-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul Gear wrote: | If you want to virtualise Windows, nothing comes close to VMware in | terms of functionality.
Oh and I forgot to mention, where I work we ran some head-to-head tests of ESX server versus Xen/QEmu (via RHEL5-AP). http://www.stickfreaks.com/images/vm_compare.xls (Apologies for the MS Excel file, but this was prepared for corporate suits) The tests was to load up Windows Server 2003 with all the latest service packs on both systems. From there I ran OpenSSL benchmarks (contained in the spreadsheet above), and the other sysadmins ran various other benchmarks. On average, Xen was 2 to 4 percent slower than bare metal. On average, VMWare was 6 to 16 percent slower than bare metal. The other tests performed (a variety of database tests on MS-SQL and other systems) mirrored these results. So again, with all bias aside and looking only at he empirical evidence, Xen/QEmu is not only cheaper, but runs substantially faster than VMWare. ~ Thus far I've had extensive experience with both products, and Xen continues to impress me much more than VMWare. - -Dan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIon7jeFJDv0P9Qb8RAt9oAJ9FeVa4qAaQZOGnBJHsTOvaWYIkTwCeI5Vp gYx1SAOq1Bb2fftkZtE2Y6k= =q9E0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- ubuntu-au mailing list ubuntu-au@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-au
