Owen Townend wrote:
2008/8/13 Senectus . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
2008/8/13 Daniel Mons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Paul Gear wrote:
| If you want to virtualise Windows, nothing comes close to VMware in
| terms of functionality.
Paul,
Could you please expand on this? I'm currently running 4x HP BL680c (16
cores, 64GB RAM) with Xen/QEmu to virtualise a number of Linux and
Win2K3 machines.
[snip]
And before anyone says anything about VMWare being "free" - the "free"
version is not only proprietary, but it is limited to 4 CPUs and 4GB
RAM. And if you refer to the top of this email, you'll see I'm playing
with much bigger toys.
- -Dan
Interesting... is anyone aware of a non biased comparison survey of the
products side by side?
Hey,
Not guaranteed unbiased, but at least side-by-side info including
the afore-mentioned core limitations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_virtual_machines
cheers,
Owen.
I guess the main problem from my perspective is documentation & "spit &
polish" of Xen & KVM makes it hard if you only administer 10 odd
machines, It's ok if you eat sleep & breath these apps but to the
sysadmins who have to multi skill it is almost prohibitive to setup.
What I'm trying to say is Vmware is bundled so that it is easy to
implement! I want to use open source solutions & am sceptical of
commercial companies who have "free" & commercial offerings. I want to
try the alternatives but to say the least KVM is a pig to implement
considering *buntu has made this the default. I googled for how to's but
there was a fair bit of ambiguity & confusion in the implementation.
Cary
--
ubuntu-au mailing list
ubuntu-au@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-au
