No mention of disrupters like Docker!
Most likely a definitional issue. Docker is not strictly virtualisation, its containerization. Containerization is a much slower moving trend.
Strictly speaking, you are correct, but VMware certainly feels the heat from Docker. It's easier to deliver an application via a container rather than as a VM when you have a homogeneous data center infrastructure. I think this is why VMware has teamed up with Docker, Google and Pivotal.
Are they feeling it because of docker (specifically) or are they feeling it because the trend toward containerization is in the technology trigger phase (Gartner) and docker just happens to have most of the mind share? Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti containerization, in fact I was running LXC (which is where docker started) for sometime. Technology just takes a long time to diffuse into a market and containers (as contradictive as this sounds), requires a much stronger technical understanding then a simple OS on some level, this goes against the simplicity/abstraction trend.
The article indicates that VMware sees a future threat, but also an opportunity. The license fees for VMware instances and optional features are high, whereas Docker instances could be effectively free. Running Docker containers in a VM changes the economics of VM deployments while preserving much of the VMware goodness until it is commoditized by Docker or other competitors.
Yes (cost) licensing is the biggest advantage that containers offer over traditional VMs. Cost however should never be viewed in isolation, it needs to be weighted against other factors, and container vs operating system capabilities is going to be an important one. The other factor here is that Linux is coming to age, as is a lot of the automation around it (chef, puppet, etc), this in itself will affect the whole container cost dynamic.
What's your thoughts on Microsoft Hyper-V? It is gaining slow ground. Attractive deal if you own MS data center licensing and make sense for some shops.
As a hypervisor its come a long way. As a solution it's still lagging. There will be an interesting nexus between Azure and Hyper-V which will help differentiate it from other vendors (I still believe this will be around casual-coupling), how relevant this is will depend largely on where it fall into the centralization/decentralization cycle. Traditional infrastructure vendors are a fair way into the assault against Public cloud, intimating many of the cloud like attributes, combined with cost realities, all the realities of running remote services and stickiness of 2nd platform architectures (and issues with development maturity).
Retrieving data ...