Well they did relent and have the driver pack for linux now. I have a couple linux vms (one desktop and one appliance) that seem OK, but I'm not a linux guy so who knows. I run the Microsoft product, the free vmware server, and vmware workstation. They're all different in meaningless ways (for personal use). Tim Mangan Founder, TMurgent Technologies tmangan@xxxxxxxxxxxx (+1)781.492.0403 ---------------------------------------- Return-Path: <windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Received: from freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180] by mail7.hostek.com with SMTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:24:16 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id B11947C7982; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31634-01; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 2C1F67C6BC7; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:58 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list windows2000); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id CF8D57C743B for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31610-01 for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from klais.its.uu.se (klais.its.uu.se [130.238.7.59]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id C0D4D7C6B9C for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:23:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from nyarlathotep (mach163.orgfarm.uu.se [130.238.38.64]) by klais.its.uu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6EBF3826CA for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:23:47 +0100 (CET) X-SMSpamC: processed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.2 (2007-07-23) on spam3.hostek.com from 10.10.12.7 at Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:25:38 -0600 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=7.0 tests=DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RDNS_NONE autolearn=disabled version=3.2.2 X-Original-To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Delivered-To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v0.6.4 klais.its.uu.se C6EBF3826CA DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=uu.se; s=centralsmtp; t=1196346228; bh=Q5S2gQUw4CAKKogkSNeqk64ZGM2l2Pe/LG7 Kcs+qm9E=; h=Reply-To:From:To:References:Subject:Date:Organization: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:Thread-Index: X-MimeOLE:In-Reply-To:X-Virus-Scanned; b=fEcayF51Z3Z6AT201eahKNN9R 1ZAW/+ipNAs/9qC6xJ7emEttSrZoSzx99miKE2gTYJZ/SVR+ESQveMP5kERnqIq6HEK h7rsNGaMyh7d356VEOO79cUX470Ip9YONXUwn2LkspNig7PSdckJeON3M0UtrzfVntq 7SbMGwRkdPNs= From: "Sorin Srbu" <sorin.srbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> References: <fcb88fec017b4c8e9293ca231a3043b6@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [windows2000] Re: 32-bit virtual machines Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:23:47 +0100 Organization: Org Pharm Chem, Uppsala University of Sweden Message-ID: <CE77C33A3AFD4071AAFB2B781FA69DF9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C8329B.D6645B40" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcgykhBKg53cGY5oTY+ZGMneAActewAAT12A X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4133 In-Reply-To: <fcb88fec017b4c8e9293ca231a3043b6@xxxxxxxxxxxx> X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at klais.its.uu.se X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain X-archive-position: 17988 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Errors-to: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx X-original-sender: sorin.srbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Precedence: normal Reply-to: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx List-help: <mailto:ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=help> List-unsubscribe: <windows2000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=unsubscribe> List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: windows2000 <windows2000.freelists.org> X-List-ID: windows2000 <windows2000.freelists.org> List-subscribe: <windows2000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=subscribe> List-owner: <mailto:jimkenz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> List-post: <mailto:windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> List-archive: <//www.freelists.org/archives/windows2000> X-list: windows2000 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain X-Rcpt-To: <tmangan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Yeah, but it does some things very weird. Like eg not being able to run *nix-guests very good. At least this was the case before, maybe they've improved on this now... ---------------------------------------- From: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Mangan Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:12 PM To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [windows2000] Re: 32-bit virtual machines The free virtual server from microsoft will run on a 64bit host. Tim Mangan Founder, TMurgent Technologies tmangan@xxxxxxxxxxxx (+1)781.492.0403 ---------------------------------------- Return-Path: <windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Received: from freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180] by mail7.hostek.com with SMTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:56:03 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 24FBB7C786D; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00652-09; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 8C2747C75E9; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:48 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list windows2000); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id F16BF7C6898 for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00608-10 for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from klais.its.uu.se (klais.its.uu.se [130.238.7.59]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 7C8F97C59EC for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:55:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from nyarlathotep (mach163.orgfarm.uu.se [130.238.38.64]) by klais.its.uu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6A43826BC for <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:55:39 +0100 (CET) X-SMSpamC: processed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on spam5.hostek.com from 10.10.12.7 at Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:57:10 -0600 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=7.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3 X-Original-To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Delivered-To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v0.6.4 klais.its.uu.se 9B6A43826BC DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=uu.se; s=centralsmtp; t=1196326539; bh=d1ySeeoU/PDvBkfN734fe4AdV/5ykCmD5r+ UxCgBI2Q=; h=Reply-To:From:To:References:Subject:Date:Organization: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE: Thread-Index:In-Reply-To:X-Virus-Scanned; b=S314JZHkAHaeepKLzaDtKt s7Qa9TOqABa6nn0R34VlhSbEtk1aT0ng6a3ftuT836rm0LaDXR8VTHkmWLVedJ4/V5A GmTfjJMyyLscXmBqjHOMKNfA+BiheBW6FyIEiwPn4EzilIfrN5R08kT2JwsmEukb/zL a2V7PPEsRZeDKOQ= From: "Sorin Srbu" <sorin.srbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> References: <063d01c83174$a224b0a0$e66e11e0$@com> <20071127204602.04E4.CHARLES@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <12c34f3b0711280629t48faddcamd074159c8e586145@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [windows2000] Re: 32-bit virtual machines Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:55:39 +0100 Organization: Org Pharm Chem, Uppsala University of Sweden Message-ID: <BEA5DF139A8A4D62974B8DBFD5B9DFEE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0058_01C8326D.FF4C6580" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4133 Thread-Index: Acgxy0jTsqAn6dI3QwmoDppenVsFfQAmhwgQ In-Reply-To: <12c34f3b0711280629t48faddcamd074159c8e586145@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at klais.its.uu.se X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain X-archive-position: 17979 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Errors-to: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx X-original-sender: sorin.srbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Precedence: normal Reply-to: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx List-help: <mailto:ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=help> List-unsubscribe: <windows2000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=unsubscribe> List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: windows2000 <windows2000.freelists.org> X-List-ID: windows2000 <windows2000.freelists.org> List-subscribe: <windows2000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=subscribe> List-owner: <mailto:jimkenz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> List-post: <mailto:windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> List-archive: <//www.freelists.org/archives/windows2000> X-list: windows2000 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain X-Rcpt-To: <tmangan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> The VMWare advantage with 64b hosts, is as far as I understand only true with VMWare *Workstation*, which is the only VMWare software that actually supports native 64b with native 64b executables and such. The free VMWare server et all doesn't. Or so I've heard. ---------------------------------------- From: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Greg Reese Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 3:30 PM To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [windows2000] Re: 32-bit virtual machines a 64 bit host with 32 bit guests is the way to go. You will be able to run more 32bit vm's more efficiently. The host has overhead and VMWare, Xen, etc were written to take advantage of 64 bit hardware. Plus, you can cram it full of RAM which is where you will really see things perk up. On Nov 27, 2007 10:52 PM, Charles R. Buchanan <charles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From a layman's perspective, using the 64-bit cpu for 32bit apps/os'es and so forth is no biggy. In fact, in a lot of cases, having that dual/quad core cpu will make life so much better! :-) I experimented with XP64 for about a week and uninstalled it. It didn't like my sound card, and I wasn't having that! lol!!! :-) 64bit computing would probably be great, except for a few minor annoyances, like the lack of drivers and the lack of 64bit programs to actually run! :-O As you know, max out on the memory! On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:10:38 -0500, While Searching For The "ANY" Key, "Ray Costanzo" < ray@xxxxxxxxxx> said this: > Hi list, > > > > My winter project this year is to rebuild my home network. I'm upgrading to > a WS2003 domain from Windows 2000 (or I may venture into 2008 depending on > when that comes out). I'm going to make use of virtualization as much as > possible and anticipate having five or six VMs. I'm not a big fan of 64 bit > OSes, so I want to run all 32 bit ones. When I build the machine that will > host all the virtual machines, I'll want to get as much processing power as > I can reasonably afford. It seems, however, that all the hardcore > processors these days are 64 bit. Will this matter? Will I just be wasting > money buying a 64 bit processor for all 32 bit OSes? Aside from the "you > should run 64 bit OSes" responses, any thoughts on this? > > > > Thanks > Jesus Christ: "There is no surer proof of Christ's divinity than that he is still so hated some two thousand years after his death." ***************************** New Site from The Kenzig Group! Windows Vista Links, list options and info are available at: http://www.VistaPop.com ***************************** To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation mode or view archives use the below link. http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm