On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:20:56PM -0500, Carl Fink wrote: > I just wanted to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. I was > about to start evaluating alternatives for virtual setups for two of my > boxes, and you've collectively made my job much easier. > -- > Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just to add my 2c to this thread... I tried vmware a little while back, and was quite impressed by it as far as performance and usability went. I especially liked the way it was able to record changes to your virtual disks and allowed you to roll back to an earlier snapshot if something went wrong - invaluable for avoiding those regular re-installs if one has to run Windows, such as when some piece of software makes the system unstable or interferes with an existing application and doesn't uninstall properly! I also didn't mind the fact that it is commercial/proprietary - I don't object to paying for software if it is good and the developers need to make a living out of it. What I didn't like so much was the unavailability of source code, and the real killer for me was that certain aspects of the programming interface to the 'virtual hardware' were kept confidential, which meant I could not port unsupported O/Ss myself or do OS development and experimentation except in a reduced functionality mode. One such limitation that springs to mind was getting access to the full resolution video device. I havn't tried it since the free execution environment was released. Does anyone know if the full programming interface to the virtual hardware is still unavailable? Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
