VMWare vs Production Server

[jakeweiq]

VM boy looks like Michael J Fox?

[AndrewDaniele87]

oh noz, image killed production server kid!

[nelsonmanzano1]

Cool Clip

[krimba4]

dude your the only one saying its for porn . so.....maybe you should stop using it for porn you crazy bastard.

[omegatintin]

VMWare Rocks 100.000.000.000.000.000.000 %

[pravicpu]

For simple use VirtualBox is good enough

[kaiomatico]

i think so, too :) the seamless mode for linux is awesome :)

[pravicpu]

sure VMware has more possibilities. For beginners VirtualBox is enough. u r right, I left windows 8 years ago :)

[hean8209]

But.. What happens if the physical server housing three virtual ones go down...

Three flies die in one smack.

Still need backup servers to fall back on.

[drhonk]

VMware has utility to do daily backup using image capture. So if you backup that image capture you can move that image to another physical server and have your virtual server running within minutes.

[amslife]

Mac x86 OSes work in VMware VMs and have for years, but Apple didn't give legal permission to do so, therefor 'Not Supported"

[agungk]

Yeah VMWare is great. But this 'Vmware' looks a little bit malnourished don't you think? :-)

[lyeaple]

thats pretty cool but you should see mac vs pc

[optikool]

OSX not support because of hardware related issues and no driver support. I guess that's what happens when you try to make your platform proprietary. Sorry MAC users... :(

[parahumanoid]

@optikool

No bid deal, there are plenty of hackintosh images for vmware out there. Of course, there are legal issues, but, oh well, I never liked the apple religion anyway, time they felt the punishment for being so closed. I won't shed any tears over this, and for testing I can always harbor a hackintosh vm somewhere (who's gonna check?).

[parahumanoid]

@optikool

Apple allowed for OS X Server virtualization if the physical server is Apple-made and each installation is separately licensed. What a robbery! Now I wonder if there are ESX compatible Apple servers and whether this possibility from Apple implies using ESX as a hypervisor.

[optikool]

If you are running VMware Workstation you could run this on Linux, Windows or Mac (Mac's version called Fusion), these three being the host OS, but for Enterprise Solutions would use ESX, like the ESX 3i which has it's own Host OS based on RHEL and can run Linux and Windows (XP needs additional scsi drivers loaded at install time I believe).

[searchmarked]

Actually optikool, ESX 3i is VMWare's embedded solution and it is not based on RHEL or any other Linux. It is it's own kernel. Regular ESX 3.5 hypervisor is not based on RHEL either. That is a common misconception. The hypervisor is it's own kernel. Linux is used for the console. You do install ESX on the bare metal though.

[optikool]

What gave you the idea it was on a MAC? Was it the music? Most VMware Virtual Machines would be running on blade servers, which I doubt are Mac.

[Ronar2006]

You're right! :D Blade Servers are no Macs....bad idea! :D Blade servers most likely run with VMWare ESX Server, which is a costum-made Linux.

so it is NO mac! :D

[searchmarked]

Ronar2006 please see my reply to optikool. ESX is not Linux. It uses Linux as its console. The hypervisor (this does the virtualization) is its own kernel. Actually ESX 3i doesn't even use the console any longer and fits into about 32MB.

So, ESX is NOT Linux.

[viciousdave119]

Ahh, that was great. It just prooves that vmware on a mac is better than your BIOS crap Windows pcs.