Slashdot Mirror

Yes, you would use host headers in IIS.

Years ago when I first set up SSL it was a pain in the neck. Installing third-party certs was a painful process with little, outdated docs on how to do it with Apache, but what was worse was I also had to set up self-signed certificates and that was an even more painful process because the documentation was so sparse there might not have been any. webmin didn't help much either, so I had to do a lot of searching and some reading of code in the supporting projects to figure it all out. Once I knew what needed to be in place it was fairly straightforward but getting their was a major pain in the neck. It's not so much a matter of a complicated process, but what directives do I need to add to .conf files?

I wrote a howto for myself so the process could be repeated. I should have completed the howto for public consumption but being self employed there is never any time for that kind of thing.

At this point the docs should be much better - at least I hope they are.

Windows was a little easier but not much. Sure, it's point-and-click, but when you have to click around in 38 different dialog boxes (Yes yes I know, 38 is an exaggeration), you'll be wish you could just do it all from the command line. The process on Windows is easily as complicated as on Linux, in fact slightly more so once you understand the steps. Fortunately Microsoft released a tool for making creation/installation of SSL certs a much easier process. Check out these sites:

http://www.visualwin.com/SelfSSL/
http://www.somacon.com/p42.php
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=80a1b6e6-829e-49b7-8c02-333d9c148e69&DisplayLang=en

In later versions of Windows they have made it a heck of a lot easier. In 2008 it's a breeze - you don't even need to download any resource kit tools to make it easy.

Microsoft's Type 1 Hypervisor, Hyper-V, currently can run Linux x86/x64 ("offically" there are ICs for RedHat and SuSe, but my guess is you could run other distros). VPC and Virtual Server (Type 2) can run a myrid of other OSes, including DOS, OS/2, Solaris...etc. A list for VPC is here: http://vpc.visualwin.com/. Microsoft and VMWare don't "support" any of these 3rd party OSes (or EOL OSes, such as DOS). In fact, VMWare can't support _any_ OS, only the injected drivers they produce.

Well, Apple didn't do the UI thing first. I don't know if anyone did it before MS, but MS alreayd has it with Volume Shadow Copy on 2003 server, it's been out for some time now. You just right click on the file and there's a "Previous Versions" tab. Pick the one you want and you go.

http://www.visualwin.com/VSS/Part3.html

This is essentially what they are bringing to the desktop in Vista.

ok fair enough if gaming is what you want to do a virtual PC of any type isn't going to get you the best performance out of any given hardware, There is some 3d support in vmware but it's for specific hardware which chances are will not be in your laptop.

I was trying to post about the relative merits of virtual PC v VMware and I obviously upset a few people. As yours is the only intelligent reply I will try to clarify my points here as I am sure I will be modded down again.

For x86 Mac's there is parallels and virtualPC version 7 for ppc macs -these are not free. there isnt a vmware version for Mac's yet... The parent post was misleading.

Another post for this article referenced a page giving a comprehensive list of virtual operating systems under virtal PC for ubuntu 6.06 it said "Boot into "Safe Graphics Mode" and install normally" http://vpc.visualwin.com/

anyway you are free to try both virtual Pc and vmware and make your own decisions, I think you can use the same image file.

I think I should state my position I have used windows for years and I want the freedom to use my computers how I want. I am pessimistic about DRM restrictions within VISTA and the more limited restrictions existing within XP
I do not want to suffer from rootkit installations such as employed by
SONY http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/31/201 6223&tid=172
game company spyware such as
Warden http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/01/17 58256&tid=158

and a whole raft of spyware and viri that all windows users need to guard against.

However I do have a windows habit, there are programs I use on a regular basis which will run only on windows.
so the alternatives are a seperate windows box a dual boot and virtualisation.
I personally use all three options but I am finding that a native install of ubuntu with a vmware installation of XP Pro suits me, I don't play games much on PC, I'll admit to owning a PS1 and an XBox(with xebian) for when I do want to play games.

I am interested in multiuser systems something which can be achieved with remote desktop to a limited extent with XP Pro (3 seats maximum) and also with linux (generally without sound) RDP in windows uses a virtual soundcard which automatically gets used in windows media player and has to be specified to be used with winAmp(another topic).

virtual Pc and vmware are not really targeted at homeusers anyway but for a homeuser vmware makes financial sense over virtualpc.

Incidentally I did actually ask someone from vmware which was faster on a given set of hardware vmware under windows or Vmware under linux and he said it was vmware under Linux.
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=187943&cid= 15499387

finally I would like to point out I am not disparaging virtualPc itself.
but
a)The Security of a MS host operating system
b)The Cost of a microsoft Os to host the virtual PC (XPhome is generally preinstalled not xp pro)
c)The limited number of concurrent users.
d)The performance overhead of using Vista as a guest OS

these are my personal reasons for choosing vmware over virtual PC.

Does virtual pc support usb2 (vmware gives usb 1.1 support)?
is it capable of using the underlying gpu making gaming in a vm practical?
I'd be interested to hear of virtual PC's merits. I agree with the parent that gaming in a VM sux and rebooting is a pta.

Yes, VPC can run a variety of Linux distributions and is very useful for testing code, or having a secondary operating system. See this http://vpc.visualwin.com/ for the full list of supported platforms. However, VMware workstation is still much more configurable and powerful (though not free) and will allow you to run almost every x86 operating system completely unmodified.

By the looks of things, it does, in fact, support quite a wide range of *ix-based OS's...
Have a look for yourself: http://vpc.visualwin.com/

Missing some of SCO unix server OS's, and some misc client/server distro's that I've only ever heard of in passing, but overall... kinda impressive, for M$. Well done to them. I've not used VPC myself, and I haven't used VMWare since my college days (v4.0, where it ran like a dog on RedHat(choice of OS wasn't up to the students), but even if it only runs half as well as they say does, it'l be more than usable.

Check out this link as to what will work on VPC and what won't. http://vpc.visualwin.com/

Virtual PC lets you create separate virtual machines on your Windows desktop

Hmmm.... I've installed Debian, Fedora, and Gentoo in Microsoft Virtual PC. Just Pick "Other" from the list in the Wizard. Actually, I don't think the Wizard does anything except set the initial RAM size anyways.

Besides, would you expect VPC to "support" Linux? Essentially, VPC is hardware. You'd expect the same level of support that you get from a typical hardware vendor. Well, sure some hardware vendors are good at supporting Linux. But, most have exactly the same support policy that Microsoft does for VPC.

BTW, look here: http://vpc.visualwin.com/ to see a list of what works in VPC and how to get some of the tougher ones to work.

> But does it run OS/2?

Yes. 8-)

Virtual PC / Virtual Server have been able to run Linux and 700+ other operating systems since Sept 13th 2004.