VMware Releases Server 1.0

Free download... sweet! by ScottLindner · 2006-07-12 09:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've never used VMware but have heard lots of great things from many people. I always wondered what the business model was for VMWare. Who uses it? Why would they pay for it? Things like that.

Are there any legit home uses for VMware on a regular basis?

--
Slashdot.. where people join together in deliberate ignorance.

Re:Free download... sweet! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-07-12 09:18 · Score: 1, Interesting

> If you use VMotion you can have redundant servers, so if your main VMWare server box fails, the 2nd backup VMWare server automatically picks up where the other left off, you dont even notice that the virtual machine switched servers - it works that good.

VMWare is cool, but VMotion doesn't do this. It allows live "migration" of running boxes, but not fault tolerance as you are suggesting. i.e. If one box fails, you are still screwed and all running sessions will be lost. However, if you can plan ahead and know you need to take the box down, you can move people while it is running and then take it down.

Fault tolerance would be really cool, but doubt this is possible. Essentially you'd need to have both boxes running the sessions simutaneously and perfectly synchronized at all times so if one fails the user's display/input can be redirected to the working box from the failing one.

I suppose with background snapshots, they could take a snapshot every 30 seconds or so and the other machine can pick up from that snapshot so you would lose at most 30 seconds of work. However, if the machine is connecting to outside machines like a transacting database this could be a big problem since the software might repeat database operations that shouldn't be repeated.
Re:Free download... sweet! by dwhittington · 2006-07-12 09:26 · Score: 3, Interesting

As an IT security consultant, VMware server is be a great platform for testing or demoing applications wthout tainting my host OS with some code I'll just want to blow away laster. If you are involved in IT at all, I would recommend evaluating the technology.

Server virtualization is a hot market, Microsoft is ramping up their existing product line to compete with some of VMware's new features. Part of that roadmap is a good 2-3 years out. This is technology is far from a fad.

-David

PS: Legit home uses for VMware... my vote is a virtual honeynet.
Re:Free download... sweet! by spun · 2006-07-12 10:09 · Score: 3, Interesting

We use it here in the Child, Youth, and Family Development department in New Mexico. We have an IBM BladeCenter where the blades run VMware ESX with Virtual Center, and most VMs run SuSE Linux. We are transitioning from HPUX and AIX to an all Linux backend. We like that combo because it makes it easy to clone and move machines as need be. When a server becomes overloaded, we can buy another blade and move some VMs over onto it with ease.

--
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Re:Free download... sweet! by timeOday · 2006-07-12 11:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

I use it for exactly that... I develop under linux, and have XP and Office under VMWare. For that matter, I've developed under cygwin on a Windows guest on a Linux host.
I have also used VMWare for some applications designed to "own" the computer they run on... these apps require certain OS versions, certain user accounts, filesystem structure, etc. etc.
We have also used VMWare to run Windows software on a Linux cluster. I wasn't closely involved, but as I understand it, numerical codes (which are mainly CPU bound and don't make many syscalls) pay little performance penalty for running under VMWare.
In fact, I'm only about 75% happy with VMWare going "free as in beer," since the pricing wasn't really burdensome and now I'm worried about VMWare's future. It would be great if an OSS alternative truly existed, but for the level of functinality and finish of VMWare, I don't think anything else is close.
Re:Free download... sweet! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-07-12 12:08 · Score: 1, Interesting

Coolest thing that I personally like about the VMServer is the ability to be able to boot up a SuSE 10.1 based Xen Dom0. I have yet to create DomUs though, nonetheless, it sure beats having to dedicate two boxes to play around with Xen. I'm running VMWare Server 1.0 in SuSE 10.1, which then is running a SuSE 10.1 VM booted up as a Dom0! Now how geeky-cool is that? :D

Virtual PC by xilet · 2006-07-12 09:05 · Score: 4, Interesting

I wonder if there is any concidence between this and Virtual PC 04/07 being released free. Hrmm...

With this out, why would I need vmplayer? by RLiegh · 2006-07-12 09:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

With this, apparently I can create new machines, make snapshots and suspend machines to disk. Doesn't making this a free download make vmplayer redundant?

Re:With this out, why would I need vmplayer? by gbjbaanb · 2006-07-12 09:32 · Score: 5, Interesting

I think VMware realise that there are a lot of free virtualisation products out there, and so they had a choice of entering the free market or slowly dying out - something like Novell, Corel, Netscape etc.

Once we all get used to virtualisation, then the big companies that will start using this and see the benefits will buy the big, expensive ESX Server product.. and the support, and the tools and add-ons. For the rest of us, we get free toys so everyone's happy.

Xen is a different product, its a virtualisation tool, but it allows you to split 1 OS into several running 'instances'. VMWare is a 'wrapper' that allows you to run several different OSes side by side. Which one you'd go for depends on your requirements.
Re:With this out, why would I need vmplayer? by A+Bookworm · 2006-07-12 09:54 · Score: 2, Interesting

-----
Xen is a different product, its a virtualisation tool, but it allows you to split 1 OS into several running 'instances'. VMWare is a 'wrapper' that allows you to run several different OSes side by side. Which one you'd go for depends on your requirements.
-----

I believe that you are incorrect there, especially about Xen.

VMWare Workstation and VMWare Server are host/guest based virtualiztion products. When you boot the computer it launches an OS (Windows, Linux, whatever), then VMWare Server runs on that OS. VMWare Server then sets up environments for guest OSs to run. Because of this layered setup (Host OS | VMWare Server | Guest OS) your guest OSs tend to be slower.

Xen, however, is a "hypervisor" type virtualiztion product, somewhat similar to VMWare Server ESX. You don't boot to Linux, you boot to Xen (or ESX). Xen (or ESX) then boots each OS in its own environment (Xen calls them "domains"). Each OS runs on its own, with Xen (or ESX) handling resource allocation/sharing/conflicts. Because of this lower-level approach, the OSs tend to run faster, depending on how hard you're taxing each one.

Currently, however, Xen only works with a slightly modified kernel. Therefore, you can't properly run Windows inside a Xen domain (developers have done it, to prove it can be done, but they can't share their work because that would violate the Windows EULA). With the virtualization technologies coming from Intel and AMD, however, Xen will be able to run unmodified Windows kernels in Xen domains.
Re:With this out, why would I need vmplayer? by Pedersen · 2006-07-12 09:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

I do have to wonder what VMware is hoping to get out of this... Basically they are only selling the support and management products and completely opening up the VM end of their business. Is this to stop the mass migration to XEN?

Actually, they're not even close to opening up the vm portion of their business. They are opening a specific segment of their business, and, in turn, llikely to gain much more business. So, let's check out their listing of free, shall we?

VMWare Player Somebody sends you a group of files which make up a virtual machine. Now, you can run the stuff in that virtual machine. However, you may not change the settings. Don't like how much RAM the VM uses? Too bad. Oh, you may also not create new virtual machines, just run ones that have been made for you. VMWare Server This, basically, replaces VMWare GSX Server. Major difference? It also runs on Linux now (GSX only ran on Windows). You can create VMs, but you may not limit them in certain ways. For comparison, in ESX, you may limit the amount of CPU usage, and in the amount of disk bandwidth usage, etc. Server (and GSX) you are not able to do this. There are other limitations. Major benefits of VMWare Server? You can run multiple guest OSes as services, needing no monitor/mouse/keyboard to make them work. This is wonderful for remote/headless installs.
So, what's left for them? More than you would think. First, for features only available under VMWare ESX/Virtual Infrastructure

VMWare HA Automatically move VMs from crashed hosts to still running hosts in seconds. Reboot crashed VMs automatically. etc. VMWare DRS Move VMs from high load to low load hosts with no downtime VMotion Oh yes, you can move VMs around from server to server without any downtime. How sweet is that?
And now, VMWare Workstation

Creation You can create new virtual machines, something which VMWare Player does not allow you to do. Configuration Change Change memory, add virtual disks, etc. Something which VMWare Player denies you as well. Virtual Teams How about a whole cluster of virtual machines which can start and run, and work together, as one unit, instead of just a bunch of individual virtual machines which have to be manually started/stopped? Perfect for demo'ing complex apps on multiple (x86) platforms
So, what do they get out of it? They get to tease you with the good stuff. And when you're ready for it, you'll come back and buy it. Because it really is that good. And no, I don't work for them. I'm just a very happy customer.

--

GPL made simple: What was my stuff is now our stuff. If you improve our stuff, please keep it our stuff.

What's the license agreement? by Anonymous Coward · 2006-07-12 09:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

I went to download server beta a few days ago to try it, and AFTER filling in my contact details I got the licence terms that said no commercial use under any circumstances. This was a shame since I wanted to run a couple of windows-ony apps under Linux on my work laptop to save dual-booting.

Have they changed those conditions? I still don't see terms before filling out the contact info, and don't feel like filling them in again only to feel cheated again.

This comes at a good time by dargaud · 2006-07-12 09:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

Today I diched Windows from my laptop and was right in the process of installing Kubuntu. Unfortunately there are a few Windows apps I still need and that have postponed my use of Linux on the desktop for a long time although I've been using it on servers for quite a while. I keep hearing of those emulator/virtualizers/whatnots but can't really figure out what is the difference between them: VMware, Win4Lin, Crossover, Wine... Do you install Windows after or before Linux ? How do you install Windows apps ? Etc... Is there a comparision of them somewhere (I've searched in the past) ?

--
Non-Linux Penguins ?

The business uses of VMware are obvious... by mmell · 2006-07-12 09:21 · Score: 5, Interesting

and have been stated elsewhere in this thread.

What seems to be missing is good reasons for using a VM at home. I can think of several:

1) Seems a lot easier than dual-booting (for those of us with SO's who aren't comfortable with Linux)

2) Makes a good home lab for what is rapidly becoming another standard tool of the IT trade

3) Hardware speeds are approaching the level where (except for gaming and certain compute-intensive applications) most home machines are quite powerful enough to run multiple partitions without the user even noticing a slowdown.

4) Shiney!

5) Free (as in beer)!

Feel free to add to this list - it's a long way from being complete.

Incidentally, I wonder if Windows Vista will run under VM? I'm guessing yes (as anything else would mean that Microsoft is cutting their own throat).

Re:The business uses of VMware are obvious... by oni · 2006-07-12 10:19 · Score: 2, Interesting

Seems a lot easier than dual-booting (for those of us with SO's who aren't comfortable with Linux)

and it's a lot more powerful than that too. The real power of a VM imho is that you set up a machine seperately from the hardware. I like to have a little web server on my home network. I bet most slashdotters have a web server at home. I can't even remember how many times I've installed debian and configured apache. The thing is, I'm all the time taking my little server apart, taking parts out of it for my main computer or whatever. Each time I have to reinstall the OS.

No more. Now I have a VM with a web server set up just the way I like it. I have an image of that VM burned off on DVD. I can set up a brand new machine, install a bare bones OS in an hour or so, then I install VMWare and copy the image of my server, boot it up the image and I'm in business. The old config still works.

So basically I now have an abstraction layer between the server and the hardware. My example was simplified but the principle is sound.

Oh Damn by blackirish · 2006-07-12 10:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

Goddamnit, I just finished testing and upgraded my servers to Beta 3 yesterday.

I have to say though, as the IT manager in a medium sized business with a limited (whose isn't?) IT budget, VMware has made my life MUCH easier.

I can buy capable dual-core servers for $500, use VMware to host several platforms on each and have budget leftover for spare hardware. I can offer more services to users, because I don't need to purchase additional hardware or request a budget increase. Security is improved, because VMware lets me separate services which should not be running on the same platform. And reliability is improved and downtime is reduced. If hardware fails, I can restore the virtual machines from backups onto spare hardware already running VMware. With the static nature of most of my servers, logs and databases are on an NFS, I can usually restore full functionality within an hour.

And you know what the best part is? I don't have to sweet talk the CFO for more money when budget time comes around again. And strangely enough, the higher ups see the better bang for the buck and my budget is increasing.

Re:Oh Damn by tweek · 2006-07-12 10:56 · Score: 2, Interesting

I feel you on all those points. I would also profer that if you need to eek out the extra performance 5k per CPU is not a bad deal for Infrastructure 3. If you can work with a reseller, you might be able to get lower.

The only downside I see to ESX 3 is they STILL won't support SATA.

--
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"

A few observations by PingXao · 2006-07-12 11:31 · Score: 3, Interesting

First if you install Windows into a VM from a legit Windows XP CD and try to download any updates the Genuine Windows Advantage test fails. So MS already knows if you're running VMware. I think MS wants you to buy multiple copies of Windows if you're planning to run in a VM as well as on the real silicon.

Second, this is a licensing issue too, one thing I've used it for is for software I use too infrequently to purchase and has a trial period like 30 days or whatever. Create a VM, install XP in to it, and take a snapshot. Then install and run the software. You may, as I often do, only need to run it for a couple of hours and then not again for a couple of months. By then the trial period has expired. Simply restore the VM from the snapshot, re-install the trial software and you're good to go for another session. Unethical? Maybe. Flame away.

Lastly, despite the fact that I occasionally do #2, I mostly use VMware to run Fedora Core for development. I have Apache set up on it with all the bells and whistles and when I'm working on a website I use it as a test server. Runs quite well with 256 MB dedicated to it on my 1 GB main XP system.

Re:Browsing in a sandbox to escape spyware by Kadin2048 · 2006-07-12 13:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

Also, VMWare's support -- I'm told -- for FireWire is limited and/or not present, and USB 2.0 also is pretty poor. I don't know if that means you can't run a VM off of a mounted volume that originates on a Firewire/USB 2.0 device, or that the guest OS just can't "see" the FireWire bus, but you might want to be careful before designing something around VMWare and FireWire or USB 2.0.

--
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."

Re:We moved all our servers to VM ware by Hyperx_Man · 2006-07-12 15:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

I was not involved in the purchasing of hardware, but they are HP boxes, and each one cost close to $20k. Less than 1 year old. Dual processors ( I think a few were quads, but not sure). They actually replaced Compaq servers that cost about that much 5 years ago. I will try to get the exact specs tomorrow.

--
Intelligent Design

20 of 292 comments (clear)