Re: vmware

Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:00:44 +0200
From: Thomas Kaiser <ubuntu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Subject: vmware
To: jdangler@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Ubuntu Help and User
Discussions <ubuntu-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <44EDF75C.9000300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

John Dangler wrote:
[...vmware server is great...]

So, I can install vmware server onto my local Ubuntu
machine, install win XP Pro under vmware, then install win
apps into that virtual machine and run them within the vm
environment ? If that's true, I definitely need to try that
out!


Hello John

Go and try "virtual machines", it is really fun. Vmware-player
is perfect for a Desktop PC. You can enable multiverse
repository and install vmware-player with apt (sudo apt-get
install vmware-player) or synaptic.

This
http://www.virtualization.info/2005/10/how-to-create-new-virtual-machine-with.html
article might be a good start.

Have fun, Thomas

While I fully agree with Thomas, from my experience is is *much*
easier to use the built-in functionality of vmware server to
create ANY environment possible (with vmware) than constantly
creating and converting vmx files on vmware player, just to
circumvent the fact, that player was originally meant to be a
sort of "read-only" environment to advertise the excellence of
vmware's products to a broader audience.

Although I admit, that
the latter might be fun.

However, I understood that the OP would like to
install HIS own windows with HIS own apps and use them.

So my personal view is, that for this, vmware _server_ is much
more easy to operate and powerful to work with than the player
application.

I myself began with player and VERY QUICKLY converted to server.
I did never regret the change and btw. I found that server,
despite it's "network-related" name is exactly as easy to
install as is player.

Just feel free to try both.
Note: I am not sure that you can use
both at the same time. I for one could not manage to do this,
since my server install killed the player install. No harm for
me and both run perfectly good on Ubuntu.

In case that you need more information, this list is here to
help you around.

Have fun
Eberhard


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Relevant Pages

  • RE: [PHP] Xampp question, pretty much 0T
    ... I suggest you look into VMWare. ... versions (player, server, etc) if you don't want Workstation (which I ... [PHP] Xampp question, pretty much 0T ... recommended it to me when I asked for an easy install of AMP. ...
    (php.general)
  • Re: ssh package for OS 5.0.6
    ... I installed an available version of OpenSSH, ... | day from a remote linux server to the SCO guest running on VMWare ... I added in the curl part because some install solutions need it. ...
    (comp.unix.sco.misc)
  • Re: Windows Media Player on 64 bit Windows 2008 Server
    ... The player you are referring to, no matter how you refer to it, is indeed ... If you wish to install Windows Media ... Experience role onto the server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: network sharing
    ... Could you point me to a doc to configure/test my network from VMWare to my host? ... There is no artificial distinction between desktop and server in Linux. ... apt-get install samba smbclient swat ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Windows Media Player on 64 bit Windows 2008 Server
    ... Is there any possibility to install Windows media Player on ... windows 2008 Server without installing the Desktop Experience? ... There may be very good reasons not to install everything that comes ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)