- This topic has 8 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
-
any one?
install hyper-v role in server and activate it in your bios
Why would VMWare be better for Windows apps than running a Hyper-V installation of a Windows OS?
I’m still doing my research on this topic, but from what I’ve gathered so far:
1) Hyper-V is awesome for running servers-inside-of-servers, especially for people who are learning rather than pros. I can test out new server roles inside of a Hyper-V VM, without having to worry about corrupting my precious main installation.
2) Hyper-V is worthless for Linux, unless you are using it for SLES or something. In the latter case, Hyper-V is a godsend, as it allows me to use Linux services for server roles that I’m not as comfortable with the Windows equivalent (I’ve got lots of experience with Apache, less with IIS).
That said, Hyper-V royally screwed my networking, to the point where it was unusable and I had to disable the role. A bit of poking around on the web has turned up a plethora of similar complaints, with ‘idunnomustbedoingsomethingwrong’ being MS’s only response. Very annoying.
Bottom line so far:
– Know your needs before you choose any solution.
– VMWare is best for guest OS’s like Linux, when you want to run certain apps that don’t have any equivalent on Windows (I just wish I could do OS/X, so that I could use Papers 🙁 )
– For games… don’t use either, and run as admin on your native box.
– Hyper-V WILL blow VMware out of the water, performance-wise, as the technology matures. MS is investing heavily in virtualization, and you can bet that they’ll apply the same business strategy in this department as they have everywhere else: HVVM’s will be able to exploit Windows internals, while MS will make it increasingly difficult for other companies to do the same, creating a performance chasm between the different options.** Edit: this was intended for the other HV vs VMWare thread. Sorry guys.
Why would VMWare be better for Windows apps than running a Hyper-V installation of a Windows OS?
I’m still doing my research on this topic, but from what I’ve gathered so far:
1) Hyper-V is awesome for running servers-inside-of-servers, especially for people who are learning rather than pros. I can test out new server roles inside of a Hyper-V VM, without having to worry about corrupting my precious main installation.
2) Hyper-V is worthless for Linux, unless you are using it for SLES or something. In the latter case, Hyper-V is a godsend, as it allows me to use Linux services for server roles that I’m not as comfortable with the Windows equivalent (I’ve got lots of experience with Apache, less with IIS).
That said, Hyper-V royally screwed my networking, to the point where it was unusable and I had to disable the role. A bit of poking around on the web has turned up a plethora of similar complaints, with ‘idunnomustbedoingsomethingwrong’ being MS’s only response. Very annoying.
Bottom line so far:
– Know your needs before you choose any solution.
– VMWare is best for guest OS’s like Linux, when you want to run certain apps that don’t have any equivalent on Windows (I just wish I could do OS/X, so that I could use Papers 🙁 )
– For games… don’t use either, and run as admin on your native box.
– Hyper-V WILL blow VMware out of the water, performance-wise, as the technology matures. MS is investing heavily in virtualization, and you can bet that they’ll apply the same business strategy in this department as they have everywhere else: HVVM’s will be able to exploit Windows internals, while MS will make it increasingly difficult for other companies to do the same, creating a performance chasm between the different options.** Edit: this was intended for the other HV vs VMWare thread. Sorry guys.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
