Am 17.08.2010 um 21:56 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
I think my point is that Win32 is a "never to be finished feature".
Every time I've ever tried to use it, it's a short period of time
before it seg faults. I have a hard time believing that anyone is
using it seriously.
No "serious" Windows user will consider QEMU a viable alternative to
the free-as-in-beer VMware as long as it doesn't provide a neat
graphical user interface which is on par for stuff like changing the
virtual CD (i.e., avoiding the monitor console) or configuring things.
Slightly similar lately on Mac OS X x86 with VirtualBox as semi-free
virtualization solution. Unfortunately the Q project made the bad move
of importing a CVS snapshot of QEMU into their SVN, so you could no
longer properly work against upstream.
Maybe it's time to rethink the relation between QEMU and its
frontends / management tools? If we want to compete with the
commercial products (sic), we might agree on some "official" frontend
per GUI-centric platform, with a Git-based repository (like qemu-
kvm.git) and synchronized releases that may call themselves "QEMU",
linked from qemu.org, rather than having a variety of (outdated) Q*
frontends per platform of which most are nothing more than a
configuration window to spawn the regular qemu[-system-x86_64].
Currently what QEMU can point with is richer machine and hardware
emulation and its license; if we want more users than that, we'll need
to deliver what users usually want the most - stability, performance
and ease of use... and good marketing.
Regards,
Andreas