Comments on: Desktop Virtualization Revisited Part Four: VMware Workstation http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/ Open Source, Open Standards Sat, 05 Oct 2013 13:48:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: tzbtghmpq http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-106539 tzbtghmpq Sun, 01 Jan 2012 11:37:41 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-106539 frJx9L <a href="http://lvjjsrfqlqgc.com/" rel="nofollow">lvjjsrfqlqgc</a> frJx9L lvjjsrfqlqgc

]]> By: Yancy http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-105545 Yancy Sat, 31 Dec 2011 15:29:15 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-105545 I appcraeite you taking to time to contribute That's very helpful. I appcraeite you taking to time to contribute That’s very helpful.

]]> By: sysadmn http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6374 sysadmn Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6374 Ken - thanks for another great Desktop Virtualization article.<br /> <br /> As you noted, Workstation is a little pricey. For most people, the free Player is a good place to start. There's a dated page at http://vmetc.com/2008/02/18/why-should-i-buy-workstation-when-server-or-player-is-free/ which discusses WS vs Player and Server.<br /> <br /> IMHO:<br /> <br /> If your workload is graphics intensive, use Player or Workstation.<br /> If you need screen capture (live or static), replay, or multiple snapshots, use Workstation.<br /> If your workload is I/O or network intensive, use Server or ESX/ESXi.<br /> If you need to remotely access VMs through VMWare's console (as opposed to VNC, FreeNX, or X), use Server or ESX/ESXi.<br /> <br /> I'm sure others can add their experiences.<br /> <br /> Regards,<br /> sysadmn Ken – thanks for another great Desktop Virtualization article.

As you noted, Workstation is a little pricey. For most people, the free Player is a good place to start. There’s a dated page at http://vmetc.com/2008/02/18/why-should-i-buy-workstation-when-server-or-player-is-free/ which discusses WS vs Player and Server.

IMHO:

If your workload is graphics intensive, use Player or Workstation.
If you need screen capture (live or static), replay, or multiple snapshots, use Workstation.
If your workload is I/O or network intensive, use Server or ESX/ESXi.
If you need to remotely access VMs through VMWare’s console (as opposed to VNC, FreeNX, or X), use Server or ESX/ESXi.

I’m sure others can add their experiences.

Regards,
sysadmn

]]> By: smino http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6375 smino Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6375 Amazingly and very annoying, you cannot boot a vm from your USB stick. You can boot from CD, and from cringe floppy, but not from a USB stick! Hello VMWARE, time to get into the hi tech century!<br /> <br /> Same comment goes for Virtual PC. I have alot of USB os I like to test, but I have to keep an old laptop around to do boot/testing, since Neither VMware nor Virtual PC can boot from a USB stick.<br /> Regards,<br /> Sly. Amazingly and very annoying, you cannot boot a vm from your USB stick. You can boot from CD, and from cringe floppy, but not from a USB stick! Hello VMWARE, time to get into the hi tech century!

Same comment goes for Virtual PC. I have alot of USB os I like to test, but I have to keep an old laptop around to do boot/testing, since Neither VMware nor Virtual PC can boot from a USB stick.
Regards,
Sly.

]]> By: sysadmn http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6376 sysadmn Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6376 Yes, that is a pain. Best I've been able to do is keep .iso images on the host, and boot from those. It's a couple of extra steps when you're trying to remaster a live cd to make the .iso instead of just copying the squashfs to a flash drive. Yes, that is a pain. Best I’ve been able to do is keep .iso images on the host, and boot from those. It’s a couple of extra steps when you’re trying to remaster a live cd to make the .iso instead of just copying the squashfs to a flash drive.

]]> By: znmeb http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6377 znmeb Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7310/#comment-6377 <p>I\'m a long-time fan of VMware Workstation ... I started with a Windows-hosted 3.0. I migrated to Linux-hosted at 5.5. I\'ve found that, although it\'s not supported by VMware, VMware Workstation works just fine with a Gentoo Linux and openSUSE host, and I haven\'t found a Linux guest that didn\'t work yet on either a Windows or Linux host.</p> <p>As far as the price is concerned, I didn\'t mind paying $189 to migrate from Windows to Linux host between 5.0 and 5.5/6.0, and IIRC upgrades are only $99 once you\'ve settled on a host OS. BTW, I\'ve run the free VMware Server 2.0 on a Windows host and it\'s ghastly. The IE browser interface is almost unusable when compared with Workstation, and the performance isn\'t spectacular either. I quite frankly don\'t understand why VMware invested all the development effort in VMware Server 2.0, especially since there\'s a free ESXi version that\'s vastly more efficient. </p> I\’m a long-time fan of VMware Workstation … I started with a Windows-hosted 3.0. I migrated to Linux-hosted at 5.5. I\’ve found that, although it\’s not supported by VMware, VMware Workstation works just fine with a Gentoo Linux and openSUSE host, and I haven\’t found a Linux guest that didn\’t work yet on either a Windows or Linux host.

As far as the price is concerned, I didn\’t mind paying $189 to migrate from Windows to Linux host between 5.0 and 5.5/6.0, and IIRC upgrades are only $99 once you\’ve settled on a host OS. BTW, I\’ve run the free VMware Server 2.0 on a Windows host and it\’s ghastly. The IE browser interface is almost unusable when compared with Workstation, and the performance isn\’t spectacular either. I quite frankly don\’t understand why VMware invested all the development effort in VMware Server 2.0, especially since there\’s a free ESXi version that\’s vastly more efficient.

]]>