Re: MUAs that compare with Outlook (your chance to show how much better Linux is than MS!!)
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 09:13:37AM +0200, Paul Huygen wrote:
> You *could* do that, because VMware is a sophisticated program that
> seems to work very well. However, to continuously run an application
> like Outlook, Vmware seems not very suitable. VMware shares the
> processor cycles evenly between the virtual machines that it
> supports. As a result, the Outlook application would use up half of the
> processor time, although it does not do anything most of the time.
Actually, as long as the guest OS does idle calls, VMware does not use
any extra processing power. According to my (yet limited) experiences,
Linux is a very polite guest OS. Windows 2000 performs very well too,
while Windows 98 tends to grab somewhat more cycles from the host,
even while idle. Not half of the processor time, though. I generally
use little Windows, but for running Linux on guest OS's, VMware is a
great thing. Nothing beats testing different distributions and
server/client software than having them run on their own sandboxed
virtual machines, especially since a system restore is just a matter
of copying a directory.
> Win4lin (www.win4lin.com), a (commercial) program that also enables
> to run windows under Linux, seems to be better suited for this type
> of work. In Win4lin, the windows sub-process allocates processor
> time only when it really needs it to do work.
While I have not tried Win4lin personally, I've been told that Win4lin
wastes quite a bit less host OS resources, so for running Windows
software exclusively it might indeed be a better choice. Assuming WINE
and/or plex86 never get there (sigh).
Matti Airas HPCC, Gatt, White Yankee, ITSDN, DONCAF,
email@example.com CDMA, AOL TOS, SNS, SBS, ANDVT, HAMASMOIS,
+358 50 34 64 256 sneakers, World Trade Center, White House,
http://www.iki.fi/mairas/ SBU, edition, rain, VIP Protection, KY-75,