This week’s Hagrid goes to Carsten Rachfahl.

Carsten has been a pillar of the hybrid community for over a decade — a blog, a YouTube channel, the German Microsoft Virtualisierungs Podcast, and the Hyper-V Amigos. A one-person Azure Local and Hyper-V broadcast network. MVP since 2010.

This week’s Hagrid goes to Darryl van der Peijl.

If you run anything Azure Local, you already know Darryl. He runs the community Azure Local Slack and the monthly Azure Local Insider newsletter — the connective tissue of this community, where people share what’s new, what’s broken, and what’s next. He’s a 12x Microsoft MVP and CTO at Splitbrain. He’s also the brains behind the Hybrid Platform Conference — a one-day Azure Local & hybrid cloud event in Amsterdam (Sept 28, 2026 at Hotel Casa), with a free virtual edition to follow.

First, about that nickname

If you’ve met me at an event, you already know the beard. And you probably know that somewhere along the way, people in this community started calling me Hagrid. I’ve leaned into it — a big, bearded guy who loves keeping things running on the ground and in the cloud. Honestly, it fits. Hagrid was the Keeper of Keys and Grounds, and that’s basically what we all do in hybrid: keep one foot on-prem and one foot in Azure.

Azure Local is not the default VMware exit path. Neither is VMware Cloud Foundation the unquestioned benchmark it was two years ago. And yet the industry keeps framing the VMware exodus as a binary choice: stay and pay, or move to Microsoft’s preferred Azure-connected platform. Both options serve somebody’s agenda. Neither starts from the question that actually matters to infrastructure operators: what do I need, and what’s the cheapest way to get it without creating new dependencies?

The series started with a simple question: if so many organizations are unhappy with the VMware commercial path they are on, where should they go next?

After twenty posts, the answer is clearer than ever.

For a lot of organizations, the right answer is not “stay where you are and absorb the bill.” It is also not automatically “move to Azure Local because it is Microsoft’s newest answer.” The right answer is often the platform that has been in the rack, in the OS, and in the skill set for years: Hyper-V on Windows Server 2025.

Post 19 built an automation practice around PowerShell , modules, DSC v3, CI/CD pipelines. For many organizations, that’s enough. PowerShell is native, it’s free, it covers 100% of Hyper-V functionality, and your Windows team already knows it.

But some organizations have standardized on Ansible for configuration management across Linux and Windows. Others use Terraform for all infrastructure provisioning. And some want both , Terraform for creating resources, Ansible for configuring them. The question isn’t “which tool is best” , it’s “which tool fits your team, your existing investments, and your Hyper-V use case.”

“PowerShell Returned to Its Throne” isn’t just a series tagline. It’s the architectural reality.

Every post in this series has used PowerShell for configuration, validation, and management. But there’s a difference between running scripts manually and building an automation practice. If you’re honest with yourself, most of us do the same thing: write a script, run it, tweak something, run it again, save it in a folder called “scripts-final-v3-FINAL,” and hope we remember the parameters next quarter.

This series advocates for on-premises Hyper-V with three-tier SAN architecture. But intellectual honesty , and the credibility of everything we’ve written , demands that we evaluate every option fairly. Storage Spaces Direct and Azure Local have legitimate use cases. Three-tier isn’t always the right answer.

The cost lens matters, though. For many organizations leaving VMware, the decision is not just about technical elegance. It is about whether Azure Local’s host fee and potential hardware refresh are justified, or whether reusing existing compute and existing SAN is the smarter move for the workloads they actually run.

“But what about all the cloud stuff Azure Local gets?”

It’s the first objection every decision-maker raises when you propose traditional Hyper-V over Azure Local. Azure Local comes with AKS, Azure Virtual Desktop, Azure Portal VM management, Azure Monitor, Azure Update Manager, Defender for Cloud , all integrated. How do you compete with that on standalone Hyper-V?

The answer: you don’t need Azure Local to get most of those services. Azure Arc brings much of the same Azure management plane to your existing Hyper-V infrastructure , selectively, incrementally, and without taking on the Azure Local platform fee just to reach the Azure control plane. You pick the services that add value. You skip the ones that don’t. You keep control over where the monthly bill starts.

A two-node cluster is an architecture decision. A 64-node cluster is a lifestyle choice.

Posts 5 through 8 built your first cluster. Posts 9 through 15 hardened, monitored, secured, and protected it. This post asks the question that comes next: what happens when you need more?

Scaling Hyper-V is also where the economics need to stay honest. The goal is not to recreate every premium reference architecture just because it exists. The goal is to scale a platform that is already cheaper than the VCF path and often more flexible than an Azure Local design that assumes new hardware and a new recurring bill.