizations, this is unsustainable. But there are alternatives, and leaving is possible (yes, this sounds like an anti-addiction campaign ad).

Frequently Asked Questions About the Risks of Staying with VMware

To summarize the key points—or for those of us who skim because IT management is a never-ending fire—here’s a summary of the most important questions.

1. Why is VMware more expensive in 2025?
   Broadcom’s acquisition brought a strategy focused on maximizing profits by raising prices without offering anything new in return. In a word: greed.
2. What are the risks of staying with VMware?
   That prices continue to rise without added value, and that the company’s focus on large customers sidelines or excludes smaller ones.
3. How can I avoid VMware vendor lock-in?
   By evaluating the alternatives. Microsoft’s Hyper-V is on par when it comes to enterprise features, while Proxmox and Nutanix are quickly catching up and are viable options.
   Even Citrix XenServer or Red Hat’s OpenShift may be suitable for more modest requirements.
4. What open-source alternative to VMware exists?
   Proxmox VE. Based on Debian, it offers full virtualization via KVM or a more lightweight but higher-performance option through LXC containers (limited to Linux systems only).