On 18 August 2009, 15:37, Jim Kyle wrote: > The difference you cite between server and workstation implementation may > explain why I have no problem with VMWare Server; I've not attempted to use > VMWare's Workstation package. Virtualbox may well be simply a workstation > implementation. That difference is good to have pointed out!
VirtualBox is used extensively by hosting companies to provide virtual servers. They're usually run under Linux in "headless mode" - that is with no primary console - and can be accessed via RDP (remote desktop protocol). However, the two virtual machines I have constantly up are running under Windows XP Pro - and I've never got "headless mode" working on an XP host. All other virtualized machines I have are demo and/or development servers that I only run when I need to use their consoles. So it wouldn't make sense to run those in headless mode even if I could. Hopefully, this explains things a little better. -- Geoff Lane Cornwall, UK -- Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 ________________________________________________ Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
