Windows-On-Linux Emulator Shootout 247
securitas writes: "ZDNet has posted a comparative review of 5 Windows-on-Linux emulators from VMware (2), NeTraverse, WinToNet and Wine." The results encountered varied quite a bit -- none of the products are perfect, but it looks like they hit a particularly disappointing time with Wine.
Moral of this story: (Score:4, Insightful)
Really, what's the point of running the emulation if you lose speed and capabilities?
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:3, Insightful)
The point is that you get to run another OS while still having access to your regular OS. I can keep my development enviroment and monitoring tools up and running in Linux, while booting Win2000 in VMware and browse that one webpage that requires a plugin that's not available in Linux (yet). And if you fullscreen Vmware you will NOT notice that you're running inside Vmware since it's feels as fast as the real thing (granted: 1.33GHZ + 512MB DDR
If you need to ask why, it's probably not for you anyway....
-adnans
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
Windows 2000? It comes with a telnet server too.
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:2)
I use VMWare to emulate Windows NT and 9x under Linux so that I can do web development in Linux, reconfigure Apache and MySQL on the fly, and still test my work in the most common browsing environments without having to own a second machine or worry about losing my 'net connection to an off-site box. Would a second or third machine be better? Sometimes. But not when my desk space and/or budget are limited.
(Actually, I only do it this way at work; at home I have four boxes for doing the same thing and much prefer that arrangement. But my employer is too cheap to give me a second, let alone third, box for testing purposes.)
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
VMware GSX Server is an enterprise-level product and is priced accordingly. The electronic distribution, which can be downloaded from VMware's Web site, costs $2,499, and a packaged version including documentation costs about $50 more. VMware's Workstation product, designed for individual users, is available for $299 and offers much of the same functionality
At those prices I think it would be cheaper to buy a second low-end machine.
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:2)
At those prices I think it would be cheaper to buy a second low-end machine.
I'm using version 2.0.2 from their earlier product line: $99, runs Win9x, NT, or 3.x.
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
The Enterprize level product is just that. It's a VM manager for a (I assume) VERY powerful server. Get an eight or sixteen way box a few 32 gigs of RAM or so, and I bet you could serve many copies of any of several OS's to some low end clients that are basically just dumb terminals. Do all your managment from one place. Upgrade Office once, and everybody has the latest version. I don't know that to many businesses would be interested, but I can see some advantages.
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:2)
The user PCs would not actually have anything on them. VmWare runs in X, right? So you setup a large sever able to serve say 24 Windows Virtual Machines (from the article that would require a 6 processor machine, but to ensure good performance, we'll say an eight CPU machine with 16 gigabytes of RAM). Then you setup 24 machines of extremely low power, say Pentium 133s with 16 MB pf RAM, and no hard drive (Maybe a really small one for swap space, but I doubt you'd need it) or really anything except a video card (a decent one for good screen resolution), a NIC, and a CDROM. Make a bootable CDROM with nothing but a Linux install that automatically boots into X, and then opens a Windows VM full screen window from the server. Presto, 24 machines that are all "dumb terminals", but all have a nice familiar Windows interface your users are used to. You can manage everything from the server and the underlying OS. Since the server does all the work of running the OS and software, you can use whatever crap you want for the client machines, as long as they are powerful enough to run a Linux kernal, and X in 1024X768 (with no Window Manager, and only a single "window" open.)
Need to upgrade Office? Do it for each copy of the VM from your desk (or maybe right a script that'll do all of them at once). Same with OS upgrades. User hosed the system? No Problem, copy the data onto some temp space on the underlying server, wipe the VM and make a new one (again this could probably be automated from the underlying OS). Somebody wants to try Linux/BSD/"The latest version of Windows TM", but you don't want to risk your production systems? Install an extra VM for them to play with, and if it doesn't work out, wipe it.
This would, of course, be somewhat more expensive than buying 24 "normal" machines and a server for data and such, but I don't think it would be ALOT more expensive, and it would have some advantages. Like I said before, I don't know how many bussinesses would intersted in something like this, but it is an interesting idea. (Actually it'd make a great setup for a lab, or Internet cafe, where you can't trust the users not to abuse your OS.)
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:2)
I like to work in local coffee shops on my laptop.
Carrying around two laptops and the cable to connect them would be a drag. VMWare lets me do it all on one box, though testing MSIE under VMWare while running piggish Oracle under Linux requires a fair amount of memory (256MB works OK).
Why dual booting is no good (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, I also like to play Civilization II of which I own a windows copy; I don't know if it's available for Linux and in any case I've already paid for the Windows version. I could reboot into Windows and play my game, but that would mean that I wouldn't have any of my applications available, none of my files would be accessible, and none of my cron jobs would get run.
Running CivII in a VMWare box is the best of both worlds. Sure, the graphics are a little sluggish, and the sound is choppy (bug in VMWare for Linux), but it's quite playable and quite stable, and it looks like any old window on my desktop, and I can put it away for a minute and the come back to it if I need to do something else.
And of course VMware offers some cool extras, such as the ability to roll back changes to a virtual hard drive -- this is wonderful for checking out Windows software, as you are guaranteed a quick and easy (1 second, 2 clicks) return path from any installation or upgrade, no matter what it did to your registry and "system" dll's..
The many uses for VMs (Score:3, Insightful)
Using VMWare, I can keep a stable base environment and develop and test code on multiple platforms: various Linux distros, plus multiple Windows flavors in my case.
In addition to that, I can install stuff that I'm evaluating in a virtual OS - including in a virtual Linux running on top of Linux - and if it causes any problems, I haven't affected my base environment.
With VMWare, the state of a virtual machine can be suspend in seconds, and you can shut down the physical machine and come back to exactly where you left off, right down to the state of the Caps Lock key and the mouse cursor. In the middle of some complex development and want to take a break to play a game? Just suspend the VM you're working in, play your game, and resume the VM you want.
I can save multiple configurations of each OS, and keep copies of old configurations to go back to if I need to. It's like having a whole swath of preinstalled partitions, except you don't have to reboot your machine to switch between them, and you can run more than one at the same time.
The only caveat to all of the above is that it needs a lot of memory and disk space to work well - figure at least 64MB per running VM, ideally more; and at least 1-2GB per VM disk image. Good CPU performance doesn't hurt, either. The upside is that these days, this is all pretty cheap. I currently run with 512MB RAM and 2x30GB disks, on a dual CPU box, and the only performance issue I'm ever aware of is a bit of mouse lag.
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:2)
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
My boss doesn't want to pay 20k for a solaris box, and he doesn't want to deal with the hassle that windows has become - Linux (or *BSD, I'm agnostic) will do the job.
From the Linux box, (still in beta in my work shop) they can emulate the windows apps. They *should* be able to X into Solaris and the Solaris apps.
But it is a kludge.
Re:Moral of this story: (Score:1)
I disagree teh most useful scenerio I think is ina help desk env. whereI used to work you ha dot support win98/nt/macos each time we would have to run to a different station to simulate the client problem. what I ended up using was vnc to view my mac but it still required purchasing other machines.
The point is (Score:1)
You can also easily back the things up and recover from crashes -- we use VMWare and the entire win system is just a large file. You can have a 'read-only' system, ie no changes are kept between reboots. This gives you a much more stable environment.
Over the last few years we've had legacy win apps that constantly crash with cc:mail routers the worst. We ran about 25 instances of these on four virtual machines. All we then need do is click on that friendly Power Off / Power On button.
It also lets you put all those crappy win apps that HR and marketing come up with on one box.
One thing I dont get is... (Score:2)
No wonder (Score:1, Insightful)
They're not comparing apples with apples as usual.
Mind you, this is ZD net we're talking about...
Re:No wonder (Score:2)
WINE. (Score:1)
Win2Net but not Citrix Metaframe? (Score:2, Insightful)
And then the left the obvious out. How you can run linux programs on windows with something as sipmle as a terminal emulator or a X server
Re:Win2Net but not Citrix Metaframe? (Score:1)
they review Win2Net and complain about Sticker shock, but don't even look at VNC.
Win2Net might intercept calls at the win32 API layer instead of doing compressed differential screen shots like VNC (might not, i have no idea), but try it, the performance will not be much different.
VNC is free. No sticker shock there.
Tried Win4Lin and VMware... VMware won. (Score:2)
I bought both Win4Lin and VMware Workstation and gave them a try. Win4Lin 3.0 was a nightmare to install -- on a stock RedHat 7.1 box -- and the tech support at Netraverse was less than helpful, even perhaps a little rude. I finally gave up on the GUI installer and dug through the RPMs until I cobbled together my own installation using their undocumented command-line tools. Using Windows 98 SE, Win4Lin is fairly fast and seamless, but some of the windows updates didn't install correctly (among them Internet Explorer 5.5) and VirtualDub did not run at all (I guess it uses DirectX).
VMWare installed easily, though it's a little more clumsy just to use. Once I had Windows running on it, it took VirtualDub and ActiveSync with no problem. Unfortunately, it's slower than Win4Lin in general and the way it "captures" the mouse cursor in X drives me nuts (yes, I have tools installed, but I still have to hit CTRL-ALT-ESC if a dialog box from another app pops up over the VMWare window). In the end, though, VMware seemed like the more solid product with better support, and it ran the apps I needed as well as all Windows updates (including IE 5.5 and DirectX 8).
Yes, I did try Wine for both things, but Wine is such a poorly documented mess at this point... I mean, there are rumors of people getting many things to run correctly, but just try tracking the knowledge down. When you do find it on something like Google groups, the details and DLL/registry fun needed to get specific apps to work with Wine is insane. I think at this point Wine is just a development platform (ala what Corel did with WordPerfect Office for Linux) because it sure isn't useful for anything else (but solitaire).
OK, but which one? (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a real-world problem and I was hoping this article had a possible solution. I want to move my home PCs to Linux where possible, but my 5 year old has lots of Windows games. I recognize that these reviews are targeted to corporations trying to save bucks by using Linux, and for them the bottom line is Word and Excel, but for the majority of
I'm not talking about Monster Truck Madness, I'm talking about Freddie Fish and Winnie the Pooh and Reader Rabbit. How do those fare under these emulators? I'm ready to dig into the configuration settings, create shell scripts, or whatever, so that he never knows he's on Linux -- he logs on and the emulator presents him Windows in full-screen -- but which emulator? Looks like none of them is up to it on our modest (400 MHz Duron) hardware.
Which leads me to the next question (but since this is the first post I doubt many will see, let alone answer): What's the best free/open X Terminal for Windows? If I have to run Windows then at least give me a reasonable way to reach Linux on another box (VNC is nice but the lag time hurts).
Another option is to run Windows and use VMWare to run Linux. This seems like the backward approach, but it could work. Has anyone tried it? Is it worth the trouble, or would dual-boot be better? (it's certainly cheaper, but reboots are annoyingly slow).
The ultimate solution would be to get Linux apps for my boy. Is there any educational/entertainment Linux software for kids? (commercial is OK, I'm not opposed to buying my software).
Thanks to all who answer
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:1)
As for your Xterminal question, let me know
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:1)
Well, XFree86 runs under Cygwin (see http://www.cygwin.com/xfree/). But if you've got lag problems under VNC, I reckon X might not make things better...
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Insightful)
I work doing integrations, and would almost not be able to work without VMWare. We have gigs and gigs of vm's here, already set up. You can use it almost like a quick ghost, only you can have 2, 3, 4 on 1 machine, and don't have to blow away the base machine.
Plus if one goes down, just do like someone said earlier, doubleclick the
If I need to do testing with version x of our product and version y of another product with theirs on linux and ours on winnt4 SP4, it's no problem. Just load up the vms, change the configs, and test away.
Buying copies of VMWare for game playing or to run Office is just rediculous! Talk about wrong tool for the wrong job...
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2)
He has his own P133 Windows box that does Reader Rabbit et al just fine, and when (not if) he destroys it, we won't lose anything critical. When it's dead, we'll replace it with another similarly equipped junkpile cast-off.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:1)
Do you leave him in the car when you go shopping too? Or do you carry him around on a leash and tell him to shut up when he's thirsty and wants some water?
Seriously, embrace his curiousity. This is the only way computers can help children learn, not some bullshit rabbit telling them how to read. If he breaks it, fix it, it's not like it's hard to fix a computer. Who cares if you can't play Half life for an hour out of your day.
In my experience, the one thing that kids always know is when someone is being condescending towards them. Giving them their own junkpile cast-off computer is condescending.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:1)
Anyway, if I had kids, I would give them their own Windows 98 or ME machine which they can learn with. I don't know how old your kids are, but I would have nightmares of them sticking a peanut-butter and jam sandwhich in the CD ROM drive. Sheesh, I barely let my wife use my main computer (the best thing about Windows 2000: Restricted Users!)
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2)
I just dont like to take risks, I think that was his major point and unfortunately most people dont have money to buy bleeding edge computers for the youngsters so they get last weeks hardware.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2)
He doesn't know condescension from condensation, and too bad if he does. I give him his milk in a spill proof plastic cup, and he doesn't touch the Waterford stemware.
Nobody cares if I can't play Half Life/Quake/Doom/WWF Bitchslap, not even me. But I do care if I have to sit up all night rebuilding and restoring disks full of business-critical data.
And when he gets old enough that he can go beyond Reader Rabbit and has outgrown his junker machine, I'll get him a new one with capabilities appropriate for him. He's STILL not going to touch my main machines.
We're the parents, he's the child, and a healthy and happy one at that. We are not peers.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Informative)
Have you ever tried the XFree86 Windows port [cygwin.com] from Cygwin [cygwin.com]? I've used it in the past to get a remote X login on windows 9x and 2000 machines I had to use at the time. And, yes, it's free.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.hobsoft.com/products/x11/x11.html
http://www.hoblink.de
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Informative)
there are several projects to create kid-friendly linux software. a good place to start would be the Debian Jr. project, which aims to create an entire distribution. There are also some simple educational games around, like Tux Typer.
dual-boot (Score:2)
There are plenty of reasons to do what this article is about, but letting your son play games is more easily solved by dual-booting - AND everything'll run faster.
- Arete
Re:dual-boot (Score:2)
After reading the comments here it looks like I'll need two PCs on the 2nd floor, one with Windows for my son, and one with Linux for the 802.11b card.
Meanwhile, I've discovered this site [linuxforkids.org], which encourages me to give him Linux as well as Windows. So I'll run one of the several suggested X-terminals on his PC and host his Linux stuff on another box.
Re:dual-boot - I suspect you're not still reading (Score:2)
But I certainly would recommend 2 boxen for that purpose, anyway. In fact, I would recommend giving him a dual-booting fast (all relative, of course) and leave an older computer as just a router. Much more secure than running a bunch of other junk on a router at all - it should JUST be a router.
For that purpose, I suspect something like a 486dx25 w/ 16 MB of RAM is sufficient. That what I normally end up with in a surplus router...
(go with more ram if you've got it, but it's not essential.) Of course, I'm only pumping DSL with it, so I'm topped at 1.5 if I'm lucky. But the only real downside is the relatively minor power requirements.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2)
LOL! My wife works at Microsoft; I interviewed there (twice). I use Windows 2000, NT4, ME, 98, and 95 just about every day. I have an advance copy of XP I'm going to load on my laptop after Labor Day weekend (know your enemy and all that
Actually, a pure Windows PC is the best option for my son's needs. But for the family's needs I wanted him to run a Linux PC (I didn't get into details, but his PC is on the 2nd floor, and I wanted to use it to host the 802.11b card, which would require Linux on that box, full-time. The only other Linux boxes are in the basement, and my laptop, but the laptop can't act as the 802.11b access point! Don't even think about suggesting Windows is good enough for that application -- I'm not stupid enough to allow anyone in the neighborhood onto our LAN.)
After reading the comments here it looks like I'll need two PCs on the 2nd floor, one with Windows for my son, and one with Linux for the 802.11b card.
Meanwhile, I've discovered this site [linuxforkids.org], which encourages me to give him Linux as well as Windows. So I'll run one of the several suggested X-terminals on his PC and host his Linux stuff on another box.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2)
The computer is a hand-me-down from one of my nephews. He upgraded the motherboard and found the new one wouldn't take all his old cards, and when they were done they had enough left over to make a decent PC, so they offered it to us. I've not yet seen it, but they told me it's a 400MHz Duron. I don't doubt that they got that wrong; maybe it's a K6-2 or something.
Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2)
So I was misinformed and you are right -- it's not a 400MHz Duron.
wine still not prime time (Score:1)
Re:wine still not prime time (Score:2)
I have just finished to test some apps on it today - here's whats going on...
1. Quicktime 5 - it runs, but screen gets black and some flashes and the TCP/IP stack implementation of wine is not complete - so no streaming, but playing sorenson based coded files plays ok..
2. Adobe Page Maker 6.5 (trial version) - runs perfectly.
3. Windows Media 6.4 - plays files and streams, but fail to download & install new codecs.
so, it's progressing..
Enterprise Level (Score:3, Insightful)
Wrong. Apache [apache.org] is an enterprise-level product that is priced accordingly.
VMware GSX Server is an absolute must for any company looking to maintain multiple centralized development environments.
Wrong again. Removing MS Windows from all workstations is an absolute must for any company looking to maintain a decent development environment. Note change in wording: if the environment is centralized and multiple, you only have to maitain the "center" (server), and leaf node configuration is straightforward, right ?
Unfair to Wine? Yes and No (Score:1)
It appears that they were a bit unfair to
wine ( but not really on purpose )
They seemed light hearted enough about it
that I believe the mistake was accidental.
What mistake is this, you might ask?
They tried running Microsoft Applications!
( the exception being Paint Shop Pro
Not only that, but I'm not quite sure what the
snapshot date was on the wine that they used.
I have used Photoshop perfectly in wine.
Photoshop! I can also run Netscape. Just the other day, I got Real to completly work,
which I believe is an indication that they
have winsock2 working.
In the end, what should be added is this:
running apps in wine isn't what you think it is.
Just because wine has been in development for a few years, and doesn't work, doesn't mean it will be a few more years before it works! Chances are that it is a single call ( or family of calls, as DDE and COM are still under developement, afaicr
--Dante
Re:Unfair to Wine? Yes and No (Score:1)
I'd read the article... (Score:1)
Re:I'd read the article... (Score:1)
Use the 'g' key (Score:2)
Just hit the 'g' key a couple times. Toggles "show", "show but don't load", and "don't show/don't load" modes. There's no reason to dig anywhere.
And if you want to try something extra spiffy, hit F8, then hit 'g'. Now type in something and you'll get the Google search results for the term you entered.
-B
Comparing Apples and Oranges (Score:1)
It seems to me that comparing VMWare (and the like) to Wine is like comparing apples and oranges. VMWare actually creates a virtual machine posting BIOS again and thus starting your target platform by the partition you're in. Wine emulates function calls on linux (and libraries, of course) but still runs as the base operating system. How do these even compare?
Ziffed Again (Score:1)
Couldn't they at least have included something like QuickBooks in the app mix? QB capability is one of those real-world things that is keeping several small businesses from moving to Linux. As opposed to Word and Excel, for which there are plenty of worthy replacements.
Citrix Metaframe (Score:1)
Wine and VMWare (Score:1)
Theres nothing better than a quick game of sol.exe straight after installing Wine
Starcraft (Score:1)
I haven't tried any of the others, but I can say that Wine does an excellent job of running Starcraft on Red Hat 7.1. I've played for four hours straight and no crashes!
Now, if I can just get it to work with Wine on FreeBSD!
Re:Starcraft (Score:1)
Excuse me? (Score:1)
Isn't the whole idea of Linux to invent your own stuff; while it might be convenient to emulate and/or convert MS stuff, it's even more convenient (from that point of view) to actually use MS.
I'm not intending to promote MS here. I hate them too, I'm just not knowledgeable enough to use Linux (and frankly, it isn't worth my time to learn). Plus, I wish to evade the modstick.
It seems to me (your average Joe Bloggs) that the way to go is to invent your own (free (and presumably superior)) file formats, and prove them superior through their use! Force goddamn MS to emulate you! And you know it can be done, look at Quicktime... (Or PDF, or MP3, I think...)
You're excused. (Score:2)
As a sometimes web developer Apache and PHP on my Linux box are very handy. But it'd be nice to be able to check my pages in various flavours of IE without multiple PCs.
Re: Excuse me? (Score:1)
Although I still have this feeling that a lot of my programs (and games) won't work under it, I've heard phrases such as 'programming your own drivers' which frankly give me the screaming heebie-jeebies. What's this about?
Anyway, since ATM Apache, GNU, and so forth are just words to me I will have to do some private research before I embark on anything.
Dreamweaver on Linux (Score:1)
Re:Dreamweaver on Linux (Score:1)
Re:Dreamweaver on Linux (Score:1)
- Arcadio
Re:Dreamweaver on Linux (Score:2)
It also manages to write decent (not great) code in the process, in contrast to every other GUI tool I've used.
The currently available HTML editors for Linux, while fine, are NOT the equivalent of Dreamweaver. Sometimes open source is the best tool, sometimes it isn't. In this case, Dreamweaver is easily the best tool.
Re:Dreamweaver on Linux (Score:2)
So which one is faster?? (Score:2)
Saddly, what little mention of speed they had was very vauge statements that certain things were too slow. They did minimal testing on each one, and what they did try wasn't even the same or similar software on the different emulators.
So I'm no closer to knowing if I win4lin, for example, would be overall faster (as they claim) than vmware which I currently own (well, license, but I paid, damnit). I very well may shell out another $79 if something like win4lin is significantly faster. They say it is... but like all software it comes with no warranty and they won't take it back and refund me if it doesn't live up to their promises.
Wouldn't it be great if, say, some magazine were to compare these emulators and publish some useful comparisions?
<rant mode on>
Well, it'll probably be quite a while until we see any real comparison of these emulators, since these ZDnet bastards just cranked out this lame-ass deadline-driven excuse for a review.
This little rant won't solve anything, but at least it makes me feel a bit better. Maybe someone from vmware, netraverse, or menta might read through these comments. The anonymous idiots/authors at zdnet/metagroup certainly aren't, since they seem to care so little about about this topic.
<rant mode off>
Re:So which one is faster?? (Score:3, Informative)
If you want to run your office apps and have Windows 95/98/98SE/ME (not sure about Win ME - anyone?) - then use Win4Lin 3.0
If your app requires even a single call to any DirectX stuff (like full-screen with Direct Draw) - then it won't run on Win4Lin.
Win4Lin run "normal" apps (that doesn't requires DirectX) much faster then VMWare.
Now - if you want to run Windows NT/2000/XP or Another Operating system (Linux) then the only option you have is VMWare - but you'll need lots of memory (which is cheap), and a strong processor. VMWare however - is slower compared to Win4Lin but it runs much more software.
Now - I didn't see they mention it - but if you need to run MULTIPLE VMWare sessions at once, with scripting support (VM1 turns on VM2 to do XYZ and then turns of VM2 etc...) - then you'll need VMWare GSX which got a pretty big price tag - $2500
If you want to run some serious numbers of VM's at once (15,20,30 etc) - then you'll need VMWare ESX - which is an entirly different product (it's bootable VMWare without any hosting OS) - a really strong machine (4 processors minimum), tons of memory (gigabytes), and very fast hard drives and network. You'll get a special console which is Redhat 6.2 + perl scripts to do all the maintaining stuff - and for each user you'll need to install special KVM software (keyboard, video, mouse) - price tag - $11.200 + precentages..
Re:So which one is faster?? (Score:1)
WINE Shouldn't apply... (Score:1)
Wine is not an emulator. (Score:1)
Re:Wine is not an emulator. (Score:1)
VMWare vs Win4Lin vs Raw Windows (Score:1)
Win4Lin (by default) uses the native underlying Linux file system, which is faster than FAT32. It boots Windows faster than a booting Windows on a bare PC on the same hardware. If you've booted windows under Win4Lin recently (so Linux caches the files referenced), and need to restart (say, after installing any damn windows app :-), you can reboot in 10 seconds!
If Windows does blue-screen (which it does far less in Win4Lin than native), there's no scandisk required, as Linux is the one handling the file system access.
I use it on top of SGI's XFS on a laptop, which is even better. I haven't had done an fsck or a scandisk in months :-) Life is good.
There is the odd limitation, and obviously for gaming you'd want to reboot to native Windows. But in general, I don't boot windows natively any more. Oh yeah, it has sound support, too, which I find works quite well. (Seems to me VMWare didn't support sound, although I could be wrong on that point.)
So if you need a pure PC for testing or QA, or want to try different OS's, I heartily recommend VMWare. But for access to Windows apps, Win4Lin I find much better. Oh yeah, you can map any Unix directory to Win4Lin virtual drives, too. Much easier than VMWare's Samba bridging stuff (which I never could get working consistently). Win4Lin is much cheaper, too ($79 vs. $299, or something like that).
Re:VMWare vs Win4Lin vs Raw Windows (Score:1)
But overall, Win4lin is great. Though the VMWare guys also offer a toned-down, Win9x-only, version of VMware that costs about the same as Win4lin. Supposedly this version is more optimized to run Win9x.
- Arcadio
Not just Windows (Score:1)
I'm developing software that needs to run on all of these platforms and the current setup makes debugging easier.
One word of advice for anyone thinking about running VMWare: get plently of memory... especially if you intend running multiple VMs concurrently. The 2GB that I have is rapidly depleted when a few VMs are going.
Two approaches (Score:2)
VMWare Pros:
So there you have it. Problems in one are generally made up in the other. This isn't to say that these programs will have such "Cons" for all time, but this is how it stands now. Ironically, VMWare does a simpler task (emulating x86 instead of emulating Windows directly) and winds up with more compatibility.
For me, I use VMWare to run any necessary Windows applications. I don't play games on my PC at all, so this works perfectly. There is absolutely no reason for me to ever dual boot. I can run IE, Media Player, etc. It all works without a hitch. Granted, VMWare is not free, but $100 wasn't much for me considering I haven't spent much on Linux software anyway.
The only odd-men-out are PC gamers. Damn games! Here's to hoping Loki can pull through.
Re:Two approaches (Score:1)
I beg to differ (Score:2)
As another reply pointed out, OS/2 apparently doesn't run in VMWare. I really can't explain this because I don't use OS/2, but I would attempt to guess that OS/2 does some really wacky things. My PC's setup utility has an option that includes OS/2. It's the only OS-specific option in my entire BIOS menu! Can anyone shed some light on why OS/2 is "special" ?
Anyway, I would classify this as a hardware incompatibility, which is what I mentioned as a VMWare Con. And if OS/2 (or any similar non-working OS for VMWare) didn't exist, you could simply make a Linux bootdisk that crashes if USB is not found and call it an OS. Maybe I shouldn't have been so broad in a statement that could be voided so easily.
How about: VMWare will run anything x86 as long as it obeys VMWare's hardware/bios compatibilities.
It does not run in a self-contained window (whatever that means).
Funny how you should mention you don't know what I mean and yet still disagree with me at the same time. VMWare runs the VM session it its own window. Compared to WINE, this gives the effect of having your Windows applications self-contained in a single window.
DirectX (Score:1)
The only thing I ever use Windows for these days is playing games (Everquest and Jumpgate), so I don't see any point in emulating a non-DX version
MSEULA (Score:2, Funny)
Missed VNC (Score:2)
Re:Missed VNC (Score:2)
With VNC, you are seeing just what is on the "console" of the NT machine...as if you were sitting in front of the monitor. You can have multiple VNC connections to a machine, but only one person controlling it.
Isn't a windows emulator pointless? (Score:2, Interesting)
Over the years alot of great apps such as GiMP, StarOffice, etc.. have come along to keep people like me from going back towards using MS Windows.
I don't understand the point of installing MS Windows to run ontop of linux. Sure - it's fun from a software hacker's point of view - but in all sense it is almost a step in the wrong direction.
I'm not discounting the MS oper sys's - they have their place in the world - but for me I can't see the point. I run Linux as an ALTERNATIVE to running MS Windows...
Could someone please intelligently explain the point to this?
Thanks.
Re:Isn't a windows emulator pointless? (Score:2)
I don't like the crappy IRC clients, the crippled commandline (cygwin is nice but not 100% there and it's kind of "weird" sometimes), the lack of mailbox scriptability (but I like the UI of mail clients on windows), and the $#@!$% file locking semantics I run into whenever I try to delete or move things.
So I like to cvs update files with tortoise, browse around them with one of the quick viewers (like the text file viewer in the resource kit), then do real development work on them with xemacs on the bsd side in vmware. Running bsd under vmware meant not having to worry about whether my cardbus pcmcia ethernet card was supported, or most other hardware for that matter.
This solution lets me test my server scripts on both IIS and apache (I know IIS is a gaping security hole so I only bind it to a local interface), and their output on ie, netscape, mozilla, and konquerer (if only writing HTML to spec was sufficient, *sigh*). And I don't even have to be connected to the network to do it, I do it all from one laptop wherever I am.
That's just my story, I'm sure other people have their own reasons.
Re:No, it's not (Score:1)
"The overwhelming majority of computer users in this world cou;dn't care less about the OS. All they care about is the apps..."
"And please don't make the mistake of assuming that the apps on Linux are good enough. They're not, simply because even the ones do as much as the best of breed Windows apps are different, and therefore require a learning curve, something mainstream users detest. They don't want to learn about computers or OS's or even apps, they just want to do stuff with a computer."
Then why not just run MS Windows if that's the case???
article is unfair to wine (Score:1)
Fallout2 in Linux, without a single file from Microsoft Windows.
I amazed this is possible, and I don't think Wine is "unready", it's already usefull.
PS. and who needs graphical instator ?
Old DOS Stuff as well? (Score:1)
However, I have a vested interest in the old-skool Sierra games (Quest for Glory, etc.) that ran in DOS. I know that there are DOS emulators out there and I even tried really hard to get one to work way back when - but I was wondering if any of these Windows emulators actually worked for programs that ran in DOS mode. It would be interesting to get QFG2 running again, EGA gfx and all
Re:Old DOS Stuff as well? (Score:1)
Why would you want to run DOS programs under Wine, when you have a leaner emulator that does just the job you want? Windows is running these programs in a virtual (emulated) DOS window anyway.
Krishna
On the other hand... (Score:1)
I know I am going to get beaten down by most people on slashdot for this, but this has been itching at me for some time.
It seems the major concern with the average (note: average) home user has with these emulators is if they can run windows games. Instead of even trying to run windows games under linux with the use of an emulator, why don't you just run linux with VMWare in windows 2000, and have true support for all the games you want to play, while keeping whatever linux "stuff" you need. It seems that there is no reason to go to linux just to run your windows games under an emulator, it strikes me as absolutely pointless.
Don't get me wrong here, I can see that a windows emulator for linux would be useful if you are working for a corperation, or your a coder, or have some other real business or purpose with linux, but it seems all the people who just go to linux because thats what everyone is talking about, only to run their windows things are just being plain stupid.
Shouldn't need windows... (Score:2)
I think the term 'Emulator' is slightly misleading for VMWare et al - I understand what, say, a Spectrum emulator is - it runs games written for a Speccie on a completely different system. Surely VMWare, which just runs Windows 'inside' other OSes is doing something different - after all you can run Windows on x86 hardware last time I looked.
counter-strike (Score:1)
wine is the best at what it does (Score:2)
Not only that, but wine is currently the only way to run windows games in Linux fast and reliably. You can use it with OpenGL or Glide, and there is a version of wine maintained by Transgaming (I think it's Transgaming) that has some support for Direct3D.
Currently, I play the following Windows games IN LINUX, which only wine can do.
1. Star Trek Elite Force
2. Half Life - all of them, which is really 3 or 4 games..
3. Big Red Racing
4. Unreal - *which I just started playing natively in Linux using the UT engine
5. Solitare ; )
6. UltraHLE - I beat Wave Racer in Linux running UltraHLE ; ) an emulator running in a reverse implementation of windows, getting 2fsp higher than in windows
7. Deus Ex (which I am going to buy the Linux port of when it's released)
8. one or two more games that I no longer play...
* for anyone else who has done this, the trick to getting saved games working running in the UT engine is very simple, change the path separater in the SavePath to \ instead of
But do any of them run AOL underlinux (Score:1)
Why? Wine is a totally different beast. (Score:1)
In other words, it doesn't make sense comparing emulators to Wine, a development library. This is the same as comparing Allegro, SDL libraries to a SNES emulator.
they still forgot WABI :) (Score:1)
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
Cause some apps only run on Windows and some people have to have Windows for work purposes. Oh yeah... and for games.
Re:Hmmm (Score:1)
Re:Good Point (Score:3, Interesting)
Note: I don't profess that everything below is proven or easily-demonstrated fact. In fact, just to say right out, all of this is my opinion, but I feel my points are practical and easily applicable to many members of the Linux-using community.
"It seems to me that if the Open Source community was half as strong as they profess, there would be ample software that they would *rather* use on Linux
than Windows. "
Exactly.
I use Linux, and I've found good GPL programs that I've even found preferable over Windows programs. You don't hear me complaining about a lack of programs for Linux; the only game I play [besides simple things like mines, sol, same, tetris, and the like] is Quake II, which Linux runs without a hitch.
Now to address some of the points raised...
The most common webpage-reading-problem under UNIX is actually because of the way MS Word converts things to HTML (namely, *incorrectly* -- it does not adhere to the publicized HTML standards.)
And TrueType is actually... (yes, you guessed it) Macintosh technology! (details here) [demon.co.uk] True, the fonts may be from Windows... although there's plenty of free TT fonts out there, and I use those for TT work [which I've done all of... once? hah], not the ones shipped by MS.
I don't dual boot, I don't use emulators, and I do plenty of meaningful work. I use things like AbiWord, LaTeX, vi, PHP, perl, ICON, gcc, Spice and the like to do what I need to do, which includes word processing, network administration, electrical circuit design, and programming in several languages.
Crappy browser? Lynx isn't crappy. It's incapable, sure... but if you want more capabilities, there's a spinoff project that adds all sorts of crazy features to lynx, called links [sourceforge.net] -- it's like IE without graphics.
And if you want the graphics, there's always galeon, Konqueror, Netscape, Mozilla, or Opera...
I haven't gone back to Windows. Maybe that means I'm not an actual member of the community, hah! :)
And I frequently find it's easier to use Linux boot disks to fix DOS and Windows machines, due to the plethora of disk and MBR utilities available for free for Linux that fit easily on a floppy or two along with a few necessary boot files.
Oh yes, and before I forget, I'm not saying any of this to piss anybody off. I just want you to know that Linux works for me. Maybe I *am* an oddball [very likely true ;)] but I *do* use Linux successfully.
Re:Linux serving legacy COM objects? (Score:2)
Can you make inter-VM calls? How about inter-VM DB-driver queries (eg. biz objs in VM1, DB in VM2)?
Yes. Inter-VM calls can be made across the "network" which VMWare sets up. You can host two NT VMs on a Linux box and they can talk to each other quite happily; and other machines on the network can talk to them, too. Each gets its own IP address, etc.
Although it's not COM, in one case I've used VMWare to run MS SQL Server 6.5 on a Linux box, with a Java application server running under native Linux. The performance is better than hosting the database on a separate machine with a 100Mbit connection, and it allows "legacy" databases (or other systems) to be used without dedicating a separate box for the purpose.
Re:Plex86 (Score:2)