Mark Allums wrote: > Virtual PC is dead in the water. With Windows 7, MS has gone the > hypervisor route. Virtual Server 2008 and later is a new(er) product. Not everyone is on W7. For example my work machine, where I require VMs the most, is on WinXP. I'm sure not upgrading it to W7 on my dime. ;) >> has been plagued with performance problems from its inception and on >> machines which support AMD-V/VT-x it likes to bluescreen the host OS if >> you try to do anything remotely complex; like run more than one VM at a >> time or run VMs under two different virtualizers. IE, it is the typical >> Microsoft schlock which should be avoided if at all possible. > Let me repeat: If you are doiong Windows (only), stick to MS product. > Everyone else, ignore that. And let me reiterate, even if you are doing Windows only. IE, Windows host, Windows Guest, steer clear of Microsoft's solution as it is complete crap. I think it's pretty rude to quote where I point out the numerous problems with Microsoft's tripe and then nudge people towards it. > Virtualbox 3 got off to a rugged start, but six updates later, it is not > too bad. I use it. As of 3.0.6 my WinXP and Linux guests (on a WinXP host) gets this odd bug where it cannot open new programs. Programs already running continue to run. The only solution is to power-off the VM since, to exit, the guest needs to start new a new program. It took me forever to get back to a stable 2.2.4 install which let me run my VMs again without that bug happening. As that's on my work machine and I often swap between several different VMs in a night and need them to Just Work(tm) I've not tried anything after 3.0.6 and certainly avoid VPC. -- Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream? PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do... -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature