Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Microsoft's Virtualisation Technology Falls Behind, Snubs Linux

  • Subject: Re: Microsoft's Virtualisation Technology Falls Behind, Snubs Linux
  • From: "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: 15 Mar 2007 23:00:56 -0700
  • Complaints-to: groups-abuse@google.com
  • In-reply-to: <1409292.ihFYgM1x0d@schestowitz.com>
  • Injection-info: n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=67.177.54.5; posting-account=qBkgDQ0AAABzDRgcG_FM5_bU3HKWaJOu
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: http://groups.google.com
  • References: <1409292.ihFYgM1x0d@schestowitz.com>
  • User-agent: G2/1.0
  • Xref: ellandroad.demon.co.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:505355
On Mar 15, 9:59 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> [But they are going to bundle it with the O/S, so who needs better
> quality...]
>

Anyone who is serious about using a virtualized desktop...  VPC is not
that bad, but it isn't as good as the free vmplayer.  The biggest
annoyance is it's lack of USB support.

> Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 lags behind competition
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Microsoft released its Virtual PC (VPC) 2007 virtualization software
> | as freeware recently, and you definitely get what you pay for. VPC
> | 2007 isn't Open Source, nor does it run on Linux. Linux isn't even
> | mentioned as supported guest operating system, but since people
> | have successfully run several Linux distributions through earlier
> | versions of VPC, I decided to give it a go. After several hours
> | of struggle, I found out why VPC 2007 doesn't claim to support
> | Linux distros.
> `----
>
> http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=07/03/10/0953255&from=rss
>

I don't understand this...  The author says that VPC was stable.  That
it was fast running the OS's.  The primary concern was 1) lack of usb
support and 2) slow install times.  Well, both those affect windows
guests as well.  The lack of usb support is the biggest pain.

> Related:
>
> Friendly fire mixup: MS identifies Windows as Mac
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | In what might be described as a "Friendly Fire" incident, Microsoft
> | software has identified a copy of Windows as a hostile operating system
> | - belonging to enemy Apple forces.
> |
> | The host software, Virtual PC 2007, promptly disabled the intruder.
> |
> | It's not the first time Microsoft has incorrectly identified its own
> | software - and shot it down.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | Microsoft seems to have enormous problems with old stuff in general. In the
> | Comes anti-trust case, it emerged that two dozen libraries were shipping
> | with Windows, for which Microsoft couldn't produce the source code.
> |
> | Maybe the dog ate it?
> `----
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/09/friendly_fire_virtual_pc/
>

Again this is NOT a problem with VPC.  It's a problem with windows
update v6.  Win9x is not supported for patches anymore.  The work
around is to replace the v6 for v4 in the address bar.  Look at the
reader comments.

> Ubuntu on Virtual PC 2007 - No way dude!
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | A number of people have asked me whether it's possible to install
> | Linux onto a Virtual PC 2007 virtual machine.  Well, since I had
> | an Ubuntu ISO on my desktop I decided to give it a go.
> |
> | The short answer is no.  It won't.  I thought that it might but
> | my optimism was short-lived.  The graphics are all messed up.
> `----
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=273
>

Long bet a problem - yet every other distro I've tried has worked
flawlessly.  Seems like the issue is with Ubuntu, not VPC.

> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The restrictions on virtualization were discussed here a couple of
> | months ago, but now the more people are waking up to the EULA restrictions.
> |
> | MS claims it is "necessary for security reasons" and that only the "most
> | technically savvy users, or people in companies with tech support,
> | probably could handle Vista in virtualization programs, while home users
> | should be steered away."
> `----
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070222/ap_on_hi_te/microsoft_virtual_vis...
>
> A Software Maker Goes Up Against Microsoft
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | When quizzed on Microsoft's plans, Mr. Ballmer replied, "Our view is
> | that virtualization is something that should be built into the
> | operating system."
> `----
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/24/technology/24soft.html?ex=117289800...http://tinyurl.com/35jkur

And?  Are you disputing this?  Don't go and tell me that it's perfecly
fine to add virtualization support to the Linux kernel, but MS is not
allowed to do the same?

By the way - I don't use VPC anymore (except for an old NT4 image).  I
just use the free vmplayer.  The main reason - it supports usb.

--
Tom Shelton


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index