Slashdot Mirror
VMware Signs Deal with Microsoft
ken_i_m writes "VMware has signed an OEM deal with Microsoft to offer various flavors of Windows pre-installed with their product. Here is VMware's news release." Don't get too angry about this; if you're using VMware, you're probably loading up a version of Windows anyway.
Win 2000 is stable (though the hardware requirements make it unusable for most computers made before 1999).
Mac OS X is is stable & unixy. I know of quite a few people who have switched from mklinux/linuxppc to use OS X Server for server purposes.
BeOS personal Edition - it has some limitations, and some people are complaining, but the interest in it is incredible - are Linux advocates looking for something else that's free, but user friendly
Linux stocks are at record-low prices - and dropping. Net & tech stocks are also off, but the linux decline preceeded them.
So has linux peaked?
Not true. VMWare will run at whatever resolution your Xserver is running at. This goes for color depth as well.
Regarding SC, for example, it requires 256 colors at 640x480, no more. If you are running your Xserver in 16bit, it won't work, because it can't switch to 256 color. On top of this, it requires DirectX, which is not yet supported under VMWare.
That said, I am aware of people running SC in vmware. Myself, I just run it with WINE. ?:^)
Hey, Windows isn't that bad. I wouldn't want to use it to do anything important, but there are boatloads of games for Windows. And the Blue Screen of Death matches the furniture in my room. :-)
--Emmett
Oh, and check out #slashdot on irc.openprojects.net.
Also, check out #slashdot on irc.openprojects.net
--Emmett
Also, check out #slashdot on irc.openprojects.net
As far as I understand it, VMWare presents the same machine to the OS running in it, regardless of what your hardware is. They fake a generic NIC card, video adapter, and SCSI adaptor (and probably other things), so you should always end up with the "same" hardware under VMWare.
WWJD? JWRTFM!!!
Sorry.
I have several legacy apps that often require the bare-bones direct access to the hardware that only DOS can provide. One of these days, I hope someone makes an emu, vm, loader, driver, or something that will let me run them.
Here's a short list:
Second Reality
Panic
Optic Nerve
Crystal Dream II
Anyone get any of these running under Linux?
--Threed
Browsing at +2, or else on my Cell Phone. I see no trolls.
Try rebooting the cable modem. Unfortunately your ip will probably change but if that is undesireable spend the 25$ or so and get a TZO account. This works pretty good for me. Whenever I want to play some games that can't easily be Masq'd I just switch the cables from my masq box to my desktop reboot the cable modem and run winipcfg and release and renew the dhcp lease. I'm in the cincinnati area so YMMV.
In Republican America phones tap you.
Using Windows is taxing.
Upgrading Windows is both a tax and taxing.
VMware makes it possible for me to use Linux as my desktop OS at work. I have to run NT for things like Rational Rose and for reading/editing all those freakin' MS Word docs. But I can't recommend my setup to others because of setup hassles such as setting a second hardware profile on NT and replacing the default Xserver. (I haven't tried version 2.0 yet so I don't know if it's any less time consuming.) With VMware Ready to Run, I can now recommend Linux to a lot more people. It's still not perfect though because it won't be a dual boot system.
Thank you for reminding me to keep my treshold on +2
I'm running OS/2 Warp 4 right now (and most of the time). My Web-browsers directory has in it:
Netscape Communicator 4.61
Netscape Communicator 4.04
Netscape Navigator 2.02
HotJava 3.0
HotJava 1.15
Lynx/2
WebExplorer 1.2
Sslurp! 1.6 (site downloader)
If I wanted, I could run the very alpha Opera/2, or several versions of Netscape/W16, Opera/W16, or (rumor has it), IE3/W16.
Also, using XFree/OS2 provides a platform on which a number of browsers have been ported (and the GIMP, which is about all I use XFree/OS2 for myself).
So there are quite a few web-browsing options under OS/2. And even most unix shells, shell tools, good editors, ports of all my favorite compilers. Overall, a nice place to work.
Buy Text Processing in Python
Who on earth is Jon Katz and why do trolls keep on about him/her/it?
I'm out of my tree just now but please feel free to leave a banana.
I've developed a tremendous distaste for commercial software since I started using linux, BUT I have to say vmware is quite nice. I'm using it right now to run windows under slink and that is where windows belongs, in a cage.
That said, what the fuck is with the stupid "tux in a business suit" icons? Gee, that's sooooo cute. I hate suits at work and I don't need to see my favorite mascot disgraced in this way.
Can we at least have tux dressed up like Che or something to even things out? Sheesh.
support gun control: take guns from cops
stick with dual booting.
It's fine for most applications you can't run in linux and things like that but it is too slow for games.
support gun control: take guns from cops
1. Maybe not everyone is as good at getting things to run under wine as you, personally I've had little luck with it and it is slow as hell. Anything more complicated than notepad seems to have problems
2. Just because you can't think of a reason to run a virtual win9x machine in linux doesn't mean there isn't one. Where I work, I need access to a MS proprietary mail system, windows only netware management tools, MS Office, and a host of other such bullshit. I need linux to keep my sanity only, because honestly I could do without it and use some windows ssh client to manage the linux machines. However, I would go insane using windows all the time.
support gun control: take guns from cops
Oh? Hmmm. They describe their product as being for NT and W2K. What the heck, maybe I'll take it for a spin and stick FreeBSD on my system... or a Linux distro...
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
I haven't bothered with VMWare yet because it doesn't support Win98SE and I think it's gonna be kludgy to go from Win to WinLinux, fire up Linux VMWare then re-launch Win98SE.
If VMWare are getting in bed with MS, they'll be working hand in hand with a company that hasn't shown a whole lot of interest in maintaining backward compatibility. This reinforces my suspicion that VMWare won't bother extending their product's capability back to '9x.
If I've proven myself clueless, at least make your flames educational, OK? I'm man enough to be insulted if at least I get to learn something in the process.
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
Maybe MS thinks that people are finding out their OS sucks and won't install it.
-- I doubt, therefore I might be.
How much you wanna bet that Win2001 or some such version will have the installation and packaging aspects of 'ready to run' built in. If I were cynical, which of course I'm not, I'd bet that MS will use VMWare technology to run Win2k in a VMWare session on Linux on a S/390 mainframe and then say...'see it's enterprise ready' !!!
I'm glad VMware can make some bucks from MS. That's a good company and cash will help them to develop VMware further.
Andrew
Bundling pre-installed Windows with VMWare is a slam dunk. I'm quite glad that VMWare made this move, because it means that it will be cheaper for me to install Win2k on my VMWare box (after I upgrade my computer, blah blah blah :)). It also makes it that much easier to poke and prod Win2k for flaws on top of my Linux box.
And additionally, it will save you money if you want your cable modem to be installed on your Linux box...:)
And we can soon give VMWare and Microsoft the award for best Linux application (VMWare with WinNT :)).
Finding God in a Dog
Okay, at least try paying a
little attention. This is to run Windows under other operating system. Now, yes, the other operating systems might Windows NT, but they're more likely to be Linux or FreeBSD or whatever else can be used as a VMWare host OS.
-David T. C.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
A lot of the instability of NT comes from poorly written drivers. By using tightly controlled VM drivers which interface with Linux drivers (which hopefully are more stable) you get a more stable system.
Scuttlemonkey is a troll
They gain the following:
1. Following the "Windows Everywhere" strategy, they get a copy of Windows9X/NT/00 on machines that otherwise wouldn't run Windows.
2. While the press release doesn't say this, it is a reasonable assumption that MSFT will get some sort of licensing fee from VMWare for each copy sold.
3. By increasing the number of PCs running Windows, MSFT gains more potential users for other MSFT software such as Office or IE. This enables them to earn more revenues for copies of those products, too. This increases "lock in" at the corporate level ("sure, we can use Linux on the desktop for the geeks who want it, without giving up MS Word and MS Excel as our standard word processor and spreadsheet."). "Lock in" ensures future product sales.
Finally, I think MSFT realizes that the battle for the desktop is over and they won. They don't need the monopoly on desktop OSes any more. They've got additional areas where they own the de facto standards (MS Word and MS Excel come to mind. IE to a lesser extent). I suspect that their attempt to settle w/ the Feds will revolve around lots of apparent sacrifices regarding their OS monopoly. They can afford it since they've got many other areas where they've locked in vast numbers of customers.
This is a small sacrifce for MSFT, if any.
What's the point Ummm -- I'm a system admin. My company uses Outlook and Excell (with VB programs) extensively. I must be on windows to do those things, which I need to do multiple times a day. At the same time, i need to have a number of X-clients going monitoring systems, runing programs, playing quake ^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h and other wise being productive. If I have to reboot everytime I need to be in Windows I will loose a ton of time. If I have multiple boxes I will waste money and waste a ton of space. If I have VMWare, I am happy, content and busy Quak^h^h^h^hworking.
Pump is a nice little program that tells the DHCP server that you want a new IP lease. Its kind of like running Winipcfg and clicking on "renew" except of course, pump is a command for Linux.
It comes with Red Hat IIRC, I am using Mandrake 7 now and I had to use Rpmfind to get it. (Why it does not come with Mandrake I do not know...)
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
When I first installed VMWare on top of E, I couldn't believe how incredibly slow and bloated Windows felt.
So what happens when someone loads up Linux in a window? It's slow, and feels bloated. This stifles the great thing about Linux by putting a plastic bag over it, and telling users that it choking is its own fault.
In other words, "go back to Windows. It's faster."
The $300 you spend on VMware could have gotten you a mondo-big hard drive for your primary box. With LILO, you could configure it to boot many different OSes (i.e. multipe versions of Windows) from different partitions on the drive. Without needing to spend the bux on VMware.
But it takes a lot longer to cut and paste from GVIM running in Linux/X to the Win95 box, and pasting into a WinNT box, as well as drag and dropping files files between the Win9x and Samba running on the Linux box.
The great thing about VMWare is that it is very seamless. AND My win9x VMWare boxes are much more stable than any box I've seen. And reboot time of newer, bigger machines is very annoying. There is a time and place for Dual-Boot (Gaming), but in a work environment, VMWare is much more practical. Allowing me to do all my primary work under Linux, and run Office and Outlook under Windows.
-- Keith Moore
This sig is the express property of someone.
It could be another concession to weaken the perception of MS as an aggressive monopoly.
You need to check your facts. Microsoft has lost in the palmtops: WinCE has about 10% of the market, PalmOS has 90%. MS just renamed WinCE to Windows Powered.
I also question the cable boxes, and since the X box won't be out for at least another 18 months, who knows what will happen in the gaming console market.
-- Error: Cannot find file REALITY.SYS - Universe halted, please reboot!
VMWare can host each machine in less than 128 Megs, and doesn't use much memory itself. So if you can configure the guest OS to use say 32 megs, then each VMWare instance takes roughly 32megs + some overhead (lets say 8 megs for the sake of argument).
Yes, you may want a machine with lots of RAM to run multiple OS's at once, but that doesn't mean that each instance will use up lots of RAM. I have a machine w/ 256 Meg RAM, and host multiple NT guests running under Linux, w/ no problem.
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
VMWare has allowed me to get more linux installed in my office. This deal with MS will only help in my efforts.
I have found that I can install linux and VMWare with windows on a machine in our engineering dept and before long the user is spending more time using linux apps then windows apps.
your comment is too cranky and whiny too be worthy of a more intelligent response
having been moderated up 1 to Funny, and then down 1 to for Troll, i seem to have learned my lesson:
moderators suck. fucking humorless assholes.
MS has had deals before that seem to
contradict their "us or nobody" approach.
see citrix
js
I wonder what the perfomance of a MAME running on Windows 98 VM running inside of Vmware running on Windows NT running inside of Vmware running on Redhat ...
Nice thought...however, VMware has some detection mechanism that will not allow you to run a virtual machine inside another virtual machine. I understand this would create some rather nasty problems.
Imagine for $10 getting a variety pack that included compressed VMWare images of the *BSDs, Solaris 8, several distributions of Linux, EROS, and BeOS?
And for just $210 you could get *BSDs, Solaris 8, several distros of Linux, EROS, BeOS, AND Windows. (monopo-what? price-gouga-who?)
--
+&x
Flamebait???
I can only assume that I hit too close to the truth for somebody.
I'm betting that the real reason for this is that there is a demand to run some non-Windows OS along with Windows.
I'm betting that my motivation will be to run Windows without having to reboot the base O/S when Windows bluescreens. A Win98 window on a Linux box sounds about right.
Besides, I need some excuse to buy that dual Celeron motherboard.
--R
I think we could legally create some VFS's that have RedHat/Caldera/SuSE/FreeBSD/Mandrake/whatever distro is your favorite now, and distribute them on the net. Sounds like a great idea!
They probably aren't all running simultaneously, and heck - memory is cheap, and well worth it.
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
Shouldn't someone be modding up a good post or blasting a real troll instead of wasting a point on a comment that really didn't deserve any attention (either way)?
Moderate this down to -1 (this one actually *is* offtopic), but the parent wasn't...
Moderation only works if it's used properly... hope this gets caught in M2
</whine, bitch and moan>
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
For fscks sake... WHY???
Ooh, NT is unstable. Let's run a more stable OS, add a VM layer, and *then* run NT on top of it!
Someone is missing the point here... (sigh)
Martin
The problem is that whatever the conditions of the deal that they signed with Microsoft will mean the end of them. Embrace, sign, extinguish.
If they load up a different OS, they might start liking that other one...
Although the stability of the other OS will be hard to see for the users.
Sig:
none of the games I've tried in vmware-1.1.2 running windoze NT worked
...
...
Darn. Especially StarCraft and Age of Empires! My son wants StarCraft and I'd like to try Age of Empires
Maybe I have to wait for the port then
Will in Seattle
Cool--this means that Microsoft is very unlikely to put a clause in their EULA making it illegal to run their products in a VM. (A measure, which, unfortunately, would end up enforceable under the UCITA)
I had a copy of OS/2 Warp 3 sitting around from back when it first came out (IBM was giving it away at Fall Comdex '94)...used it for about a year or two. I recently put it on an extra computer I had kicking around and, with some finagling, got TCP/IP networking working well enough to FTP into my Linux server and browse the Web through my masq'd cable modem. Some trickery was needed to get Internet Connection for OS/2 to talk through a NIC instead of a dial-up connection (it's normally dial-up only), but I'm at work and my OS/2 box is at home, so if you have any questions as to how I did it, send me email and I'll dig up the info I found on how to get it to work.
Given that the only browsers I've run across so far are Netscrape 2.x (double ick because (1) it's ancient and (2) it's Netscrape) and some ports of Lynx, I suppose it's more a shits-and-grins exercise than a practical setup...especially since it's on a Cx5x86-120 with 16 megs of RAM and it's not talking to either of my servers (one SuSE Linux 6.2, one NetWare 5), except for FTP to/from the Linux server. (My main machine runs Corel Linux 1.0, VMware, and Win98...the latter two are so I can have a decent Web browser (read: Internet Explorer) under Linux. It's kinda slow that way right now, but I should be getting 256 megs of RAM today, and that'll fix that problem...:-) )
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
I don't know about VMware inside Virtual PC (the newest Apple hardware I have is a IIGS :-) ), but one of the VMware FAQs answers the question about running VMware inside VMware. The short answer is, "Don't." If you try it, I suppose you'd learn the sound a tree makes when it falls and nobody is around, or something like that. :-)
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
I wouldn't be very surprised if this license agreement only applies to vmware versions of win98+nt or winnt+2000 and does not apply to linux+win bundles.
Think about it:
1. If I want linux on win I can go for a umsdos based distrib or get lnx4win from mandrake which runs from an image and saves file permissions etc.
2. If I want win over linux; I am already a linux user; why not use Wine? or just dual boot to a win partition? a couple of scripts to dd the partition and restore it for multiple install testing. No performance hit, no svga problems, no fake peripherals in a virtual machine.
This is probably cements marketshare for vmware in msdn where developers need to cope with the plethora of different ms oses. Vmware is probably also concerned about plex86 eating into their win on linux market!
You can get VirtualPC for the Mac bundled with Windows, so why not VMWare? You can still get it without an OS :)
:)
VMWare is cool. I'm a registered user of Ver 2 for Linux, and man - it flies (even running Windows 2000)! My Linux box is a P3/450 overclocked to 527, with narrow SCSI and 256MB RAM, running Mandrake 7. I ran a little benchmark util called "CLIBench" on VMWare/Win 2K, and it is actually FASTER than my wife's K6-2/500 Win 2K box at almost everything - pretty impressive methinks! The K6 does beat VMWare on disk writes, and CLIBench doesn't test video, which I'm sure is faster on the "real" machine. I kind of like the flexibility - Not to start a flame war, but at least Explorer 5 on Win 2K doesn't die like Netscrape for Linux. I even get pretty good frame rates playing Quicktime 4 movies.
Out of order? Fuck! Even in the future nothing works! - Dark Helmet (Rick Moranis) "Spaceballs"
Occasionally, the color pallette would get nuked, requiring that I switch from and back to full screen mode to fix it. But I did it -- I swear! And it really wasn't that hard.
--
"I have a good idea why it's hard to verify programs. They're usually wrong." --Manuel Blum, FOCS 94
Yes. It should be #3 or #4. Definitely not #1.
--
"I have a good idea why it's hard to verify programs. They're usually wrong." --Manuel Blum, FOCS 94
Does Hemos get another Hemos Award on his birthday?
:P
-- BlueCalx | http://nickd.org/
"if you're using VMware, you're probably loading up a version of Windows anyway."
but why should I have to buy ANOTHER copy of this overpriced product?
You are not thinking right: Windows programs can take out the OS much easier than a UNIX OS. As a developer, I would love to run a virtual Windows box. If my program dies and takes the OS with it, my development environment will still be safe.
:)
Also, a developer can run a virgin install of Windows inside VMWare. Most users have installed different drivers and software to their Windows box. Running software within a virtual virgin (grin) install can reduce the number of factors attributed to a failure of your program. It would be easier to decide if it was your fault or Windows.
It is still ok to blame Microsoft; it is politically correct.
Does this mean that we will be getting Direct-X support for playing games? The only reason I have to run VMWare is to run Windows games, and most require Direct-X Video/Sound support.
Thanks
Alex DeWolf
adewolf1@tampabay.rr.com
Why the Linux biz Icon? I would think the microsquishy Icon would be better...
That's what I'm doing with my copy. Useful for checking out other distros, doing development work, kernel hacking, etc. Broke it? Oh well, just copy the backup file (~200 mb) back over it.
"But what I don't get is why this is good for M$, what do they gain? What they lose is that they are helping people make the break to a more stable platform and relegating windoze to be simply an application launcher and runtime environment"
And what exactly do they lose by that? If M$ is, as most of us seem to believe, only in business for the money then collecting the license fee is all that matters.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised they haven't come out with their own commercial Win9x emulator for Linux.
*cough*
Unless you're simply tired of having a real machine crash when you could be crashing a virtual machine, or you're tweaking configurations and don't want to lose everything...
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
I've already got a motherboard and processor...
Do I want to upgrade them JUST to save $60 on W2k? yeah right.
Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq MSFT) is the worldwide leader in software for personal and business computing. The company offers a wide range of products and services designed to empower people through great software -- any time, any place and on any device.
Lord, where does that sound familiar... I thought that was Sun's tag line. "empower people through great software"... uh yeah, whatever.
VMware Ready to Run is also an excellent way to try Windows 2000. A user can keep their current world completely intact and also, with simply a file copy, have Windows 2000.
Oh yes. You can pay $200 for an upgrade copy of W2k, wow.
I guess it's good for Linux users, but all I can think of is how entering into agreements with MS is bad, and wonder if they will try to get VMware to quit making VMware for Linux. I was in the computer store yesterday buying myself a boxed copy of RedHat 6.1, and walked down the Windows OS aisle... $89 for Win95 upgrade, $99 for Win98 upgrade, $199 for Win2k upgrade... I fail to see how an OS that's 5 years old is worth only $10 less than the current home version.
Well maybe I just answered my own question... if you want to have 3 windows OS's on your Linux box, and you're paying that kind of money for each version, the hell if MS doesn't want you to do that...
You'd be surprised. I'm going to get flamed for this, but I'm using Windows 2000, and it's actually very stable. It surprised me! I'm not one that usually likes Microsoft products, but W2K actually seems like decent software. It supports all my hardware, including my USB gamepad, and almost all of my existing software runs on it. The only thing that wouldn't run was some Berlitz French learning program by TLC (Mattel), which I shouldn't have bought anyways. :-)
What has happened to EVERY company that has ever worked with Microsoft? They get their technologies stolen. It happened before the release of the Macintosh, it's happened with scores of other companies. I think it's great that this deal fell through, and as long as Microsoft doesn't decide to rape them, they'll be fine.
You know there are other alternatives you know. OS2 is quite nice as well as QNX, and others. using VMware does not mean that you have to use windows.
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
I use vmware.I'm a web developer and I spend a lot of time testing my pages in different browsers. I used to have a bunch of machines with different configs. win95/3.x browsers, win98 4.0 browsers, soon win2k/5.0 browsers, and a
3.1 machine with others. Now, I have two machines linux with 3 vmware 'windows' an a native Win box. (drivers are not the same for color checking in vmware). I love the fact that I can test different browsers on one machine.
Besides the virtual networking is really cool.
What kind of a monster linux machine do you have? Vmware takes 128Mb (recommended) for each instince how do you do all that?
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
you think that might have something to do with the speed diffrence.. hm.. i can run linux apps relly fast or windows apps in a relly slow virtual machine :]
If I remember correctly, Warp 3.0 came with a PPP dialer, to allow you to access the internet. IBM's marketing machine pushed Warp 3.0 as "The totally cool way to surf the internet". The included browser (WebExplorer) was nothing to write home about, but at the time, it was passable. It might be in the BonusPak.
There is an OS/2 native port of Netscape Navigator available (and possibly Communicator?). I know Netscape worked under Warp Connect (Warp 3.0 + built-in LAN networking). I'm not sure if it works with the PPP dialer in Warp 3.0 (plain), or if you need to install any fixpacks. Give it a try though.
Head over to the Team OS/2 web site for more OS/2 tips and pointers. Surf some newsgroups.
Warp 4.0 is nice, if you can get your hands on it (eBay?). One nifty feature is an 'FTP Folder', where you could have an FTP site appear as a desktop folder.
Anyway, good luck!
The point is, that you don't have to reboot to switch between environments. VMWare lets you run Windows applications alongside your Linux applications. Rebooting just because you need to use a Windows application is a real time-waster, especially if you have to do it several times a day.
Sure, there's a performance penalty with VMWare, but it's not the resource hog you make it out to be. On my eMachine at home (96 megs, 333 "MHz" Cyrix M2), Win98 is quite usable under VMWare. Slower, sure, but not deadly-slow.
I parsed the situation more as the following:
The poster of the story was suggesting to the anti-MS people that (even if you ARE ant-MS), this may be a good thing.
Like you are.
-Shane
Wanting to run VMWare is just saying that I can't do all I want to on my current Operating System! This is just Microsofts way of saying, "now you can put linux on it to do the stuff windows can't".
The one reason people run VMWare on Linux is because they can't run some windows programs (even with wine). I just don't get it. Why would Someone want to run Linux on an NT box if Windows NT is "Better"(according to Microsoft)?
Microsoft had nothing to do with infiltrating our linux desktops. Microsoft is not "pushing" vmware to license their product.
Vmware wants to provide yet another service to their customers. Thats all. Just like DELL, GW2k, Micron, etc.
Just as DELL recently decided to sell multiple operating systems with their physical computers, VMware wants to do the same with their "virtual" computers. They already provide us with a free "ready to run" linux OS. They wanted to be able to sell windows as well.
--
Twivel
It's my brother's Birthday too.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MARTIN!
Possible reasons: 1. Make it appear that they admit other OSs exist at a time where their "monopoly" abuse is hopefully taking them directly past go and to jail 2. Try to get more Microsoft Tax 3. Provide a custom version which will do a DR-DOS type detection and spew out error messages I always thought Rev Billy G played in ZZ Top...
OS/2 definately supports TCP/IP, I think you must have a very old or stripped version, others have posted links of use on that issue. I haven't run it in several years, primarily because it supports so little hardware (I loved it but 9/10 machines I wanted to run it on turned out to be incompatible unfortunately,) but back then it had great networking support, can't imagine it's just disappeared.
So far as a browser, let me recommend Opera - the 16 bit windows version should run just fine under OS/2, and a fully native OS/2 port is in the works and expected to be available soon. The 16 bit version is up to date and very usable - I still have one box running Windows 3.1 (it's for my dad, he's used to it and doesn't want to take the time to learn Linux or Windows9x) and it works great.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
What if I don't run VMWare for Windows? What if I want to run Be, or QNX - heh? Is it really time to invest into freemware? Yes it sure is!! www.freemware.org
How did you get OS/2 3.0 (Warp?) to use the NIC instead of PPP and dial-up? Is there a webpage out there with this kind of information?
I'd take OS/2 over Windows in a heartbeat. Now, if you offered me a choice between Windows and, say, having all my fingernails pulled out one by one, then I'd have to think about it for a while.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
2. VMware still won't run Be. How 'bout if they partner with Be to get Be running in VMware, or (better yet) port VMware to Be? (It'd be fast - darn fast.)
"The romance of Silicon Valley was about money - excuse me, about changing the world, one million dollars at a time."
Visit
Just wanted to point out (maybe this is a tad nit-picky, but I think it's an important point) that Debian isn't any sort of a "corp"-- and that's what makes it Debian. :) All of Debian's unique character is, I feel, derived from the fact that it's totally non-corporate-affiliated. (Speaking as an exclusively Debian Linuxer myself :) )
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
Unfortunately, it apprears that VMware isn't a good choice for gamers yet. They don't support much DirectX/Direct3D/DirectDraw yet, and their interface to the X server is the DGA interface, not the new DRI interface. Plus, their DGA interface is proprietary, although their FAQ comments that they'd like to see some of their code added to the XFree tree.
Sound under VMware is apparently limited to SB16 emu, and no midi/joystick/wavetable function.
I'm looking forward to a VMware that will let me toss that Windows partition so I can play games! After all, computers were invented for games and pr0n. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise :)
"We apologize for the inconvenience."
User: Lets install new drivers for the video card Windows: got the disk? User: got it Windows: what should you say? User: OK. Windows: no, it ain't ok, can't find the required drivers User: They're right there! Windows: Where?! User: On the disk! Windows: Which one? User: B:\ Windows: no such disk. User: why is it there in dos? Windows: not my problem. User: So how should I install the drivers? Windows: why do you need drivers, you don't have a video card. User: No way Windows: I'm telling you User: What about audio? Windows: No audio either User: What DO I have than? Windows: A joystick User: never had one... Windows: I know better User: and I was just about to go buy one... Windows: see! what would you do without me?
Did you notice the ending of the press release ?
:-)
First came an "About VMware" then followed an "About Microsoft".
Who doesn't know Microsoft ?
-- A Mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems. - Paul Erdös
I'm SHOCKED! Some company NOT USING LINUX? HOW CAN THIS BE? I thought Linux was the end-all be-all of existence! You mean, Linux can't walk my dog, make my breakfast, fix my car, entertain me, and even be my own personal love slave?! MY GOD! LINUS TORVALDS: WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN ME!?!?!
It's nice to see them including "Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds" at the end of the press release!
:)
In any case, this isn't a bad thing at all. This just means that most of those who use VMware on non-Windows platforms (and some who do) will have an out-of-the-box solution ready for them to use the second that they buy it.
This could mean that people will be more likely to consider Linux + VMware, for example, as an alternative to Windows. Not everyone wants to worry about running installation scripts, creating virtual drives, etc. Sure, I do -- I'd rather do a clean install than trust anyone else -- but that's me. I simply won't choose the ready-to-run VMware.
meisenst
Green's Law of Debate: Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about.
I'm really wondering about the Microsoft take on it though; it's hardly in keeping with their classic character. They want you to run a MS OS as your primary platform, and leverage that into other areas.
As I see it, allowing VMware to sell preinstalled with a Windows OS in the virtual machine is a threat to the whole primary platform idea. It looks like a way to make it easier for Linux vendors to edge into that primary platform space that they covet so much.
So I'm really wondering what MS sees as their benefit from this deal...
Microsoft has a tradition of getting people dependent on their product, then locking the door on alternatives. Like when they told Compaq that they would lose all rights to install Windows if Netscape was showing on the desktop. Like when they told IBM that they couldn't install Win95 unless they dumped Lotus Smartsuite.
Microsoft doesn't like people having options. A dependency on windows gives them power to remove options later. People are right to fear that the option to not-buy Windows with VM-ware might disappear later.
differences of opinion is why we have more than one moderator. The next time you see a whiny post when you have moderator points to apply, you can make a difference to him.
In the meantime YOU are being cranky and whiny,
I couldn't vouch for 3.0, since I got 4.0, which comes with TCP/IP (works fine with a cable modem, even if the @home jokers say they only support Macs and the Evil Empire's OS), comes with Netscape (and there are people making sure that Mozilla will run on OS/2)--OK, actually as it comes off the CD-ROM you have to go get Netscape. but that's no big deal. Until the Project Magic people get the native OS/2 Opera going, one can if one wishes, run Win3.1 flavored Opera in a WinOS2 session. (I chose not to, because I don't want to send the Opera people the wrong signal.)
It does do Java...in fact, IBM is pushing Java heavily and trying to make sure its Java is very fast.
On a different note, I wonder if vmware will ever fix their "bios" so that I can run win95 b under it on my k6/2 machines (no, I don't own win98, and it's NOT worth $100!).
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
Actually, they already do provide a Linux distro pre-configured. SuSE Linux is provided on CD is you purchase the boxed version (instead of just downloading and buying the license file to run VMWare.
The setup for SuSE Linux is excelent. Copy it from the CD to your hard drive, and point VMWare at it, and it runs. Not much else required.
Davis Ray Sickmon, Jr - looking for something to read? Check out my three free novels at MidnightRyder.org
Actually, my base OS is NT 4.0 SP 5 (it's an evil Dell machine that hates Linux). On top of it I'm normally running:
1 SuSE Linux
1 Windows 98
2 Windows NT 4.0's
The immediate question might be "why the hell do I do that"? Quite a few reasons, really. I like Linux, so I run SuSE in one box for anything that I want to do under Linux, 'specially anything 'net related beyond email and a browser.
The Win98 I use for testing on games that I am writing (however, MIDI and 3D hardware doesn't work under VMWare - yet.) One copy of NT is for an MMI package called Wonderware Intouch (what a name...), and the other one is for Rockwell's RSView 32 MMI package. The two packages don't get along well, and and RSView32 doesn't get along with VB6, so I have yet another VMWare. Best part - if I want to scrap and re-install an NT system for some reason (IE - I load something that makes NT harf) I just copy a pre-installed VMWare 'disk' file overtop of the old one, and re-install the one software package I need. No worries that way.
VMWare is a great little package for quite a few situations - I actually bought version 1.0 when it came out, and have been a fan ever since. My only complaints? Win9x under VMWare takes up too much horsepower. For some reason, NT under VMWare only takes about 2% horsepower running in the background, while 9x's take about 40%! The other complaint - not Open Source. But with a tool as good and stable as VMWare has been for me, I'm not quite as concerned about the Open Source issue as I am with, say, using Excel.
And for those wondering - the machine I'm using it on is indeed pretty beefy. Dual PII/400's, with 256 MB RAM. While it could be argued that for the price I should have just built 4 separate machines, trust me, it's MUCH more convientent this way, and I can do some things that just aren't nice and tidy on 4 machines. Plus, when you add 4 21" monitors, it's gonna start racking up the cost!
Davis Ray Sickmon, Jr - looking for something to read? Check out my three free novels at MidnightRyder.org
BIG MISTAKE on the part of Microsoft. One of the reasons that people DON'T migrate to Linux for despite its stability is the fact that it won't run Windows applications that don't have a viable Linux alternative. Now lack of a good Office suite and a budget to retrain everyone for Linux isn't even an issue. Microsoft has delegated their own operating system to nothing more than a buggy process for Linux to run until it has it's own software counterpart.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but none of the games I've tried in vmware-1.1.2 running windoze NT worked (which btw worked just fine under NT w/o vmware).
These games include StarCraft, Age of Empires1 and 2, Grand Turismo 2 (or 3, I forget).
It all has to do with the video driver that vmware uses in NT, which is an SVGA, that only supports 640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768. All those games required different resolutions, and they didn't work.
Lighten up a little. Sheesh. Give him/her some credit at least for being creative, and IMO, from reading the posts below, the parent post is a pretty accurate reference. If we try to mute everyones attempts at a little humor around here, the only thing we'll have is "I agree" and "flamebait" posts. Personally I thought it was funny, and in a somewhat stale "M$" is evil thread, a little humor breaks up the redundancy of it.
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
It is okay, I laughed at your comment and ida found it at -1 or 5. I judge comments on my own. Its called personal moderation.
:-)
Its an amazing concept really.. thinking for yourself
More people need to try it.
I could just see it: Microsoft forks off a kernel and runs VMWare on it.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Isn't using Windows enough of a tax?
Office is where their money comes from anyway.
Don't forget Asheron's Call.
kwsNI
IMHO, This is good, because installing Win98 inside VMware on my linux machine was probably one of the most painful experiences I have ever had. It took FOREVER. Now, perhaps I should clarify myself my saying that this is a good thing as long as there is still an option to purchase VMware without any OS. Actually, I think the best thing for VMWare to do would be to offer a pre-compiled version for every OS that they support. Just my $0.02.
segfault@bellatlantic.net
Well, honestly, probably not. There's not that many Operating Systems out there to try. But it'd be nice, none the less.
One other note: a convincing argument I once heard for Linux "mainstreaming" was cross-OS compatability and games. VMware seems to be attempting to solve both problems. Like a great number of people, I'm stuck using M$9x at work because my employers don't like/support/want to deal with Linux. I'm excited by VMware because it brings people like me closer to a true, diverse choice of productive environments.
***JUMP PAD ACTIVATION INITIATION START***
***TRANSPORT WHEN READY***
***JUMP PAD ACTIVATION INITIATION START***
***TRANSPORT WHEN READY***
You seriously don't get it do you. He said he is a WEB DEVELOPER. That means he isn't going to want to reboot to some other OS every time he makes some little change to the HTML just to check that it is compatible with any particular browser running under whatever WMware host OS..
If anything this will encourage users to now have a second, non-microsoft operating system on their desktop.
"Do you think we could wipe out world hunger forever if scientists figured out how to make AOL's Free CD's edible?"-
I have a dual-boot system at home using Lilo. But VMWare gives me the ability to, without rebooting, open up Win98 and use Quicken and do my online banking.
More inmportantly, it allows me to easily test any software I'm developing under a variety of OS configurations. Each one can be booted in a VM, and when I shut the VM down I have the choice of keeping or discarding all the disk writes. In other words, boot up Windows, install a piece of software, run it, then instead of uninstalling I just shut down the VM and discard the disk changes. Presto! I'm 100% exactly as I was before the test.
VMWare is very, very useful beyond the dual-boot paradigm.
Michael J.
Michael J.
Root, God, what is difference?
Hehe. Yes it is definitively fake! Pasted together in PhotoShop. Even the source code in the CVS repository have traces of the airbrush on most of the glyphs :)
:)
Seriously: I know the GUI is a bit inconsistent, but it is shaping up (Some of the screenshots are rather old).
Sorry to keep this thread off-topic. Just couldn't resist
--- Kurt Skauen
What's the point of vmware to begin with? LILO will take care of multiple OS systems already and quite effectively too. Vmware eats tons of resources and doesn't do anything more than a dual boot system anyway. You can mount tons of different partition types with Linux already. Did I miss something?
Can you imagine how bloated it will be if it comes with Microshaft products installed out of the box? Unless you can afford a top of the line system with a fast chip and lots of ram, it's fairly pointless as far as desktop usability.
At US$300 plus, they could OEM Win9x in there and hardly notice. I was all set to buy a copy when I thought it was $99 but it ain't worth three times that per seat.
Non-commercial use of VMware is still $99. If you use it in a commercial setting, then it's $299.
Both prices are fair and very reasonable for what VMware does; it's a good way to try out FreeBSD v.4!
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
I can't wait for an MS distro of Linux that comes bundled VMware, Win9x and Office 2k.
When someone yells "Stop" or goes limp, or taps out, the fight is over.
This is just another example of Microsoft trying to get their foot in the door. Linux is cutting into their market share and they're not too happy about it. This is like Microsoft bundling IE with windows. They're trying to keep a hold on their windows users even after they've moved on to Linux. If I want to run Windows in VMWare, then I'll install VMWare and then install windows. I don't want to have an OS forced upon me.
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." -- RFC 1925
Use VMware as your long stick... Poke win98 from afar. Let VMware be your petri dish... Quarantine the filthy beast.
Here! Here! Well spoken twivel. I would add just that Dell and other Windows OEMs don't have as much freedom to blow off Microsoft as VMWare does (if Microsoft were ever to get greedy or pushy *snicker*) since most of them still rely heavily on the windows user to sell their hardware.
This is an idea that has been popping around for awhile. Microsoft may eventually come out with its own form of linux. To what advantage? Money. Pure and simple. How do they make money? Marketing. In my company, a major telco in the southeast that rhymes with TellMouth, we are allowed to use Linux on our workstations, or we can use WindowsNT. For our production servers we use Solaris and a couple of NT boxes (which are being phased out). Our powers that be would use Linux in a production environment if they were assured that it would be supported and that there was a substantial support package. They don't trust Linux yet. They want accountability along with a brand name. Now, since Microsoft has these things, it doesn't matter that their version of Linux may be worse, or that it may violate the GPL or just have a modified KDE that emulates just about everything NT does. Microsoft's marketing department has succeeded in fooling the entire world that their OS is the best and most stable, when smarter heads know otherwise. These same demon seeds can convince the powers that be in my company and many others that Microsoft's brand of Linux is better because they have "standardized" it and made it more "compatible" with MS products. Remember, the truth does not enter this hypothetical world at any time. As long as Microsoft's marketing department gets in full swing behind a Microsoft Linux, then we run the risk of people believing it really is better. My opinion is that no matter how much Microsoft gets involved with Linux, all of their intentions should be mistrusted. This is a company that either destroys its competitors, buys them, or does its best to undermine their business. Its a huge game to them. Who gets the most toys. Any venture in the Linux market can mean only one thing to me. Beware! Of course, I could be a little paranoid...
Come on, are you seriously telling us we should use OS/2 instead of windows?
Sooner or later MS is going to want in on the development cycle. They'll take a good look at this product, and a few months later they'll announce their wonderful identical product, and sever the ties with the company whose idea they just stole.
Either that, or they'll just buy them outright, and casually remove linux support...
Heh... I used to think those dimensionx guys were cool too...
NO TOUCH MONKEY!
Wow, i should find that one guy that came into my store and claimed he had his 8g HD partitioned 4 times, one partition for win3.1, one for win95, one for win98, and the other one for when win2k comes out. i bet he would really be pleased with this. :)
From the press release:
> VMware Ready to Run is also an excellent
> way to try Windows 2000. A user can keep
> their current world completely intact and
> also, with simply a file copy, have Windows
> 2000.
I smell an implication here... 'try before you fry'?
This is probably not as big a deal as it looks. I've been involved in OEM deals. And one thing the initiators of these deals always try to do is get a bi-directional press release. That is, the press release should include quotes from both parties. This release has no quotes from MS. That is significant. It appears vmware merely came in as an ordinary customer and probably paid a big NRE plus revenue share just to bundle windoze like any other customer.
Microsoft probably sees VMWare as just another OEM. I mean... look at it! They, Microsoft, probably would prefer that if you were to purchase VMWare, you'd have to purchase a copy of Windows with it or do without. I, for one, have an old licensed copy of Win95 that would do just fine thank you very much! I see no reason to buy another copy everytime I buy a new machine - virtual or otherwise.
I will consider VMWare a product that is recomendable by me until such time as you can't buy it without purchasing another copy of Windows.
I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to purchase VMWare.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
If you ordered the CD version of VMWare for Windows NT/2000 1.0, you got a second CD with a copy of SuSE 6.1 preinstalled on a disk image.
It was rather nice. I'd always wanted to try SuSE out, but never had the time. This was so easy and the image ran under my copy of VMWare for Linux as well.
"And what exactly do they lose by that?"
What they lose is they legitimize a platform that they often tell people is "not up to the job" and "not robust enough". Plus they help pave the way to loosen their death grip on the market. If I were an IT manager, i'd look at this and think. Hmm maybe I really can replace windows on the desktop, get a lot more stable environment but not have to give up all those bloody applications that i paid through the nose for.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
It's a nice solution for what it is, but it's not going to put a full Windows box on your desktop.
Pretty much doubt it. Though I'm starting to come under the persuasion that Linux is a great server OS but not the best of desktop OS's. When I'm at home running Linux it feels almost like running NT Server for a workstation. I'm of the opinion that we need Linux as the server and something like BeOS for the desktop. I would definately prefer an OSS desktop though. I came across AtheOS the other day. It looks designwise similar to BeOS and it is GPL. Unfortunately I couldn't try it out b/c my video card isn't supported. Hardware support is still a bit lacking.
In Republican America phones tap you.
VMware has been a boon to me. Not only can I run win98 (slowly), but I get to experiment with FreeBSD 3.1 and Solaris 2.6. I had trouble installing BOTH of these OS's on naked hardware. It's nice to finally get a chance to use them.
Of course, OS/2 didn't like vmware AT ALL. I tried to get win3.1 loaded, but I lost the last disk!! Probably not that big a deal.
I will be able to try out other linux distro's as well. VMware is a great tool. Now, I need more HD space...
Not quite true - OS/2 guest support for VMware is now available as 'experimental', i.e. unlikely to work that well but should do something. See their website for details, probably the Support section.
The pre-installed images would be delivered as virtual disk files, i.e. they could only ever be run from under VMware. Hence it would be quite easy to get the install to work reliably (after all, NT works very well on the VMware virtual hardware).
Exactly - I suspect VMware did quite a bit of testing to find out exactly which hardware ran NT, Win98 and other OSs with high stability, then worked out which hardware was easy to emulate, and chose the intersection for their VM spec.
:1, leaving :0 as the main Linux+X display), you could make it easy to toggle into a full-screen Windows session. However, you would lose Linux/open source brownie points big time :)
Of course, the corollary for this is that if you buy an AMD PCnet NIC, SB16, and so on, it should be ultra stable at running NT...
I wouldn't really recommend NT+VMware+Linux as an elegant solution for reliable applications, but if there's an app that runs only on Windows, it's not a bad approach.
For a dedicated 'Windows' workstation, you could even run VMware instead of a window manager, in full screen mode, so the system appears to boot 'right into Windows'. If you ran this on another X display (e.g.
One other datapoint - I had problems getting Active Directory to install on Win2000 RC2 native (repeatedly locked up the machine completely), so I re-installed onto a virtual disk within VMware. And of course, Active Directory ran just fine (if a little slowly, Win2000 is heavier on the machine at least compared to NT, when running on VMware).
YMMV of course...
It's a DirectX issue, NT has a very old version. You might want to try running Win2000 or Win98 in a VM. However, the VMware emulated hardware is quite basic - e.g. SB16 sound - so you might still have problems.
:)
VMware is not really intended for playing games at the moment - stick to dual booting until it gets better, or buy Linux games
I wonder what the perfomance of a MAME running on Windows 98 VM running inside of Vmware running on Windows NT running inside of Vmware running on Redhat running inside of Connectixes Virtual PC running on a Mac G4/450 would be?
Aside from MAME, it'd be interesting to run some standard benchmark, or nearly standard, like Bytemark or SPEC (if someone with the $$$ for SPEC was interested) to see how much the CPU bogs down with each layer of emulation. Theoretically, if VMWare just passes x86 instructions to the processor, each additional instance should only suffer a small bit, rather than getting completely mangled.
Alternatively, one could run slackware inside of debian inside of openlinux inside of redhat inside of turbo linux... yikes!
While this is both a great move for VMWare and potentially a great new product for consumers, I have my doubts about how well a "one size fits all" preinstall can work on all machines.
This should be fine for MS-DOS 98, but IIRC on an NT system some of the low level system stuff has to match between the real machine and the virtual machine (e.g. the HAL). I wonder if VMWare intends to have different images for different configurations... This could be a real pain for the user.
Of course, I've met some of the guys who work on this and I have faith in their ability to work it out.
/* The beatings will continue until morale improves. */
As long as VMWare is still selling a version with no operating system (and it appears they intend to continue doing so) I see no reason to complain about a "tax" on the Windows-bundled versions.
To me this just seems like an even better tool for those IT admins who want to start deploying other operating systems in their organizations.
/* The beatings will continue until morale improves. */
Oh come on, it is no such thing. It wouldn't surprise me at all if VMWare started including a linux distro for all the people using VMWare for Windows, so that they could run linux in a box without having to go download a distro over a phone line. (Actually, that's not a bad idea at all. And it'd cost them next to nothing.) Would that make linux the inferior operating system?
Microsoft cares about one thing: selling copies of their software.
:)
If they can sell Windows, Office, and add-ons to people running these under VMware, it's no different than selling Windows, Office, and add-ons to people running these on actual x86 boxes.
The problem for Microsoft comes about when people move from a Windows-only box to running Windows under VMware to not running Windows at all. But historically, they've been better at creating good applications than creating good operating systems.
If they can reduce the operating system problem to an application level (more features) without having to worry about reliability (hey, just reboot or restart VMware), that's good for them.
'Course, you could argue they already do this...
------------------
"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - Major Mike Shearer, UK
Umm, excuse me? They are going to package windows as a client OS inside their *linux* product. Why install windows inside windows? They've had their windows product a long while and already have (IIRC) a deal with Redhat to package Redhat with vmware, so that NT users can install linux under vmware, this just turns it around, to sell pre-capsulated windows with vmware for linux
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
You must first admit that there is a problem.
This seems to show that Microsoft is beginning to admit that it is in denail about it's inferior products.
After the admission you must discover what you are in denial about.
Microsoft now must identify which products are inferior. (IMHO every single one of them except freecell)
After discovering your areas of denial you must fix them.
For Microsoft I think this is impossible. Once a project hits a certian point you must scrap it. Kinda like a nuclear explosion. Once the Plutonium or Uranium starts to FIZZ you can't stop it.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
At US$300 plus, they could OEM Win9x in there and hardly notice. I was all set to buy a copy when I thought it was $99 but it ain't worth three times that per seat.
Besides which, I'm still having fits with making the networking work on the eval copy.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
A good point. I'm trying to get rid of Windows, but it would be nice to have the option to buy a bundle so that I can mostly run Linux and use VMWare to run the Windows-only games that I have.
...
Like The Sims
Will in Seattle
The key word here is "offer." If you so desire, you can get the "Ready To Run" version of VMWare with an image of the version of Windows of your choice, for a price.
:)
Sounds good to me. Then you don't have to make a boot floppy, FDISK and format your imaginary partition, sit through the installation which goes even slower than normal since it's running in VMware... And it gives me a good reason to get a completely legitimate windows license.
> You can pay $200 for an upgrade copy of W2k, wow.
If you buy a motherboard & CPU you can get Windows 2000 Pro OEM, the full package, not merely an upgrade, for $135. I just did last week, and it arrived yesterday.
I haven't installed it yet, but I must say, the CD is beautiful! They put a "holographic" image on it. If it were a Pokemon card, it would be worth $100 easy. My SGI/Debian CD looks positively dowdy in comparison. So even if the OS is unusably bad, which isn't very likely, I feel I will have gotten my money's worth.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
Is it really a bad thing that Micros~1 is acknowledging that their product should be run with VMWare? I run Windows in VMWare for one reason.. I can run linux ALL THE TIME and just boot up Windows when and if I need it (about once a month in my case) without rebooting my system. I think this is a victory for the people who want to migrate off Windows onto linux (like myself). It allows us to run all our linux stuff and occasionally run those few Windows apps that we can't live without until they're ported.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
Well, Since Linux companies are plummeting in value, and companies who deal with linux are realizing that there is no money to be made with it, this is the natural evolution. VMWare has got to sell itself as a MICROSOFT
compatible product, that lets you run linux, not the other way around. IBM is getting out of Redhat, and, as Redhat goes, so goes linux. Once Dell dumps linux (soon), Linux will be regulated back as a Fringe OS.. Then you know
how the Mac/BeOS people feel.
Is there any evidence that dell is going to drop linux support in the near future? I would like so hard evidence for this one.
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
If you buy OS/2 you're already paying for a copy of Windows, since IBM pays Microsoft a royalty on most copies of OS/2 sold (Not OS/2 for Windows but I don't think you can find that anymore.)
So if you buy vmware to run OS/2 (Assuming that's possible) you'll most likely be paying Microsoft 3 times for Windows -- one for the pre-load on your machine, one for VMware and one for OS/2.
Microsoft must think that's amusing.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I use vmware.I'm a web developer and I spend a lot of time testing my pages in different browsers. I used to have a bunch of machines with different configs. win95/3.x browsers, win98 4.0 browsers, soon win2k/5.0 browsers, and a 3.1 machine with others. Now, I have two machines linux with 3 vmware 'windows' an a native Win box. (drivers are not the same for color checking in vmware). I love the fact that I can test different browsers on one machine. Besides the virtual networking is really cool.
-- Andy
* "Uncle this droid is malfunctioning" -- Luke Skywalker
Can't be a tax, must be a fine, because, A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
O.K., so you eliminate the pain of the Windows install. To me that's only the beginning of the pain, reguardless of. I wonder if it also eliminates the pain of reinstalling?
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
17) Now I want to overclock this bad boy 18) Yes, but can I run Beowulf on that? 19) Taco sux
Oops, sorry. My mouse was sticking and I double clicked the Submit button.
kwsNI
Isn't using Windows enough of a tax?
Office is where their money comes from anyway.
Don't forget Asheron's Call.
kwsNI
If you have the commercial version... mount the cd... locate install.exe... and change to that directory.
type: wine -display localhost:0 -winver win95 install.exe
choose 'no' to install directx, other defaults are generally acceptable.
It only works in linux in 256 640x480.
To play: cd to the install directory and '
wine -display localhost:0 -winver win95 -depth 8 \ > -geom 640x480 Starcraft.exe
(it assumes your windows partion is mounted as /c) I don't have the game, so I havn't had a chance to try it, poor poor pitiful me
---
Now I would like to know if they have sign a deal with some Linux corps (RedHat, Suse, Debian ...) or *BSD groups to distribute their distros with VMWare for NT.
Maybe this new deal keep them from distributing another OS ???
--- Bouh !!! ---
Pipe-dreams aside, I really wonder why M$ does so poorly at a (semi-) solved problem when they have an essentially infinite amount of money and (AFAIK) talent. Maybe Gates', "They're users, they won't care" attitude spreads through the intranet there. Or maybe there really is a god.
Or maybe Gates hacks on the release code every now and then, and the last guy who changed his code was never heard from again.
I can see that this is good for Vmware as it solves some potential worries about M$ attacking them through licensing schemes that only allow windoze to be run on actual hardware. I guess this is good for VMware users because it might mean that windoze runs better on VMware and better supports the virtual machine. But what I don't get is why this is good for M$, what do they gain? What they lose is that they are helping people make the break to a more stable platform and relegating windoze to be simply an application launcher and runtime environment.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Maybe this is just Microsoft's way of fixing bugs in the Windoze operating systems? I can see it now - Microsoft Win2001 installs Linux, VMWare, and their OS. OS runs on VMWare, with the setting tricked out so it cannot corrupt itself into uselessness, and viola! It will be at least as stable as Windows 3.1 (I remember those days - it crashed often, but I never had to reinstall the OS).
Wouldn't that be a hoot? The system could also be "journaled" through VMWare so that the OS from before the last five software installs was accessable. Then you could "undo" a software install that fsck'd up the DLLs for other programs.
Hey, this could work....(Just my luck, trying to be funny and now I'm sitting here thinking seriously about it!).
P.S. I know VMWare does not do all that now. (Just to head off the knuckleheads that flame^H^H^H^H^Hreply without "getting" the humor).
This caught my eye early this morning, and my first reaction was, "Are they going to raise the price of VMWare?" There's already a "Windows tax" on new PC's, is there going to be one on VMWare?
I have to wonder if this is the first step of Micro$oft's plan to move into Linux territory. Why port Office to Linux, if they can keep all the Windows-to-Linux converts using Office? Office is where their money comes from anyway.
I treat this in the same way that I treated the annoucement of Micro$oft's investment in Apple -- partly for the PR, partly to make it seem like they are playing nice in the business field, and partly to see if this can be a profitable outlet for Office and their other tools.
darren
Cthulhu for President!
(darren)
And that's a good sign.
The cake is a pie
This is a good idea, but I'm just curious if this means they'll bundle more pre-installed OS images in the future. You know, like a pre-configured Solaris VM, or even another Linux distro that's already set up for a particular purpose. That would be pretty cool.
Then I got to thinking... I wonder if there's any clause in the deal that prohibits VMWare from bundling a "ready-to-run" image of another OS down the road?
And if so, would it even apply to a bundled Linux config?
-CausticPuppy "Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know
I know this is a offtopic, but there isn't really a place to tell it, so I'm putting it here,
IT'S HEMOS'S BIRTHDAY TODAY!!!!!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY HEMOS!!!!
Besides, why would a natural reaction to good news for a successful product that many power users use make people "angry". Do the story posters have to be so anti-MS?
/. reaction to the merest insinuation that someone may be running Windows without a large-caliber weapon held to their head by a jack-booted MStormtrooper.
I'm guessing the poster is referring to the inevitable knee-jerk fizzing-at-the-mouth
I am sure there would be a market for compressed images of multiple operating systems. Imagine for $10 getting a variety pack that included compressed VMWare images of the *BSDs, Solaris 8, several distributions of Linux, EROS, and BeOS?
Very handy for someone who wants to play around, or for a starting place for testing...
Cheers,
Ben
My usual seat in the cluetrain is at A HREF="http://pub4.ezboard.com/biwethey.ht
The press release said that this is optional. I know that this will be good for those people that wish to keep all their licensing P's and Q's in a row. Some of my systems came with Win98 preinstalled, so running them with vmware isn't a problem. Other of my systems didn't, and I had to go out and buy an extra copy of win98. If I had the option to purchase direct from vmware, it would save me a trip.
The only down side I can see to this is if, in the future, the purchase doesn't become optional.
Actually you are quite close to the truth - Windows NT on top of VMware on Linux never, ever BSODs, whereas a similar NT-only system at work crashes every few weeks (happened today), while my NT laptop used to crash all the time when I used it a lot.
VMware's website has a case study of a law firm who installed Linux and VMware in order to run Windows with fewer crashes - so this is not just my experience...
One useful feature in VMware 2.0 is the 'suspend to disk' feature (like some laptops but no OS APM or ACPI support required). Currently you can only suspend to disk as part of suspending the VM.
However, it would be possible to save the Windows or other OS state to disk in an identical way every 5 minutes or so (the save to disk is quite fast if you have enough memory as it goes to Linux buffer cache). This would mean you could recover from any Windows/other crash, no matter how bad, back to your state as of N minutes ago.
This is similar to some Windows products that recover your state, but is much more likely to be bullet proof since it's done through the VM mechanism.
It would also be useful when testing out bleeding edge Linux kernels, of course...
Why should we be angry about this? Microsoft is conceding that people run other operating systems, and that their product fits well in a window. By endorsing a product that puts theirs in a window, they admit that you might make other choices for your underlying system. Essentially, this is an admission of an inferior product - people can now get the Windows functionality without the penalties of actually running windows.
And once we get people to run Windows in a Window, it becomes easier to open people up to completely different alternatives w/o legacy support.
Besides, why would a natural reaction to good news for a successful product that many power users use make people "angry". Do the story posters have to be so anti-MS?
This is a summary of all the comments at level 1 and below, so that everyone browsing at +2 can get an abstract.
1.) M$ is evil.
2.) MicroShaft will never win.
3.) This program sucks. Release it under the GPL.
4.) Hot grits!
5.) The GPL sucks. Use a BSD-style license instead.
6.) This is not news. We had this running years ago on my old system using a packaged version of and a box of .
7.) Natalie Portman! Hot Grits!
8.) Slashdot sucks now. I remember when the stories where written in C and posted in binary, so you had to disassemble before you could read.
9.) 3y3 0wN j00r b0x!
10.) This is old news. Macs have had this for years.
11.) Damn linux heads! You just hate MS b/c you are jealous. MS Roolz! By the way, can someone teach me how to make a "boot disk"?
12.) This is old news. This was invented at Xerox-PARC.
13.) Too bad Amazon already has a patent!
14.) I hate Jon Katz.
15.) This is old news. This was invented by von Neumann and Turing in 1943. Read Cryptonomicon.
16.) Hot grits! In my pants!