> I just started using Microsoft Virtual PC a couple months ago, as a way to
> create a test lab, while I'm studying or Microsoft tests. Prior to that I
> had absolutely no experience with that product at work, or anything similar
> to it. It's a pretty amazing concept and, using Virtual servers at work is
> an idea that I'd like to look into.
>
> I had a few general questions about some things that I don't yet understand;
>
> - What's the difference between Virtual PC and Virtual Server? I have
> Server 2003 installed on a Virtual PC 2007 session, and it works just fine.
> - Is Virtual Server also a freebie?
> - I imagine there isn't a simple answer to this but, what's the advantage
> of VMWARE over Server 2007? VMWARE looks very expensive.
>
> TIA
>
>
>

>I just started using Microsoft Virtual PC a couple months ago, as a way to
>create a test lab, while I'm studying or Microsoft tests. Prior to that I
>had absolutely no experience with that product at work, or anything similar
>to it. It's a pretty amazing concept and, using Virtual servers at work is
>an idea that I'd like to look into.
>
> I had a few general questions about some things that I don't yet
> understand;
>
> - What's the difference between Virtual PC and Virtual Server? I have
> Server 2003 installed on a Virtual PC 2007 session, and it works just
> fine.
> - Is Virtual Server also a freebie?
> - I imagine there isn't a simple answer to this but, what's the advantage
> of VMWARE over Server 2007? VMWARE looks very expensive.
>
> TIA
>

>
>>The basic version of VMWare Server is free. VMWare Workstation (the counterpart
>>of VPC) is not free.
>
>However, VMWare Player is free and you can create the needed guest
>files manually or via a few websites that supply the service of making
>the empty disk files and the definition file for use in Player...
>
>>
>>I don't know about the server versions, but major advantages of Workstation over
>>VPC are
>>
>>1. USB support
>
>A MAJOR difference!
>
>>
>>2. Multi-monitor support
>>
>>3. Better Linux support
>>
>>However, personally I find VPC easier to use.
>
>Right, I also think so...

> I just started using Microsoft Virtual PC a couple months ago, as a way to
> create a test lab, while I'm studying or Microsoft tests. Prior to that I
> had absolutely no experience with that product at work, or anything similar
> to it. It's a pretty amazing concept and, using Virtual servers at work is
> an idea that I'd like to look into.
>
> I had a few general questions about some things that I don't yet understand;
>
> - What's the difference between Virtual PC and Virtual Server? I have
> Server 2003 installed on a Virtual PC 2007 session, and it works just fine.
> - Is Virtual Server also a freebie?
> - I imagine there isn't a simple answer to this but, what's the advantage
> of VMWARE over Server 2007? VMWARE looks very expensive.

>The basic version of VMWare Server is free. VMWare Workstation (the counterpart
>of VPC) is not free.
>
>I don't know about the server versions, but major advantages of Workstation over
>VPC are
>
>1. USB support
>
>2. Multi-monitor support
>
>3. Better Linux support
>
>However, personally I find VPC easier to use.

>Thanks for the answers, I got a lot of good information from everyone.
>
>I was just reading the FAQ on VMWare Server, and one of the questions was
>"How should customers use VMware Server?". And there was no mention of
>using it in a production environment. Each example was for either testing
>and evaluation. But I was also picturing this as being useful in situations
>where you have a server/service that is recommended as being kept on a
>seperate box - like a print server (Windows).
>Do companies use VMWare Server or Virtual Server in production, for services
>that need to be kept on seperate box (if that sounds really dumb, it's
>because I haven't used VM-anything at work).
>
>Thanks
>

> Virtual server is primarily intended to run server based OS'es and VPC is
> targeted at desktop guest OS'es, even though interchanging is possible.
> It
> has SCSI support and tuning for server OS'es. Virtual server also allows
> for
> web based access.
>
> VMWare has many more configuration and hardware options. Others may be
> able
> to provide even more information but some of the most useful for me are:
>
> 1) Support of USB devices which is a major omission in the MS products
> 2) Support of dual processors.
> 3) More networking configuration options
> 4) Easier access to host operating system within guest
> 5) Better tools for disk management
> 6) Use of VM Player to play the operating systems on computers that do not
> license VMWare
>
> "JohnB" wrote:
>
>> I just started using Microsoft Virtual PC a couple months ago, as a way
>> to
>> create a test lab, while I'm studying or Microsoft tests. Prior to that
>> I
>> had absolutely no experience with that product at work, or anything
>> similar
>> to it. It's a pretty amazing concept and, using Virtual servers at work
>> is
>> an idea that I'd like to look into.
>>
>> I had a few general questions about some things that I don't yet
>> understand;
>>
>> - What's the difference between Virtual PC and Virtual Server? I have
>> Server 2003 installed on a Virtual PC 2007 session, and it works just
>> fine.
>> - Is Virtual Server also a freebie?
>> - I imagine there isn't a simple answer to this but, what's the
>> advantage
>> of VMWARE over Server 2007? VMWARE looks very expensive.
>>
>> TIA
>>
>>
>>

>Thanks for the answers, I got a lot of good information from everyone.
>
>I was just reading the FAQ on VMWare Server, and one of the questions was
>"How should customers use VMware Server?". And there was no mention of
>using it in a production environment. Each example was for either testing
>and evaluation. But I was also picturing this as being useful in situations
>where you have a server/service that is recommended as being kept on a
>seperate box - like a print server (Windows).
>Do companies use VMWare Server or Virtual Server in production, for services
>that need to be kept on seperate box (if that sounds really dumb, it's
>because I haven't used VM-anything at work).
>
>Thanks
>
>
>
>"Michael" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>news:(email address - cut out)...
>> Virtual server is primarily intended to run server based OS'es and VPC is
>> targeted at desktop guest OS'es, even though interchanging is possible.
>> It
>> has SCSI support and tuning for server OS'es. Virtual server also allows
>> for
>> web based access.
>>
>> VMWare has many more configuration and hardware options. Others may be
>> able
>> to provide even more information but some of the most useful for me are:
>>
>> 1) Support of USB devices which is a major omission in the MS products
>> 2) Support of dual processors.
>> 3) More networking configuration options
>> 4) Easier access to host operating system within guest
>> 5) Better tools for disk management
>> 6) Use of VM Player to play the operating systems on computers that do not
>> license VMWare
>>
>> "JohnB" wrote:
>>
>>> I just started using Microsoft Virtual PC a couple months ago, as a way
>>> to
>>> create a test lab, while I'm studying or Microsoft tests. Prior to that
>>> I
>>> had absolutely no experience with that product at work, or anything
>>> similar
>>> to it. It's a pretty amazing concept and, using Virtual servers at work
>>> is
>>> an idea that I'd like to look into.
>>>
>>> I had a few general questions about some things that I don't yet
>>> understand;
>>>
>>> - What's the difference between Virtual PC and Virtual Server? I have
>>> Server 2003 installed on a Virtual PC 2007 session, and it works just
>>> fine.
>>> - Is Virtual Server also a freebie?
>>> - I imagine there isn't a simple answer to this but, what's the
>>> advantage
>>> of VMWARE over Server 2007? VMWARE looks very expensive.
>>>
>>> TIA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>