Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3441 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] (OT) which virtual machine that better.
  • From: Jonathan Ervine <jervine@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:05:41 +0800
  • Message-id: <200901201005.42284.jervine@xxxxxxxxxx>
On Tuesday 20 January 2009 01:09:41 Greg Freemyer wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Adam Jimerson <vendion@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sunday 18 January 2009 10:30:29 pm Jonathan Ervine wrote:
You can quite happily run a Xen kernel with an nVidia graphics card.
Using the proprietary nVidia binary blob as a graphics driver won't work
however.

Is there a way to get XEN to use a driver compatible with it, while my
normal Kernel still uses the proprietary driver? This machine is not a
server, but I need to VM windows for school (the program we use won't
work under WINE due to its dependency on .net framework) and I have
played with VMware and VirtualBox and wasn't to happy with them. This
machine has a AMD Athon 64 x2 at 2.3 Ghz with 3 GB or RAM I'm sure it can
handle XEN.

Just an FYI:

Here at work, I switched my desktop to Linux a little over a year ago.
I have tried a few VMs to run the few Windows Apps I have to have,
but mostly VMware Server and Code Weavers (the $$ version of wine).

Sorry for the pedantry, but, CrossOver/wine is most definitely not a
virtualisation product. It provides an environment in which to run Windows
applications, and isn't really an emulator either.

I was unimpressed with the speed of both. A few months ago I tried
doing a remote desktop to a WIN2008 server and using that as my
"Windows Desktop". That has worked great for me since then and I now
rarely use a VM on my Linux Workstation. If I do, it is code weavers
just because it integrates into Linux so well.

We already had the MS server setup, so it was basically a zero effort
setup.

Oddly I have Windows XP set up in KVM and use RDP to access it and have an
acceptable response. I guess each person has different requirements and
different levels of acceptability.

I know I'm going against the grain, but at this point, I think keeping
a real MS machine around and using RDP to run your windows apps is the
best choice.

FYI: I don't know which MS OSes support RDP. I've only accessed
servers that way, so I know Win2003 / Win2008 both support 2
simultaneous remote users plus the one local user. I'm not the only
one doing this, so I actually need to find out what it would cost to
add more simultaneous terminal service users to that server. Anyone
happen to know. FYI: We do not have any kind of volume purchase
agreement with MS.

The word 'ker-ching' springs to mind. As far as I can remember (and it has
been a while), is that Microsoft charge more (or possibly an additional
charge) for Terminal Services Licenses. I guess you could arguably say you're
simply taking advantage of the Remote Administration feature of Windows
Server. But it sounds more like you're running applications in a Terminal
Services environment. I am most definitely not a Microsoft Licensing expert
however.

Microsoft operating systems that support RDP are, as far as I can remember,
Windows 2000 Server, Windows XP, Windows 2003, and Windows 2008. Vista and I
imagine the forthcoming Windows 7 will also support this.

Jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >