Joshua

by Paul Thurrott

I've been using software-based virtual machine (VM) environments for
years to test different Windows configurations and explore Linux-based
OS alternatives. However, with recent moves from VM giants VMware and
Microsoft, the latter of which purchased Connectix's VM assets last
year, combined with a proliferation of high-end PC server-based
hardware, it appears that machine virtualization is poised for
greatness in businesses of all sizes. If you've overlooked this
intriguing solution, you might be surprised about some of the
benefits.
Both Microsoft and VMware sell desktop PC versions of their wares,
which let you host multiple virtual environments on one machine. Each
environment runs within its own memory space and behaves as if it were
running on an individual PC. VMware recently released VMware
Workstation 4.5, which offers several improvements over Microsoft
Virtual PC 6.0, which Microsoft released last fall. Specifically,
VMware Workstation 4.5 includes support for local USB devices,
directly supports the most modern development OSs (including Longhorn
and Linux 2.6-based distributions), and supports the Preboot Execution
Environment (PXE) for simpler machine provisioning.
I've been using Virtual PC for years but balked at version 6.0, the
first version Microsoft released since it purchased Connectix, because
Microsoft cut official support for Linux, removed Connectix's handy
Linux setup tools, and slowed performance. As a result, I still run
Virtual PC 5.2, the last version Connectix released. But VMware
Workstation 4.5's arrival has me considering switching allegiances. In
addition to the aforementioned features, VMware is also aligned more
toward enterprise use and less toward the enthusiast/developer/testing
crowds that Connectix targeted, originally on Apple Computer's
Macintosh (Microsoft still sells a Mac version of Virtual PC). This
change has several ramifications. First, VMware Workstation integrates
more closely with VMware's server-based offerings, VMware GSX Server
and VMware ESX Server, making it easy to copy a deployed VM to a local
PC for testing if something goes wrong; on the flip side, you can test
OS deployments on VMware Workstation, then move the environments to
the server for real-world deployment. VMware Workstation also provides
support for up to 3.6GB of RAM on any individual VM and up to 4GB of
RAM on one PC, letting you access all the memory resources a 32-bit
desktop has to offer.
And you'll need that RAM. Virtualized machines typically run more
slowly than real computers and often require more memory than their
physical counterparts. This difference is less true for legacy OSs
such as Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 95. However, my tests show these
virtual systems can outperform the real thing running on mid- to
late-90s hardware, assuming the host machine is fairly modern and
equipped with enough RAM. Ensuring that the host machine is a high-end
system with lots of RAM is less important for server-based solutions,
in which direct interaction with the UI is less likely; generally it's
the UI interaction that really bogs down VMs.
On the desktop, VM technology can serve numerous purposes. VMs are
ideal for testing, development, and Help desk scenarios, in which it
might be impractical to maintain one or more physical desktops, each
with a unique configuration. It's relatively easy to maintain a
library of virtual environments, each with its own OS and application
installations. For example, you might want to test applications,
software services, or Web applications on specific Windows 2000
versions, each with a different service pack or Microsoft Internet
Explorer (IE) version. And because VMs are just simple files to the
host OS, you can simply copy the VM and you have a duplicate
environment that you can back up or tweak differently to create a new
scenario.
On the server end, VMware pioneered the idea of multiple hosted
environments on one high-end server, and the company's VMware
VirtualCenter centralized management tool is excellent. Connectix
planned to release a server version of Virtual PC last year, but the
company pushed back that plan when Microsoft came calling. Now,
Microsoft plans to ship that product as Microsoft Virtual Server 2005
in the coming months, and the product will concentrate largely on
helping enterprises migrate aging NT boxes to virtual environments
that can be hosted on a large, centralized Windows Server machine.
From what I can tell, Microsoft's server plans are single-minded,
and I suspect it purchased Connectix's VM technologies solely as an NT
Server consolidation solution, which I previously saw as the missing
link in the company's NT migration strategy: For many small and
mid-sized companies, little incentive exists to move a slew of small,
dedicated NT boxes to a newer version of Windows Server. But if
Microsoft can convince customers to migrate those boxes to virtual
environments running on a high-end version of Windows Server 2003 on
modern hardware, the company has opened a sales potential that never
would have happened otherwise.
VMware is a bit more holistic in its approach to server-based
virtual environments. Although the company supports and even endorses
Microsoft's migration strategy, it understands that many customers
could benefit from different types of server-based VM use. First,
VMware also runs on Linux and natively supports Linux environments,
thus offering benefits to more heterogeneous enterprises. Second, in
many cases, virtual environments offer unique opportunities for new
deployments. Testing and deploying a virtual environment is easier
than testing and deploying a physical one. And with a backup
deployment or added capacity just a simple file copy away, VMs are, in
many scenarios, a no-brainer.
If you haven't looked at virtual environments yet, this is an
excellent time to do so. Certainly, the price is right. VMware just
dropped the price of VMware Workstation from $299 to $189 for the
electronic download version, and the product is an excellent solution
for mixed Windows and Linux environments. Virtual PC costs $129 and is
an ideal solution for mixed Windows and Mac environments because you
can use its VMs on either system. Both products are available in
demonstration versions for testing. I'll reserve judgment on the
server versions until I see Virtual Server, but VMware's server
offerings have been around for a while and are backed by a centralized
management console. In this rapidly evolving market, VMware's
experience might very well put it over the top.

__________________
The Apexer formerly known as SnotRocket.

"Like I ****ing said, "Ok, so I hear it may be a repost. Blah But I had never seen it, so..." **** you Canta." -Jenny 12/4/2003