|
One question – is all of your
validation testing done on VM’s or is the final sign off done on ‘production
deployable’ hardware? I’m a big advocate of VM testing,
just to set the record straight. Rick From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alex Fontana I would have to agree…;-) At
work I run completely on VMs using ESX. All my testing is done on a Dell
PE1800 with about 8VMs including AD, Exchange (clustered), SQL, etc. For those looking to do simple testing of
apps check out VM Player http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can’t create VMs but you can run
any pre-built VM, including MS VPC VMs. From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM. I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf or
physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well... From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Kingslan Hehe…. Let me know how that
full-out testing of I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS’s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
– I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment. And, make no mistake – this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization…. It’s just not the right thing for all
situations. Rick From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same
time, I have done this often. You did use different directories for the installations
right? Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation. From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of shereen naser Hi list, I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?) Thank you |
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Rick Kingslan
- Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Al Mulnick
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Rick Kingslan
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Bernard, Aric
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Rick Kingslan
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Alex Fontana
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 joe
- Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 steve patrick
- RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 Brian Desmond
- Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003 shereen naser
