Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Windows 64bit > News: Next Version Virtual Server No Gues Support

Reply
Thread Tools

News: Next Version Virtual Server No Gues Support

 
 
Andre Da Costa [Extended64]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2006
"The next version of Microsoft Virtual Server will NOT support 64 bit
Virtual Machines, so even if your run Virtual Server x64 edition on 64bit
hardware, you can't run 64 bit guests.

At IT Forum last November, when I asked about this, it was still unclear. In
December I got contractive reports on the issue, but last week Microsoft
confirmed to me, that current plans do not include 64 bit guest support.

This is a disappointment and keeps Vmware a step ahead, still.

v Next will support the new Intel VT and AMD Pacific CPU's, which make use
of a new ring in the CPU architecture. This ring will boost performance
because difficult tasks in software vitalization will be done by the new
CPU's."

Read the rest here
http://bink.nu/Article6158.bink

Makes sense especially with support for the Virtualization Technologies in
AMDs and Intels next generation processors. I would bet Guest support for 64
bit Windows being a major feature of the next version of Virtual PC. What do
you think?
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
=?Utf-8?B?SmFja00=?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-13-2006
As usual, agree with you on the need. I have two test machines running vmware
workstation and have used 32 bit vm's with great success and few problems.
Then started to use 64 bit guests, and voila, both CPUs do not have the
emulation structure needed by vmware to work. (FX-55 and ath 64 3500+).
Microsoft needs to provide 64 bit guests asap. Jack

"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" wrote:

> "The next version of Microsoft Virtual Server will NOT support 64 bit
> Virtual Machines, so even if your run Virtual Server x64 edition on 64bit
> hardware, you can't run 64 bit guests.
>
> At IT Forum last November, when I asked about this, it was still unclear. In
> December I got contractive reports on the issue, but last week Microsoft
> confirmed to me, that current plans do not include 64 bit guest support.
>
> This is a disappointment and keeps Vmware a step ahead, still.
>
> v Next will support the new Intel VT and AMD Pacific CPU's, which make use
> of a new ring in the CPU architecture. This ring will boost performance
> because difficult tasks in software vitalization will be done by the new
> CPU's."
>
> Read the rest here
> http://bink.nu/Article6158.bink
>
> Makes sense especially with support for the Virtualization Technologies in
> AMDs and Intels next generation processors. I would bet Guest support for 64
> bit Windows being a major feature of the next version of Virtual PC. What do
> you think?
> --
> Andre
> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
> FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
>
>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-13-2006
I doubt it will ever be in Virtual PC, but then, I think VPC is going away.
If I had to guess, this will not show up in Virtual Server until the LH time
frame, whatever that means.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:
> "The next version of Microsoft Virtual Server will NOT support 64 bit
> Virtual Machines, so even if your run Virtual Server x64 edition on 64bit
> hardware, you can't run 64 bit guests.
>
> At IT Forum last November, when I asked about this, it was still unclear.
> In December I got contractive reports on the issue, but last week
> Microsoft confirmed to me, that current plans do not include 64 bit guest
> support.
> This is a disappointment and keeps Vmware a step ahead, still.
>
> v Next will support the new Intel VT and AMD Pacific CPU's, which make use
> of a new ring in the CPU architecture. This ring will boost performance
> because difficult tasks in software vitalization will be done by the new
> CPU's."
>
> Read the rest here
> http://bink.nu/Article6158.bink
>
> Makes sense especially with support for the Virtualization Technologies in
> AMDs and Intels next generation processors. I would bet Guest support for
> 64 bit Windows being a major feature of the next version of Virtual PC.
> What do you think?



 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Jain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-14-2006
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:36:06 -0800, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I doubt it will ever be in Virtual PC, but then, I think VPC is going away.
>If I had to guess, this will not show up in Virtual Server until the LH time
>frame, whatever that means.


I think a derivation of VPC will end up in a desktop OS, similar to
how Virtual Server will end up embedded in the server OS.

Might as well, now that VM Ware started giving away their software.

--
Cheers,
Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
http://vpc.essjae.com/
"This posting is provided "AS IS" with
no warranties, and confers no rights.
You assume all risk for your use.
I am not am employee of Microsoft."
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-14-2006
Good point, you may be right. Though there is much less justification for
desktop software as compared to server. Still, with VMWare giving it away,
no one can really complain about MS including it.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

Steve Jain wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:36:06 -0800, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I doubt it will ever be in Virtual PC, but then, I think VPC is going
>> away. If I had to guess, this will not show up in Virtual Server until
>> the LH time frame, whatever that means.

>
> I think a derivation of VPC will end up in a desktop OS, similar to
> how Virtual Server will end up embedded in the server OS.
>
> Might as well, now that VM Ware started giving away their software.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Jain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-16-2006
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 23:12:34 -0800, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Good point, you may be right. Though there is much less justification for
>desktop software as compared to server. Still, with VMWare giving it away,
>no one can really complain about MS including it.


I think some government needs to sue VM Ware for using their virtual
monopoly on the virtual machine market to drive the little VM makers
out of the biz. You can bet if MS would have started giving away VS
for free, there'd been a lawsuit in the works.

--
Cheers,
Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
http://vpc.essjae.com/
"This posting is provided "AS IS" with
no warranties, and confers no rights.
You assume all risk for your use.
I am not am employee of Microsoft."
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-16-2006
Yes. But let's look at the realities. VMWare is NOT MS. MS, for better or
worse, is the colossus astride the earth, and VMWare is a single product,
niche company. When MS does something to gain market share, it's a bit
different than when a VMWare does.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

Steve Jain wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 23:12:34 -0800, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Good point, you may be right. Though there is much less justification for
>> desktop software as compared to server. Still, with VMWare giving it
>> away, no one can really complain about MS including it.

>
> I think some government needs to sue VM Ware for using their virtual
> monopoly on the virtual machine market to drive the little VM makers
> out of the biz. You can bet if MS would have started giving away VS
> for free, there'd been a lawsuit in the works.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Where to get stand alone Dot Net Framework version 1.1, version2.0, version 3.0, version 3.5, version 2.0 SP1, version 3.0 SP1 ? MowGreen [MVP] ASP .Net 5 02-09-2008 01:55 AM
Re: Where to get stand alone Dot Net Framework version 1.1, version 2.0, version 3.0, version 3.5, version 2.0 SP1, version 3.0 SP1 ? PA Bear [MS MVP] ASP .Net 0 02-05-2008 03:28 AM
Re: Where to get stand alone Dot Net Framework version 1.1, version 2.0, version 3.0, version 3.5, version 2.0 SP1, version 3.0 SP1 ? V Green ASP .Net 0 02-05-2008 02:45 AM
CurrentElement->next = CurrentElement->next->next (UNDEFINED?) Deniz Bahar C Programming 2 03-09-2005 12:45 AM
If declared as virtual in base, its derived version also is virtual. Why not for destructors? qazmlp C++ 7 07-27-2004 03:10 PM



Advertisments