Novell and Intel Corporation today announced the availability of paravirtualized network and block device drivers that will allow Windows 2000/2003/XP to run unmodified in Xen on SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10 from Novell, operating on Intel-based server platforms featuring Intel Virtualization Technology.
boot windows on XEN. Why do you need paravirtualized drivers if you are running on hardware enabled virtualization?
Why do you need paravirtualized drivers if you are running on hardware enabled virtualization?
Performance with emulated I/O devices is terrible, so paravirtual I/O is the way to go.
Performance with emulated I/O devices is terrible, so paravirtual I/O is the way to go.
I agree.
NetWare 6.5 SP7(OES2 NetWare) will run in a paravirtualized environment. Novell said its performance is within reasonable comparison to bare metal NetWare. It’s the only real solution for shops needing to stretch their dollars with their “legacy” systems, especially in the case of NetWare where most hardware vendors have already dropped support.
Yes i know paravirtualized devices will give better performance by avoiding all the unnecessary interrupts that happens with emulation.
But my question was actually: Why do you need paravirtualized devices to boot “unmodified” windows, you could boot unmodified windows without them as long as you have hardware assisted virtualization.
So i think the article incorrectly states:
availability of paravirtualized network and block device drivers that will allow Windows 2000/2003/XP to run unmodified in Xen on SUSE Linux
Edited 2007-02-12 22:12
They’re mixing things up. The Novell/Intel thing is about I/O and network drivers. But Microsoft/XenSource are doing a modified version of Vista Server which will in fact run unmodified on Xen.
The same thing is possible with any AMD or Intel CPU with Virtualization support under XEN.
Any Linux or FreeBSD 7 in the next few months will fit for that, what is so special about suse?
OK. So given that Novell’s CEO and CTO have been screaming from the rafters that the deal with Microsoft was about interoperability and virtualisation, exactly how much input did Microsoft have in this?
Oh, and given that we know this has been coming, is possible with VT or Pacifica, and is available on Linux everywhere, exactly what are Suse and Novell bringing to the table here that is so special?
Marketing.
MS’s involvement is nothing. This was working working in Xen before the Novell/MS agreement and the same coming to paravirtualization was inevitable anyways.
Its interesting that its Windows 2000/2003/XP only. Obviously its not because of technical issues but the restricted license of several of the Vista versions.
Isn’t Microsoft the Windows vendor? Shouldn’t they be involved in getting Windows to run virtualized (I accept that they have almost no work to do when running on VT-equipped processors, but that’s not what the propaganda^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmarketing is saying.