Good Virtual Server for AMD machine? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Good Virtual Server for AMD machine?


betyourlife
05-21-2009, 20:46
I have an AMD machine, so VMware is out. Any good free virtualization software out there for AMD machines?

RTmarc
05-21-2009, 21:05
Why do you think VMware is out? It will run on AMD or Intel with no issues.

BigSexy
05-21-2009, 21:48
I run VMware server on Debian Lenny with an AMD and have had no issues. I've run VMware workstation on an older AMD and ubuntu with no issues.

noway
05-22-2009, 00:31
Curious minds would like to know the answer to the AMD being out ?

betyourlife
05-22-2009, 00:48
Never mind. I got some bad/old information. It used to be limited to intel, but is now (and has been for a while) AMD friendly.

Carry on...:whistling:

MavsX
05-22-2009, 05:21
speaking of vmware. Vmware server is free...but it sucks. If you are going to be using vmware for any length of time. You might want to purchase vmware workstation. It is a lot better than vmware server. Also, you can get a free 30 day trial of vmware workstation. Vmware server is free.

Got it ?

RTmarc
05-22-2009, 07:20
speaking of vmware. Vmware server is free...but it sucks. If you are going to be using vmware for any length of time. You might want to purchase vmware workstation. It is a lot better than vmware server. Also, you can get a free 30 day trial of vmware workstation. Vmware server is free.

Got it ?

VMware server 2.X has come leaps and bounds over the 1.X days. If you haven't given that a shot, you ought to do so. You are correct, however, VMware workstation is a lot more robust and feature packed.

MavsX
05-22-2009, 10:10
VMware server 2.X has come leaps and bounds over the 1.X days. If you haven't given that a shot, you ought to do so. You are correct, however, VMware workstation is a lot more robust and feature packed.

is vmware server 2.x the one where the whole thing is built into your internet browser ?

RTmarc
05-22-2009, 10:13
It is. There's a bit of a learning curve on it since the various components have been moved around and some relabeled but it grows on you.

grokdesigns
05-22-2009, 12:53
I definitely prefer Workstation over Server 2.x, especially for booting up a VM to do some quick testing. If you're going to boot a VM and let it run in the background on an actual server, then it doesn't make a difference. The remote console is a nifty feature as well.

ETA: If you're using this for actual virtual servers, you may want to look at an option such as XenServer or another bare metal hyper-visor. You will have far more hardware resources to allocate to your VMs.

noway
05-23-2009, 13:34
Vmware server 2.0 is the bomb. It has it's plus and disadvantages, but if your running a major amount of GuestOS, get the server and not workstation. ESXi is also another choice, but your more dependent on the infrastructure client for management and then if you have any vmdsk built on either fusion,workstation or server, you will have to use the VM converter to converter them and imported into ESXi.

fwiw, if your studying and just hacking around, I found the player is more than adequate for 90% of the things you do and it's 100% free.

I run fusion on my mac, player on my intel notebook and then run about 3 vm2.0 server on top of ubuntu powered by Dell Power-edges. For 99% of my personal stuff, it's player or fusion.