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