Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

re: Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

cro — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:35:43 GMT

@Bill Conlon

Doesn't it make much more sense to run windows in a virtual machine on a linux system?

Maybe, but as a Windows developper I'm very happy to have Linux on a virtual machine to compile and test the kernel of our application.

...I moved to linux because it is 10 times more stable, secure and faster ..

Maybe, but Vista on my machine is stable, secure and very fast. And IMO nothing come close to Visual Studio on Linux. Why would I run Windows in a VM if I use Windows 99.99% of the times ?

re: Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

asutin — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 02:24:25 GMT

Windows is going back to where it started...ground zero! lnx rocks!

re: Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

Bill C — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:41:14 GMT

I notice you didn't post my response to your comments... never mind, I can easily copy and paste this garbage elsewhere, and sign your name to it. I really, honestly find it utterly unbelievable that you people actually believe the propaganda that you spew. Besides, too many people see through the recent OSCON 'presentations'.

Now, why not answer my original question? and be honest...

Doesn't it make much more sense to run windows in a virtual machine on a linux system?

re: Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

falde — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:07:51 GMT

@Bill Conlon:

I would say to little but not to late. Se for example how office sales grew this year partially as a result of progress made in Wine. Its not a Microsoft project but still they benefit from it.

As we can see windows is down on about 90% on the desktop market and decreasing. This is something mainly caused by Microsoft themselves. Windows did not lose market share to MacOS or Linux. Windows lost market share because the *nix market is growing and Microsoft has decided to stay out of it. The wine project shows that making Windows run on top of Linux or MacOS is fully possible.

The Wine project has written a clone of Windows that can run various Windows applications. Crossover office is a commercial version of that clone that can run applications like Microsoft office. Cedega is a commercial clone of DirectX that together with wine can run a lot of Windows games.

Crossover Linux Professional costs $69.95 + $35 yearly renewal. If they can charge that much for a Windows clone for linux that only run a fraction of all Windows application, then what can Microsoft charge for a "Windows for Linux" port of something that has 100% compatibility with Windows NT and Windows 9X? What do you think ppl would use? Wine or the real deal? I know what I would do, I would buy a copy as soon as it was available anywhere.

re: Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

Bill Conlon — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 01:26:29 GMT

Why run linux in a virtual machine? Doesn't it make much more sense to run windows in a virtual machine on a linux system? But then again, why bother with windows at all? Since the average user doesn't know up from down, how will they ever figure it all out? As a former die hard windows man, I moved to linux because it is 10 times more stable, secure and faster than a windows server running similar apps (LAMPP/XAMPP for example). One 'nice' thing about windows as a server platform is... ummm, I'll get back to you on that. Good luck brown nosing the open source community. Too little, too late.

Linux Virtual Machine additions 2.0 .

James O'Neill's blog — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:43:52 GMT

I had to check the URL for Port 25 in the last post (is it technet ... or MSDN ? its http://port25.TECHNET.com

Aggiornate le Virtual Machine Additions per Linux

Blog Team TechNet Italia — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:52:45 GMT

Come segnalato da Port25 , sono disponibili le Virtual Machine Additions aggiornate per sistemi Linux

hubab » Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0

hubab » Virtual Machine Additions for Linux 2.0 — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:17:42 GMT

PingBack from http://hubab.cn/?p=446