--- "Jeffrey B. Siegal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Drew Northup wrote:
> > I do believe what Kevin and others were really
> getting
> > at was making the VM backgroundable & recoverable
> at
> > the same time........... this would allow many VNC
> > like attributes, but it would not require the same
> > kind of resource overhead that VNC does.
>
> The resource overhead of VNC is probably less than
> you may believe (and
> can also be made more efficient, if necessary). I
> suspect it is less
> than the overhead of virtualization for most
> applications.
I run VNC as a "daemon" (it doesn't quite qualify)on
one of my LINUX boxes and am very well aware of what
resources it does and does not use ;).
>
> Anyway, what I do think makes sense from this point
> of view of
> virtualization that goes beyond the capabilities of
> VNC is some kind of
> save-to-disk facility so you can "put away" a VM and
> resume/reconnect
> later.
This is what Kevin, myself, and everyone else has been
really refering to all along....... I guess we didn't
quite make that clear enough at the outset.
Drew Northup, N1XIM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
