x86 Virtualization Server: Full Support for Linux: Check. Free-as-in-Beer: Check. Vendor: VMWar-err, check that. Microsoft?
by M. David Peterson
Microsoft delivers Linux support and makes Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2 available to customers at no charge as part of its ongoing effort to radically simplify IT management.
REDMOND, Wash., April 3, 2006 -- Today at the LinuxWorld Conference & Expo, Microsoft announced several new developments in the area of virtualization, a nascent technology that can help customers dramatically reduce their information technology (IT) infrastructure costs. Virtualization technology enables organizations to shave their IT costs through server consolidation, disaster recovery, re-hosting of legacy applications, and software test and development.
Other than mentioning the current state of my jaw (dropped!) I'll let this one stand as is.
|Just out of curiosity, why would you want to run a virtual Linux system on top of Windows? Not only are you a heretic :), but it seems like you're just asking for trouble. At a minimum you can kiss your uptime goodbye.|
|M. David Peterson
Your uptime? On which, a Win2k3 box, or WinXP/Pro box? If Win2k3, my personal experience suggests that while a Linux-based system can be just as reliable, Win2k3 has an incredible uptime rate. Being in control of a small system of Win2k3 and Linux-based systems (2 Win2k3 instances, 2 Linux server instances, with 3 virtual Linux systems running on VSR2 on one of the Win2k3 instances) I can state that I have had more uptime service without even so much of a sneeze by the Win2k3 box, where as the Linux box, while efficient, has had a couple of snaffus that have required a hard restart. The difference is really not by all that much so I wouldn't want to try and suggest Linux is inferior, and instead Win2k3 is DEFINITELY not inferior.