xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: vmware compatiblity (slightly OT)

To: pac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: vmware compatiblity (slightly OT)
From: Alan Eldridge <alane@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 23:40:47 -0400
Cc: SGI XFS Dev List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20011014143442.A25701@xxxxxxxxxxx>; from pac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 02:34:42PM -0500
References: <20011011182134.A5027@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20011011201458.A2899@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20011014143442.A25701@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
>> You need a patch for the kernel modules. But it works. VMWare 3.0 works out
>> of the box on everything I tried it on up to 2.4.10.
> 
>  Great! Speaking of the 3.0 beta, I couldnt find any plain english on their 
> pages about expiration dates: Does VMware 3.0 have a time-limitation?
> How stable is te 3.0 product? 

1. Beta expires in November.
2. Release version should ship RSN.
3. Extremely stable.
4. Larger memory requirements for guest OS (win2000 => 96M).
5. NAT networking added.
6. Big virtual disks (>2G).
7. Most annoying glitches are fixed.

I alpha-tested for them. It's been a great evolution of the product, and I
strongly recommend anyone who can afford to upgrade (dunno $$, I get the
release free) to do so. It's quite a good product.

FWIW VMWare is the ONLY commercial software package on Linux that I own or
reccomend.

-- 
Alan Eldridge
from std_disclaimer import *


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>