Microsoft Virtual PC 2004 released as freeware

[Roger Johansson]

After reading some of the marketing material on VPC, it appears that
although it can host linux & unix systems, this function isn't
/supported/ by Microsoft.

There is something so totally unreasonable in your msg that I feel a
need to reply to it even though it is a few days old.

If microsoft had built roads, and let people use those roads for free,
note that although practically all kinds of vehicles can use those
roads, "this function isn't /supported/ by Microsoft".

Someone had posted a follow up to the OP showing a pretty active user
community that has shown VPC will support other OS' but, if official
support is an issue for you, that would be something to consider.

How can a road builder have an official support for all kinds of
vehicles which want to use that road? Or who tries to use the road?

Don't you realize that you are demanding what is physically impossible?

Ethically and economically I doubt that we can demand from a road maker
that he has full support for all kinds of vehicles that are trying to
use a certain road.

What exactly do you mean with support, by the way?

That microsoft are servicing and updating and bugfixing all operating
systems that are ever tried or used on that freeware virtual machine
system?

(Note that I don't work for MS, I work for more reason and rational
thinking in the world.)

 

[Lee Peedin]

I've been reading the vmware site, but I'm still confused about what
the different products are. Can you explain the difference between
VMWare Server and VMWare workstation?

I'm interested in testing applications I write under different windows
operating systems. Can I use either of these products? What advantage
does the $189 Workstation product offer?

Thanks,

Terry

Terry,
In a "most general" form I think that the Workstation version allows
you to run virtual machines that are "not hosted" on your physical
system.

I decided yesterday to give VPC a try. I must say that I am somewhat
impressed. It was extremely simple to load and create a VM. One very
nice feature that VPC has that VMWare does not is that one can much
more easily "see" a shared folder on the host OS. VMWare requires a
network since both the host OS and vm are considered completely
different systems. With VPC one simply "points" to the folder on the
host OS and assigns it a drive letter.

If you're not interested in Linux being the host OS, (after
yesterday), I suggest you download and install MS Virtural PC and give
it a spin. I installed Win2K under VPC along with Office 2000. I
then upgraded to all the latest service packs. Total size on disk of
this vm is 2.6 GB (and it's in only 2 files).

Now before using this vm, I'll simply burn it to CD so that if I trash
something during tests, it'll simply be a copy from the CD to restore
the VM.

Lee

 

[Craig]

Craig wrote:




There is something so totally unreasonable in your msg that I feel a
need to reply to it even though it is a few days old.

If microsoft had built roads

Roger;

VMware Server supports Linux, Solaris, DOS and NTOS. Microsoft supports
DOS and NTOS. If this sounds unreasonable to you, perhaps you should
take it up the s/w publishers. Really, I personally have nothing to do
with their development strategies.

-Craig

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]>

What exactly do you mean with support, by the way?

Technical support. Microsoft will not provide any technical support if
you encounter issues with an unsupported OS.

Microsoft also doesn't release any VM additions for unsupported OSes.
With Windows, VM additions make a huge performance difference, this may
or may not apply to other operating systems too.