> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces at centos.org > [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Luciano > Miguel Ferreira Rocha > Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 4:46 PM > To: centos at centos.org > Subject: Re: [CentOS] VMWare vs Parallels, and Zen > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 04:32:18PM -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: centos-bounces at centos.org > > > [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Luciano > > > Miguel Ferreira Rocha > > > Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 4:26 PM > > > To: centos at centos.org > > > Subject: Re: [CentOS] VMWare vs Parallels, and Zen > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 04:17:29PM -0400, Miark wrote: > > > > I've seen several references to running VMWare under CentOS, but > > > > does anybody know how well Parallels runs under CentOS? > > > > > > Parallels is Mac only. > > > > There is a version of Parallels for Linux too. > > Ah. The google add sent me directly to the mac version (and me a ppc), > with only a small url to the main page. :/ > > > I think the VMware workstation is more mature, but costs more $$$ > > Also, if I read the specs correctly, Parallels require VT/Pacifica, > whilest VMWware doesn't. (Xen also requires those, for HVM guests): AFAIK Parallels is a fully virtualized hypervisor that requires no hardware acceleration (maybe it does for OS X though...). > > Xen is really for those who are willing to get their hands > dirty. VMware > > server is free and runs well. > > I agree completly. Alas, my budget doesn't allow testing of Xen > enterprise solutions (VirtualIron and Xen Enterprise), so I don't know > how they compare to ESX. They are aimed to be ESX equivalents, but I think their user interfaces need a little work, and I prefer the management software to be hosted on the server instead of separate Java GUI apps. At $500/socket they are 1/6th the cost of ESX server. > Has anyone given those a try? You can download 30 day trials of either and give them a whirl. XenEnterprise is CentOS 4.4 with Xen 3.0.4 fully Xen Source patched, which after trying out OSS 3.0.4 realized that it can take a whole company to patch it to working condition. Virtual Iron runs rPath + Xen 3.0.2 plus a whole slew of custom additions like HVM save/restore/migration. Virtual Iron only does HVM though, they have done-away with PV and the rPath is fully embedded so no remote OS access, while with XenEnterprise you can run CentOS as if you had installed it yourself. -Ross ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.