VirtualPC 2004 Versus VMWare 4.5? 250
BackNBlack writes "Ars Technica has an interesting comparison shootout between Microsoft's VirtualPC 2004 and VMWare Workstation 4.5. Has VirtualPC improved since Microsoft bought it from Connectix? It looks as though VMWare is really the choice of those who can afford it. I'm also a little surprised that Microsoft is not as compatible as it could be, given the competition."
Features (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Features (Score:3, Informative)
When Microsoft bought out Connectix, it was a good deal. Microsoft, IMO, made it better. I read at one point that you could not install Linux on Microsoft's product, I did and it worked. I am using M$'s product and it is faster th
Re:Features (Score:2)
Re:Features (Score:2)
It probably will continue to work for a while, too... Let me tell you about a case where Microsoft was "strategically incompetent".
Word 6 (and the rest of Office) for Mac was total garbage. Running a PC emulator on the Mac and use the Win version of Office was literally as fast -- and more stable.
This is also the point when i lost all trust in the computer media. The Mac press didn't give t
Re:Features (Score:2)
Was the trivial distinction that unclear?!
OK. I maybe should have written:
"The only articles in the computer press that was upset about the quality and speed of that Office version were the columnists -- they had contracts that said that they could write what they wanted. This was when I became a total cynic regarding the computer media's integrity."
Clear
Re:Features (Score:3, Insightful)
VPC is all eye-candy. This review was very poor - the bias of the author was clear from the start.
Re:Features (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Features (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Features (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, once you set the priority on VPC properly it's pretty close to the same performance as VMWare. The most important differences are as follows:
1. Memory support goes to VPC. VPC supports 4GB of RAM in the host machine that can all be assigned to virtual machines (but you have to keep enough free for the host machine to run, of course). VMWare can onl
VMware runs on linux (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:VMware runs on linux (Score:3, Interesting)
I develop a commercial web based application that runs on Linux. I have used VMWare daily for 3 years so that I can test on several Windows platforms without having multiple machines or a kvm at my desk. I just ctrl-tab to another desktop and there is Windows XP or 2000 or 98 or whatever else I am running at the time.
Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:2, Interesting)
They're going to wait for Longhorn, though, as being able to run other operating systems from within Windows would be a major coup for them. There'd be no reason for people to install over it...People interested in trying other operating systems will simply install inside the VM, and most probably won't get around to wiping off the host OS.
On the other hand, if Microsoft software becomes tied to the hardware ti
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Not only that, but they can run previous versions of Windows -- or at least some of the sub-systems -- under Longhorn, thereby allowing backwards compatibility without having to design it directly into Longhorn's own APIs. (Like Apple did when they went to OS X, I believe).
They could also the technology for sandboxing "untrusted" applications and isolate them from the main system.
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:4, Informative)
Just to clarify, what Apple did was make these available:
1) A complete API set called Cocoa, derived from NeXTStep (which GNUStep is also based on)
2) Another complete API called Carbon, derived from the classic Mac OS Toolbox with some things taken out (e.g. stuff that directly touches the hardware) and some new things added in
3) CarbonLib for classic Mac OS, which is the new things added as mentioned above. Carbon applications can, in theory, run completely natively on either Mac OS X or Mac OS 9 with CarbonLib.
4) Classic is an emulation environment that runs on Mac OS X and boots Mac OS 9 inside the emulator. It's integrated into the OS so it doesn't run inside a window (except while booting), things like drag&drop between native and emulated apps works, and the Mac OS 9 Finder doesn't run. Any classic Mac OS apps that aren't Carbon-compatible, and don't try to touch the hardware too much, should work fine inside Classic, because it's really a hacked up Mac OS 9.
Owning VirtualPC would allow Microsoft to implement an emulation layer similar to Classic on Mac OS X. To make it appear seamless to the user would require quite a bit of hacking, of course.
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Integrating the connectix product into Windows would mean the death of VMWare, which is IMO a much more superior product.
Its about choice. Its about avoiding vendor lock-in.
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:3, Insightful)
No. You could still use VMWare to run Windows on Linux, or other x86 OSes on Linux.
Also, is the belief that Windows will integrate VirtualPC basically as is into their OS? I doubt that. I can picture them making it into a compatibility layer that allows muliple OSes to run on some level, but I doubt it would intentionally be noticeable, and they may try to control it to the point that everything still looks like it's an X
Re:Why not integrate it into Windows ? (Score:2)
I think it is highly likely if not intensely probable that Microsoft will eventually use a virtualization technology as a core component of a server product. I do not think it is entirely unlikely that they might implement some part of it as some portion of even a home version of Windows at some point. If it became the basis of a core windows subsystem, which is a buzzword for being hooked into basically every major library pretty tightly, which in itself is so nearly a buzzword as to defy logical examinat
VMWare + Xinerama (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:VMWare + Xinerama (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, as the previous poster said, once you've installed the VMWare Tools, you don't need to press and release Ctrl+Alt in order to change the VMWare window focus; you can seemlessly move yo
Re:VMWare + Xinerama (Score:2)
Something very similar here. I have a Linux Laptop with dual-head setup in X. I use KDE.
The most recent VMWare (4.x) works very nicely in Fedora Core 1, and has tabs for VMs. With 1.5 GB of RAM in the laptop, I can run 3-4 VMs simultaneously, and switch between them with the ease of tabs in Moz on the host OS.
It's easy, fast, stable, and secure. What's not to lik
I use both... VMWare is superior (Score:5, Informative)
VMWare (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Windows 2000
2. SuSe Linux 8.0
3. Solaris 9 for x86
And my real OS is SuSE Linux 8.0. With that configuration in my laptop I can go anywhere with the major operating systems that my company has to support.
John.
My personal review (Score:4, Informative)
that, my friend (Score:2)
Neither are that great (Score:4, Insightful)
I would love to see a new competitor in this market.
Re:Neither are that great (Score:3)
I would love see Bochs [sourceforge.net] get to a point where it can seriously challenge these products. Waiting for VMWare to fix some stupid bug is very very aggravating. Virtual PC's are too much of a PITA in my experience.
Re:Neither are that great (Score:2)
What I would really like to see... (Score:3, Interesting)
I run VMWare on a linux box so I can have access to the dreaded windows apps. What I would really like to see is something akin to Exceed, where X windows come up on my Windows desktop as Windows windows. In other words, free the Windows windows from the VMWare container and let them roam free on my linux desktop. Sort of like wine, but more stable.
(Heh... let's see how many times you can use "windows" in one sentence!)
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:5, Interesting)
C:\CYGWIN\usr\X11R6\bin\run.exe XWin.exe -multiwindow -clipboard
This runs the X server in a rootless mode that does not require a window manager (Windows is your window manager - this instructs the X server to in turn instruct windows to draw decorations around your X client windows) and which performs clipboard integration. There are some other switches you can set, see man XWin for more information. In particular people with multiple displays will want to set another switch to support that, and there is also a switch to specify that all clipboard contents should be 8 bit (no unicode support.) It's not the fastest nor the best* X server out there, but it certainly does the job. If you are going to be running X clients locally, which you probably will if you install cygwin, you will want to add "DISPLAY=localhost:0" to your environment.
* Actually, cygwin's X server might have recently become the best X server around. It uses directdraw to draw windows, it properly handles the clipboard now which X-Win32 still can't seem to get right after an update they explicitly claimed would solve my clipboard problem, and it uses standard X tools like xhost for management.
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:2)
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:2)
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:2)
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:2)
Sometimes, confusion is good.
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:2)
Re:What I would really like to see... (Score:2)
Win4Lin is dead, so what are the Linux options? (Score:4, Interesting)
Win4Lin is no longer for sale. I base this on the fact that I wrote to them two months ago to ask about an educational discount so that I could buy a copy for my kids to use to play Reader Rabbit. A week later, I got a trouble ticket notification but it said that I have to be a registered user to access it. I've since written to support@netraverse.com and Cc:'ed sales@ and education@ as recently as July 19 but have still received to reply whatsoever. In other words, Netraverse is no longer accepting solicitations to buy their product, so I'm writing them off as dead (and at this point I would refuse to buy from them anyway).
So, are there any Free or reasonably-priced emulators that can get, say, a Windows 98 image running at a speed useful for office-type applications on a gigahertz class system? If not, I may bite the bullet and buy Vmware, but my budget is really hoping for something cheaper.
Re:Win4Lin is dead, so what are the Linux options? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Win4Lin is dead, so what are the Linux options? (Score:2, Informative)
What the hell are you talking about??? What's wrong with the BUY link on this [netraverse.com] page? It's $89 bucks, you can't even get the educational version of VMWare for that price. Beisdes, they're rolling out support for W2K this fall without resorting to CPU intensive hardware emulation.
Anyhow, Bochs [sourceforge.net] is your only "free" option to get W98 running. I don't know what the performance will be like, I've never used it.
Re:Win4Lin is dead, so what are the Linux options? (Score:2)
Absolutely so. On their site they specifically list a way to ask about educational discounts, so it's not like I was inventing a reason to pay less than everyone else.
Beyond that, though, I'm sure they have to have a rather tiny market. I'm sure that Sun could afford quite a few missed sales of this size, but I can't imagine that Netraverse can.
Finally, if my boss found out that I ignored a sales inquiry - any sales inquiry -
No soup for you (Score:2)
Lots of companies would ignore similar requests, or at best send a polite refusal.
Re:No soup for you (Score:2)
Re:Win4Lin is dead, so what are the Linux options? (Score:2)
VirtualPC does support ISOs (Score:4, Informative)
I've used both products a good deal, mostly for the purpose of beta testing operating systems and development software. I've not noticed any serious speed differences. VMWare is most definitely more configurable. However I get VirtualPC 2004 for "free" with my MSDN Universal subscription so I can't really beat that.
It should also be noted that while VMWare does run on Linux, VirtualPC runs on Macintosh. It is still supported, although a hardware difference causes it to fail on G5 CPUs because these CPUs do not permit little-endian mode. A new version will be out shortly to accomodate.
compatible with Windows is all MS really cares for (Score:5, Interesting)
So, why would Microsoft care about anything but how this works on Windows and targetted apps? They don't. IMHO.
LoB
Inside the Bochs? (Score:3, Interesting)
-theGreater.
Re:Inside the Bochs? (Score:5, Informative)
Also, configuring bochs is a major pain in the ass. I have a 2.6 kernel and (I misremember some details but) I tried to use the method recommended for 2.6, had all appropriate support compiled in as far as I could tell, and it still wouldn't work, but the method recommended for 2.4 worked fine. Bochs may fit some needs, but anyone willing to look at virtual pc is surely not someone who will be using bochs.
Re:Inside the Bochs? (Score:3, Interesting)
But for running windows, and windows apps under Linux on a daily basis it is not your best bet. Bochs is too slow and will probably always be too slow given the attitude I see from folks on their mailing list. They say the focus is on accuracy over usability. But their other problem is they are stuck under the weight of an implementation with
Re:Inside the Bochs? (Score:2)
This makes Bochs slow -- not nearly as usable as VMWare -- but useful for producing an environment for debugging low-level code.
You wouldn't just install Bochs to run software (well, maybe if you wanted an old DOS machine where speed isn't an issue).
This is pretty straightforward... (Score:3, Insightful)
Use in Tech Suppport? (Score:2)
Anyone created something like that using this (or other) products?
Re:Use in Tech Suppport? (Score:3, Informative)
You want Microsoft Virtual Server (Score:3, Informative)
This would let you do what you suggest.
Personally, i love virtual server, and i do all of my development and test work inside of virtual server images. Our product has an atrocious number of pre-relased platform requirements and rebuildi
Re:Use in Tech Suppport? (Score:2)
VirtualPC is Slow (Score:3, Interesting)
My shock is in how badly that Sierra games run in DOS 6.22. I'm about a quarter of the way through KQ4 (I just got the damned golden bridle and delivered the unicorn, only to be sent off to get the golden goose from the ogre), and it's tough to even walk around. Rosella tiptoes along at one step every few seconds and then hauls ass across half the screen before slowing down again. I'm going to downgrade to DOS 5 and see if that makes any difference. Still, the fact that Virtual PC cannot properly emulate a decade-old DOS box is pretty pathetic.
I'm going to get another 256 or 512MB of RAM and see if that makes a difference.
-Waldo Jaquith
Re:VirtualPC is Slow (Score:3, Informative)
I suggest if you're t
Re:VirtualPC is Slow (Score:2)
also, i've experienced better speeds with windows 2k.
Virtual PC is good software (Score:2, Informative)
This guy [kernelthread.com] installed every operating system out there on his Mac OS X using Virtual PC. His website includes screen shots of each OS, plus what he had to do to get it working. I would like to see a public archive of OS images people can download and try
Surprised? (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft....not compatable.... as it should be?
And you're surprised you say?
Personal experience w.r.t games (Score:4, Interesting)
Installing Operating Systems is faster on Virtual PC than in Vmware.
Surprisingly Windows XP Professional was the slowest install I had in VPC.
I have successfully installed FreeBSD, Mandrake 10.0 (KDE), Red Hat, Fedora on Virtual PC & VMWare with full networking support.
All my old LucasArts games (the primary use of emulation for me) work with Virtual PC.
I had terrible luck with VmWare w.r.t. running games.
Wait a second.... (Score:5, Insightful)
IIRC, VirtualPC is essentially an emulator. VMWare is actually a virtualization layer that only emulates the hardware interfaces, but the non-privileged application code can run directly on the CPU like it would "natively".
This by itself should explain the speed differences, as well as why VMWare requires x86 hardware to run Windows, while VirtualPC can run on a Mac (which would be impossible given VMWare's design).
I'm surprised that no one is mentioning this.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wait a second.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Both these products use virtualization on x86 - look at the benchmarks!
I use VMWARE heavly and have nothing but good to say about it. Does exactly what it says it will.
I've yet to find any software it won't run.
Misinformation fixed (Score:5, Informative)
Both products allow you to modify the virtual hardware (adding/removing ports, drives, images etc) after installation. Both products have undoable disks and various forms of networking (host only, share real NIC etc).
The last Connectix version of VPC had VNC access to your guests which was really neat. Microsoft removed that for VPC 2004 on "security" grounds. Technically that is true (VNC is an unecrypted protocol) but I suspect they would have removed it for marketing reasons anyway.
VPC does have a restriction that access to the host from the guest has to be done from kernel mode in the guest. That means for example that the Additions (VPC speak) / Tools (VMWare speak) have to be loaded into the OS in the guest. This prevents random user space programs in the guest from getting host access. I don't know if VMWare does something similar or not. It is however something to consider if untrusted software will be running in your guest.
The 2.6 kernel used in some distros doesn't work on VPC 2004 due to some self modifying code allegedly used in conjunction with the X server. Of course the VPC folks claim it is a Linux problem and the Linux folks say it is a VPC problem. Just remember that Linux is not a supported guest for VPC even though it usually works and MS haven't done anything (yet) to prevent it.
I have never had a response ever to a support issue raised with VMWare. I have had way more compatibility issues with VMWare. For example I have a bootcd that works on every real machine (I have tried over 10) and in VPC but fails in VMWare. With VPC I haven't had to raise support issues since it just works. There is a Microsoft newsgroup for VPC that works well.
Fundamentally both products work well. VPC is simpler and cheaper and does what it does well. VMWare is larger and more complicated and has lots more knobs for fine tuning and is also available for a Linux host.
We can thank MS for buying VPC as it resulted in VMWare dropping their price by almost 40%.
Though not entirely on-topic... (Score:3, Interesting)
If you want to run Windows XP in a virtual machine, appearantly you are expected to buy two copies of it because of the product activation.
Does this seem a little unreasonable to anyone else?
Re:Though not entirely on-topic... (Score:2)
Yes, but... with VMWare, your hardware is virtual. Perhaps the person doing the first install had to do the product activation, but as long as you don't hork about with the ram allocated to the VM it can be passed from person to person without *ever* dealing with that crap again. Never having to re-activate is not the same as being licensed to use it, however...
Re:Though not entirely on-topic... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've changed RAM sizes and updated VMWare drivers - never had it kick of an activation event. Not disagreeing with you about two activation minimum (one host, one guest), just not had any activation issues swapping VM images and tuning sizes to fit whatever workstation I hack my part into a demo/etc. I've fiddled with settings quite a bit too - going from workstation to laptop and back again - so in practice it has been
Re:Though not entirely on-topic... (Score:2, Informative)
ESX (Score:4, Interesting)
The only thing that has been a problem so far is getting the VMWare client utils installed if the virtual OS is running the 2.6.x kernel.
We have both at our dev shop... (Score:2, Interesting)
However, I am of the opinion that Microsoft bought VPC just to kill the project. They DO NOT want this technology out in wide distribution, easy for anyone to set up in 5 minutes because it calls into question their licensing model (e.g. I have 1 processor, 1 user, 10 copies of windows 2000 running, why should I pay 10x licensing?).
VMware all the way for me! (Score:3, Informative)
VirtualPC seems to dislike Windows Updates in my Windows 2000 SP4. Sometimes blue screens after updating and required reboots [google.com] and updates failing to install [google.com].
Also, VMware can do a lot more OS' than VirtualPC!
DOS? (Score:2)
Re:DOS? (Score:2)
Mac users (Score:2)
People run Vmware to run alternative operating systems on their pc's.
There is a difference in markets. I think virtualpc can be used only on a pc but I do not know of anyone who uses it on that platform. I am sure their are exceptions but this is just what I observed.
Host OS (Score:2)
If that's the case, the comparison is over as far as I'm concerned.
I have use for something that can run Windows under Linux, but not the other way around.
In the END they Picked Virtual PC... (Score:2)
Its better supported (they update several times a year)
It Supports NON-MS OS'es offically.
Its more robust.
Has a Linux Version which actually cuts the requirements by 25%-50% over the windows version.
what happened to "enthusiast" pricing? (Score:3, Interesting)
VMWare, bring back enthusiast pricing!
Re:what happened to "enthusiast" pricing? (Score:2, Interesting)
Not quite (Score:3, Informative)
To keep things simple I settled on KnopMyth as a quick way to install MythTV. I had the opposite experience of the reviewer: Microsoft Virtual PC installed KnopMyth seamlessly, while VMWare 4.5 crashed when the image tried to boot (KnopMyth is based on a hybrid Debian distro, and I used the straight Linux optimization on VMWare).
It turns out that neither VMWare or Virtual PC were able to access my Hauppauge card, so I had to figure out another option, but I figured I'd add my $.02 to the issue.
Also, VirtualPC actually seemed a bit more zippy to me during the post phase, although I never got KnopMyth installed on it so I didn't really run any benchmarks.
VPC & G5 (Score:2)
VMWare on Mac via Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
For this reason alone makes VMWare worth it over VirtualPC. Remote X + VMWare + Linux rocks!
bochs? (Score:2)
Not only that.. (Score:2)
Re:OS/2 pwns :-P (Score:2)
Re:GSX Server (Score:2)
This is probably possible with vmware too, though I haven't tried it...
Re:GSX Server (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:VMware will sell your email address to spammers (Score:3, Informative)
I've had an account/e-mail with VMware since they were in beta (many, many years ago) and I've never once gotten spam on that account (not a single spam message other than annoucements from VMware).
Must be from somewhere else.
Re:VMware will sell your email address to spammers (Score:2, Interesting)
I use a unique email address with every company I give my email address to. A few months ago, I started get spam sent to the address I only used with VMWare.
When I mailed the previously helpful sales rep at VMWare about it, I got no response. It seems to me that if they hadn't sold my address, the sales rep would have denied it, especially since I was in the middle of purchasing some licenses.
Re:Slashdot slashdotted? (Score:4, Informative)
There are some bug reports about it on the slashcode bugtracker [sourceforge.net], report 1002074 and 1002056. It appears that it primarily affects people using Firefox and Mozilla, while Microsoft IE works fine (conspiracy?).
Re:Slashdot slashdotted? (Score:2)
Re:M$ Support (Score:2)
Re:VirtualPC has been bought by MS (Score:2)
MS shouldn't have to support other OS's, but to me, it would be in their best interests to maximize compatibility. But then I'm not evil so my opinions might be skewed.
Re:VirtualPC has been bought by MS (Score:2)
Why would Microsoft want to miss the oppotunity to sell licenses for Windows and Windows Specific programs, Project, Visio etc on Macs?
Heat and electricity? (Score:2)
Any available? (Score:2)
Re:MS Activation is the trick (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Different (Score:2)
Re:this is kinda stupid (Score:2)
Re:I'm sure YMMV, but... (Score:2)
I've also used it for serial console netboot testing when I didn't have any real machines to experiment with (yay VMware PXE boo