 




<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Virtualization Product Choices</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/virtualization-product-choices/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/virtualization-product-choices/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 05:26:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: virtualaleph</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/virtualization-product-choices/#comment-57999</link>
		<dc:creator>virtualaleph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-57999</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[let&#039;s try ESXi --&gt; it&#039;s free and very complete: no other product can compete with vmware (IMO).
Manlio
&lt;a href=&quot;http://virtualaleph.blogspot.com/&quot;&gt;My virtualization Blog&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>let&#8217;s try ESXi &#8211;&gt; it&#8217;s free and very complete: no other product can compete with vmware (IMO).<br />
Manlio<br />
<a href="http://virtualaleph.blogspot.com/">My virtualization Blog</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gilly400</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/virtualization-product-choices/#comment-55553</link>
		<dc:creator>gilly400</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:13:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-55553</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi,

Are there many other alternatives worth looking at?

Regards,

Martin Gilbert.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Are there many other alternatives worth looking at?</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Martin Gilbert.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nopius</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/virtualization-product-choices/#comment-55442</link>
		<dc:creator>nopius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:37:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-55442</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I recommend you to try all available choices before making decision.
 
Xen is a CPU virtualization and is the most &#039;lightweight&#039;. Currently there are 2 major Xen implementations:
- open source (included in some Linux distributions)
- commercial XenDesktop Express (with free version available for up to 2xCPU sockets, 4G RAM, 4x guest OSes): http://citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=163057 

Commercial version should be more Windows-guest friendly. It has unified &#039;Virtualization Management Console&#039; and most easy to use. 

I have no experience with Xen and Windows guest (because my CPU doesn&#039;t have virtualization features). I used open source Xen on Linux with Linux guest - it was very stable.

VirtualBox is a hardware virtualization and quite heavy. I&#039;m using it now for running all my guest OSes, sometimes it&#039;s quite slow, but faster than vmware. I have no problems with it on Windows guest.
There are also 2 VirtualBox implementations: open source edition (VirtualBox OSE) and commercial (just called VirtualBox, it&#039;s also free but only in binaries): http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions
Making NIC work on guest at the same network segment as host is a little tricky, but possible. On commercial version there are tools for network configuration, that are absent on OSE, so I recommend you commercial.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recommend you to try all available choices before making decision.</p>
<p>Xen is a CPU virtualization and is the most &#8216;lightweight&#8217;. Currently there are 2 major Xen implementations:<br />
- open source (included in some Linux distributions)<br />
- commercial XenDesktop Express (with free version available for up to 2xCPU sockets, 4G RAM, 4x guest OSes): <a href="http://citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=163057" rel="nofollow">http://citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=163057</a> </p>
<p>Commercial version should be more Windows-guest friendly. It has unified &#8216;Virtualization Management Console&#8217; and most easy to use. </p>
<p>I have no experience with Xen and Windows guest (because my CPU doesn&#8217;t have virtualization features). I used open source Xen on Linux with Linux guest &#8211; it was very stable.</p>
<p>VirtualBox is a hardware virtualization and quite heavy. I&#8217;m using it now for running all my guest OSes, sometimes it&#8217;s quite slow, but faster than vmware. I have no problems with it on Windows guest.<br />
There are also 2 VirtualBox implementations: open source edition (VirtualBox OSE) and commercial (just called VirtualBox, it&#8217;s also free but only in binaries): <a href="http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions" rel="nofollow">http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions</a><br />
Making NIC work on guest at the same network segment as host is a little tricky, but possible. On commercial version there are tools for network configuration, that are absent on OSE, so I recommend you commercial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 3/10 queries in 0.037 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 295/301 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-05-20 08:20:55 -->