Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 2nd Jan 2008 20:14 UTC, submitted by WillM
"Anyone who has installed Linux on Virtual PC/Virtual Server knows that while yes, Linux is supported on these platforms, and yes, it does run well after getting it setup - installation can be a downright pain. It is for this reason that I take great pride in the fact that installing Linux on the Hyper-V beta release is a breeze."
Thread beginning with comment 294112
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-08-18
RE[3]: Whats New Here?
by Flatland_Spider on Thu 3rd Jan 2008 15:40
in reply to "RE[2]: Whats New Here?"
Member since:2006-09-01
Linux was never crippled. The problem was in the application code, or lack of code in this case.
The VirtualPC guys didn't implement 24-bit resolutions as it was more difficult to implement then 16 and 32-bit modes. Most Linux GUIs default to 24-bit; consequently X11 dies horribly when it is loaded.
http://blogs.msdn.com/virtual_pc_guy/archive/2005/05/09/415814.aspx
It was possible to get Linux running, it just required editing xorg.conf.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-08-18
I must agree. What's new here? That Linux can be installed in a virtualized environment? No shit sherlock, that's what virtualization is all about.
This whole article can be shortened to "Fedora can be installed in Hyper-V without any problems at all" without losing any important information.
I guess the real news is that someone at Microsoft wrote an article about Linux that isn't full of FUD?