• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Virtual Machine questions

Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Have a few questions, hopefully I can get some answers to them.

First... to those who have experience with them, is there a performance difference between different software like Virtual PC 2004, Virtual Server 2005, or VMware?

Second... since one of the benefits of a virtual machine is the ability to test new software before deploying it, is it possible to customize a virtual machine to emulate specific hardware? For example, a specific model/chipset NIC or a specific mouse? Or is it more for testing software compatability with other software and OS's?

Third... my schooling will focus mainly on Virtual PC 2004... will things I learn about that apply to the other software I mentioned?
 
you don't need to run a server..

1. yea.. there is a performance difference. vmware is faster, but more expensive.
2. no, you can't get it to emulate specific hardware.. and vms don't emulate, they virtualize.
3. if you're talking about using the software, then no.
 
1. Parallels workstation seemed slower than VMware, that's from my friend's experience. I'm sure some are more optimized than others.

2. Theoretically it probably would be, but you can't run an OS with an architecture other than your own with these programs. It may be possible somehow (not with virtualization programs). When I wanted to test an SMP program, VMware wouldn't let me enable two CPUs in the options.

3. If it's learning about virtual machines themselves, sure. Most of them let you mount either an ISO or real physical disk for a virtual CD-ROM, most let you write to a floppy image. All of them 'enclose' the operating system in a reasonably safe environment, unless given access to hardware that could do harm. You can disconnect their network access, etc. They all have lots in common except for the user interface. Most of the time you won't even need to touch the virtualization program itself. The guest OS should act virtually (no pun intended) identical across VMs.
 
Second... since one of the benefits of a virtual machine is the ability to test new software before deploying it, is it possible to customize a virtual machine to emulate specific hardware? For example, a specific model/chipset NIC or a specific mouse? Or is it more for testing software compatability with other software and OS's?
Click to expand...

Not really, the VM software presents a specific set of hardware and you can't really change it. And it wouldn't be a valid test for drivers anyway because real hardware tends to differ from how the docs say it should work anyway.

Third... my schooling will focus mainly on Virtual PC 2004... will things I learn about that apply to the other software I mentioned?
Click to expand...

The basic ideas will be the same but the methods, terminology, etc of each product will be different.
 
Originally posted by: itachi
you don't need to run a server..

1. yea.. there is a performance difference. vmware is faster, but more expensive.
2. no, you can't get it to emulate specific hardware.. and vms don't emulate, they virtualize.
3. if you're talking about using the software, then no.
Click to expand...

Maybe you were reading more into my questions... why do you say "you don't need to run a server?"
 
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: itachi
you don't need to run a server..

1. yea.. there is a performance difference. vmware is faster, but more expensive.
2. no, you can't get it to emulate specific hardware.. and vms don't emulate, they virtualize.
3. if you're talking about using the software, then no.
Click to expand...

Maybe you were reading more into my questions... why do you say "you don't need to run a server?"
Click to expand...
goddamnit.. i keep on missing sht.
forget what i said.. i don't think i was reading your question at all heh.

and before someone corrects me.. for 2., before ms bought out virtual pc.. it emulated an x86 proc on osx.
 
So, am I right in saying virtual machines would be more useful for software engineers than network engineers?

I have Fedora Core 5 running in a virtual machine right now, and I'm not impressed with the performance of simple things like opening applications and stuff... although I haven't installed it in a dual boot configuration so I don't really know what kind of performance is "normal."

From what I've been hearing from people, virtual servers and virtual machines are supposed to be "the next big thing" but if performance suffers as much as it appears to, I can't see it being a viable solution in a professional environment for anything but testing old software before deploying a new OS or something like that.
 
So, am I right in saying virtual machines would be more useful for software engineers than network engineers?
Click to expand...
for development.. it's useful when you need to test out an application on a different platform.
a network engineer probably wouldn't find it useful for their own purposes, but an organization may.

what vm are you using? i'm running rhel3 in vmware workstation 4.5 on win xp, and the performance and response is about the same as with a real boot.
 
Fedora Core 5 ran great in my Ubuntu VMware. Things (documents and programs) opened faster than my Ubuntu (dare I say that), but it was a fresh install.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top