Great thanks for this. Lots of great points and I'm now sold on VMs. -- Thanks Tom
On 13 March 2015 at 09:46, Iain Carlin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Personally I host my development environment in a Virtual Box VM. Within > that environment I have three virtual drives, one for the OS, one for code > and one for SQL databases. > > My rationale for this is: > > 1.I can migrate to a new machine or between machines simply by taking the > VM and drives with me. I don't then have to reinstall the whole development > environment and tools each time. (We replace our hardware every 2 years). > 2. If I want to trial some Visual Studio add-on or other software for > development, I can snaphsot the VM and recover if it all turns to merde > 3. While I use TFS for version control and backup, I can also back up the > virtual drives and VM as further insurance > 4. My VM doesn't have to be the 'SOE' build that we use on all our > machines thus freeing me from the corporate tyranny :-) > 5. My physical/host machine DOES use the 'SOE' so it reflects what my > users have so when I test/debug using that I get the same results as they > do (reduces the 'It works for me' syndrome). > 6. Right now we have a trainee working with us, and I was able to give him > a copy of the VM and he's up and running in 5 minutes (OK, a slight > exaggeration) vs a day or two of installing all the bits needed to make him > effective > > I don't have any issues with performance in the VM (as we speak it's > running 3 copies of Visual Studio with 3 different solutions open with no > problems at all). The host machine is an i7 Dual core 1.8Ghz with 8Gb RAM. > > Cheers, > > Iain > > > On 12 March 2015 at 15:20, Tom P <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> How do the experienced devs here setup their personal laptops/desktops >> for development? Do you just install VS directly on the machine and not >> worry about it or use "virtual machines" (just learning these) to isolate >> the dev stuff? Any good reasons for the latter or simply do it as a "just >> in case"? >> >> -- >> Thanks >> Tom >> > >
