|
-
October 2nd, 2007, 09:16 PM
#11
Disk I/O is the biggest hit because the VM is technically just a bunch of files. The vmx file (VM config) gets loaded into memory. The rest then is access the vmdk (virtual disk) and memory/CPU usage. The fight for resources is where you'll see slowdowns. I'd go to an even faster option if possible (10,000 RPMs). And where possible, avoid shared SCSI (exception is ESX and the use of Fibre Channel/SAN).
-
October 2nd, 2007, 11:18 PM
#12
i plan to leave my licensed winxp home
In which case you plan to break the law, I am surprised that no-one has pointed this out to you.
Your "licenced copy" allows you to install and run the software as a single instance at any one time, on a single machine.
In the case of OEM loaded editions such as companies like Toshiba generally supply, that is also restricted to the original machine as well.
Unfortunately, some misguided people seem to think that VM applications are a golden opportunity to steal the IP of software providers............ they aren't.
Whilst it is true that many members of this site have access to as many instances of software as they require, due to corporate or institutional licencing, this is not the case for private individuals, as your original post suggests that you are?
The rules are simple: if you want to run another instance either on a VM, your original machine or another machine; you need another licence.
i think vmmachines will become really a mainstream
with quad cores and all that power .. besides gaming.. it will be good for vmwaring
Yeah, I remember people saying that sort of thing about Napster 
If you find this difficult to understand, just look at Micro$oft's latest stellar performances:
1. The total confusion over licencing arrangements for Vista prior to its launch.
2. WGA 
I think that you will see where they are coming from?
-
October 3rd, 2007, 06:40 PM
#13
-
October 3rd, 2007, 07:41 PM
#14
Beee,
i think i will be vmwaring linux distros and playing
Thank you for understanding the "political correctness" requirements of the situation and responding appropriately 
Yes, it is an area that I have very mixed personal feelings over. If I have a VM with an OS on it, it is surely to test different environments, compatibilities and so on? On the other hand, there are security considerations, as you have quite rightly observed. What I will say with a firm conviction is that I have NEVER encountered circumstances where the temptation to use VM ware would have caused me to purchase another copy (to remain strictly legal). I would just have done without?
People who do use VM to effect, tend to be students or professionals, so are covered by some sort of institutional or corporate licence. This is not a problem for them, but it can be very restrictive for younger people or "amateurs", who don't have access to those resources?
In my heart of hearts, I cannot believe that software vendors actually lose any serious revenue over this. The "big boys" have the licences, and those running pirate software have already avoided paying them? AND the pirates would "lose out" equally in their sales?
Actually, I could put forward a reasonable argument that banning VM ware multiple installations drives people into the hands of the software pirates, who really cost the vendors serious revenue. The answer would be to ensure that only valid copies would work in a VM environment? That way you make a valid copy seem much more worth the money?
Anyway, it is what it says.......... a VM.......... it needs space, and every 'doze partition should have 25% available space I would suggest that you look at one of those large external HDD units?
If it is XP, I would say that you need 1Gb of RAM for your games/entertainment. Development would be happy with 512Mb, along with office and browsing. I actually don't think that you need as many instances as you are suggesting.
Maybe look at more partitioning of like hardware requiring activities under the same VM installation? Just give them folders where required?
Also, what would actually be competing for resources? No point in allocating RAM to something that will only use it twice a week when you boot to it?
Cheers,
Similar Threads
-
By MrLinus in forum Security News
Replies: 7
Last Post: August 30th, 2007, 05:06 PM
-
By J_K9 in forum Other Tutorials Forum
Replies: 0
Last Post: December 19th, 2005, 11:55 AM
-
By angel_pwnt_ya in forum General Computer Discussions
Replies: 1
Last Post: May 8th, 2005, 02:58 PM
-
By sweet_angel in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Replies: 11
Last Post: September 28th, 2002, 02:59 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|