May 19, 2012

Innotek Virtualbox Virtualization Software

vbox_logo2_gradient.pngI recently ran across a “new” (to me) virtualization software that is very similar in function to VMWare workstation.

I downloaded Innotek’s Virtual Box software, which quickly and painlessly installed, seeming to be a little faster to install than VMWare and MUCH less bloated… The entire self-extracting install is only 13.3 mb. I restarted my XP (Media Center) laptop and created a virtual machine with 512mb RAM, 64mb Video memory (I don’t remember VMWare having this feature), and a 10gb Virtual HDD, which should be more than enough for a CDR of Xubuntu 7.04.

I am typing this from the Xubuntu installation right now. I just got done installing the “VBoxAdditions” which are basically contains the same enhancements that VMWare tools offer. It was also much simpler and easier to install in Linux than VMWare tools. After I reboot, they should become active.

So far, this Virtualization product seems very stable, and is free for personal and evaluation use. I didn’t see any pricing structure on the website for companies, but I’m sure it would be reasonable.

Windows Vista RTM, Disappointment…

vista.jpgMy brother and I both recently, over the holidays, attempted to install the final Vista RTM and here is a brief entry on our findings.

My brother’s laptop is a nice higher end laptop from Alienware, it has a desktop class PC processor in it and runs XP better than most desktops.

He started the install, it took a while to go through all the hardware/software compatibility tests, but FINALLY, after about an hour, started the install/upgrade process.

The install completed sucessfully and when it came to boot time, crushed our hopes of getting Vista running on his machine that night… He basically kept getting a BSoD (Blue Screen of Death) due to a bad modem driver loading, even though the laptop’s modem is disabled.

During his install, I started the install, using the same version of Vista on my Toshiba Qosmio, which is also a high end laptop that has a gig of RAM, an nVidia 6600 Video card and decently powerful processor, although not as fast as the Alienware.

My install also went sucessfully, but took about 3.5-4 hours to upgrade XP. It was about 2:30am and I restarted it to boot for the first time…

It was looking promising, no immediate BSoD, but it just stayed at the “sliding bar” loading screen. After entering safe mode, I noticed it kept locking up on the CRCDISK.SYS driver which has to do with the IDE/SATA bus in the machine. Googling it confirmed people were having trouble, but I found no simple solution.

ONE KUDO: Microsoft at least had an OS rollback feature that would restore XP and get rid of any trace of Vista, which I did and am now back on XP.

CONCLUSION: I AM VERY disappointed with Vista and hope others have better luck.

Microsoft Virtual Server 2005

As I type this, I am installing Windows Vista Beta 2 on my PC, via my web browser, onto a virtual machine under Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 (MSVS)… Everthing seems to be going smoothly and much better and simpler than VMWare.

I am, so far, very impressed with what Microsoft has done with this software. The main thing that I think is innovative is a web browser based interface to MSVS (Make sure you have IIS installed on your PC before installing it). It creates a virtual directory off your webroot that you can log into, create and control the machines. (see screenshot).

msvs-screenshot.jpg

The web interface utilizes an ActiveX control to display the Virtual Machine’s screen. So you will need need to use IE to access it. Once in the admin interface, you can click a button and display thumbnails of all running OSes, select one and it full screens it in interactive mode.

Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 runs primarily on the Windows 2003 Server line, but I am using it on Windows XP Professional SP2 (for “non-production use only”, Microsoft says).

This is just a brief introduction to this software, but I will continue to test the capabilties to install other versions of windows, Linux, and I may even try Mac OSX since it is x86 based now. On the Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 website, it states Mac OSX will not run, but that was probably written when OSX was PPC only.

Mac OS X Leopard Sneak Preview

Mac OSX LeopardApple has a cool page setup as a sneak preview to the next major release of Mac OS X. Looks like it’s going to be really awesome.

One thing I wish though is that Apple would look more, if they aren’t already, into getting Mac OS X running on normal PCs. I know the major hassle with that is driver support. But as Apple’s architecture becomes more and more PC-like with the Intel processors and Intel Video cards, it should become much easier.

Now I have installed OS X 10.4.6 on my “Dell/Mac” but it wasn’t a full experience. The video card in the Dell was a 16/32mb shared VRAM integrated card, which looked fine, but didn’t have the full 3D support for a things that make the OSX unique. Network card support was lacking. I went through a stack of old NIC cards until I found one that worked. Perhaps with a good ATI card in the Dell Mac, it would work much better.

But I think if Apple releases a full x86 version of Mac OS X, they could really clean up around Christmas time, since Microsoft’s Vista has been delayed until after the holiday season. I would much rather spend $129 or so on an full featured x86 version of Mac OS X than MUCH more on a not so full featured Vista.

Basically, if XP can run on the current Apple Hardware, they should reverse that as well. They could really make inroads into the OS Market if they do.

Armed PC vs. Helpless Mac

If Windows Vista doesn’t work out for Microsoft, the PC vs. Mac commercials are going to get a bit more violent!

Armed PC vs. Mac