A review of VMWare 4.5 appeared at Hernan Di Pietro’s HDP Tools Site including a test of VMWare 4.5 running Windows Server 2003.
VMWare Workstation 4.5 Review
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Anyone know how to make suse 9 work on Vmware 4.0 on WinXP?
VMWare includes Linux drivers that will allow most distributions to work properly.
It really works well and is easy to use.
may be I’m wrong but SUSE 9 support is included only in VMWare 4.5. I don’t think it’ll work from scratch in VMW 4.0.
//may be I’m wrong but SUSE 9 support is included only in VMWare 4.5. I don’t think it’ll work from scratch in VMW 4.0.//
Yep thats my point too. Has anyone gotten it to work on VMWare 4.0?
I’m using VMWare 3 with SuSE 9.0 and it works fine.
I have installed Suse 9.0 on vmware 4.0. You have to add one line to the config file of the 9.0 installation. I can’t remeber the exact details, but search on google, and you will find the info. That is how I did it.
I have vmware 4.5 on my Winxp Host(Has NVIDIA which gives me 1280*960 on host machine) but when I try to get the same resolution on the guest Winxp install, it does not allow meto use same resolution in full screen mode saying that it is too large. It also does not shows any other frequency other than 85 Hz.(It is after installing tools!!!)
Please explain to me how you expect the refresh rate of an application (VMWare) to differ from the refresh rate of the host OS. It doesn’t make any sense. The refresh rate in your guest OS doesn’t make any difference.
Nope doesn’t ..just hangs after yast reboots after successful installation.
How does VM ware work ?
I too was thinking similarly. But my host has 60 Hz while Vmware shows only “one” value 85 Hz which is larger than guest?!!!!!!
Does anyone know how this product compares to Microsoft Virutal PC (formally connectix). I installed Fedora on Virtual PC (without a gui) and it took about 3 hours to install but worked great there after. Is it better on VMWare?
Well VMWare isn’t made by Microsoft, so it has my vote. I’ve used it for a little over a year and I love it, it works great under linux and windows, and I’ve never came across anything OS it wouldn’t run.
…i think the article lacks a great deal of long termin usage experience…
i’m using vmware for over 2 years now, and i have to say that an installation of vmware shows some weird errors after a certain time.
That goes especially for the windows version, which i used for about half a year. Mostly the virtual network connections tend to develop an own mind…
also the linux network modules have some intersting bugs when it comes to routing *bsd
when the linux-kernel is routing a bsd which connects over the virtual bridged network, it stalls network traffic to under 10K/sec.
i’ve tested that with net/open/free/dragonfly BSD
Virtual PC is mostly Connectix, not so much Microsoft, and it works great for test istallations. However, I find VMWare to be quite a lot faster, at least when running XP as the guest OS.
He compares XP with Server 2003 with different amounts of RAM for each. He needs to go back and give XP 384k RAM instead of 256k and then compare the results before he says that server 2003 flies.
Good review overall. I look forward to upgrading.
VMware doesn’t support Linux kernel 2.6 as host yet, but I’m running it (Mandrake 10.0) and it works mostly great. But several times it has crashed with WinXP home edition as guest.
The crash seems to be tied to disk activity, as the activity LED stays on solid. I have to push the reset button.
Anybody have a similar experience?
BTW, I couldn’t get the referenced article to load.
OK, now the referenced article loads.
/// He compares XP with Server 2003 with different amounts of RAM for each. He needs to go back and give XP 384k RAM instead of 256k and then compare the results before he says that server 2003 flies.
Good review overall. I look forward to upgrading.////
I considered to compare with 384kb for XP but I assigned 384mb for Win2K3 and 256mb for xp since that’s what VMWare setup defaults. Anyway, it’s not unfair to think that a server OS may require a little more MB than a WS OS like XP, so the situation reflects it’s usage pretty well.
i’m open for criticism, so thank you for your comments
>Anyway, it’s not unfair to think that a server OS may require a little more MB than a WS OS like XP, so the situation reflects it’s usage pretty well.
My experience is, that w2k3 needs less memory than xp (fewer services enabled by default,different gui defaults, themes) and is more optimized.
Er….yes it does. That was the whole point of the upgrade from 4 to 4.5. I had it running on FC1 on a custom 2.6.5 kernel and now have it running on FC2 running the stock 2.6.5 kernel. No showstoppers installing except using the correct gcc.
Remember, just because you cannot get something to work does not mean there is somethimg wrong with the program.
“VMware doesn’t support Linux kernel 2.6 as host yet, but I’m running it (Mandrake 10.0) and it works mostly great. But several times it has crashed with WinXP home edition as guest. “
VMware lists the specific host OS’s they support at http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop/ws_specs.html#hostos
and then adds, “Platforms not listed above are not supported.” Mandrake Linux 10.0 isn’t listed. And when I installed it anyway, it popped up a warning message.
The only reason I mention it is that I’m impressed with the product and I don’t want to give the impression that it crashes where they say it runs.
I’ve updated the article with performance scaling using Server2003 as guest OS. Tested with 64…768MB configurations.
Seems 384-512MB is the sweet stop.
Check it out on my home page.
http://www.hdp-tools.com.ar
I’m not trolling here, just curious…is Win4Lin any better if you only need to run Windows on your Linux system?
I use VMWare to run Linux on Windows and vice-versa, and I’m happy overall, just wondering if Win4Lin is any better.
” According to the official information, VMWare 4.5 offers the following improvements:
Up to 4GB memory for all running virtual machines and up to 3.600MB for every single VM. ”
This is wrong
* 4 GB – Total for all VMs
3600 MB – Max a single VM can have.
This is the Official Spec
Virtual Machine Specifications
Each virtual machine created with VMware Workstation 4 provides a platform that includes the following devices that your guest operating system can see.
—
—
Memory
* Up to 3600MB, depending on host memory
* Maximum of 4GB total available for all virtual machines
http://www.vmware.com/support/ws45/doc/intro_vmspec_ws.html#1032187
you’re right.
I will clarify the question modifying the article.