[linux-elitists] Virtualization

Mike MacCana mmaccana@redhat.com
Tue Feb 22 18:12:41 PST 2005


J. Paul Reed wrote:

>On 23 Feb 2005 at 11:10:25, Mike MacCana arranged the bits on my disk to say:
>
>  
>
>>I don't think that's cheating. I think it's not doing a hack that's
>>necessary for Windows, but unnecessary for Linux.
>>
>>But that's obviously just a matter of perspective.
>>    
>>
>
>It is, and I can appreciate the other side.
>
>I'm just saying, the state of the world today is: if it doesn't run [on]
>Windows, it's less useful. Xen doesn't run Windows.
>
>So, especially from a commercial perspective, it's less useful. I don't
>agree with that state of the world, but it is what it is. 
>
>And when you look at what Xen did to get decent performance on Windows,
>they "cheated" in that they did something that was completely useless for
>anyone else, because Microsoft['s license] won't allow them to distribute
>that work (and now, has a commercial reason for ensuring that Xen doesn't
>succeed).
>
>  
>
>>Paul, you might wanna check out QEmu's accelerator module (if you don't
>>mind something that's not OSS, but will be if someone pays its coder some
>>money already). Its runs Windows at decent speed.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't have a problem with it not being OSS, but VMware runs Windows at
>decent speed, and it does things QEmu can't. Like persistent disk modes.
>  
>
QEmu supports copy on write disk images, which give you exactly this 
feature.
 

>And I didn't really appreciate the technology (ESX especially) until I
>started using it daily.
>  
>
Certainly, the infrastructure work its puts around the VM - like ESX - 
makes VMWare quite compelling for the server case.

In my opinion, though, VMWare workstation, on Linux, is living on 
borrowed time.

Mike



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list