> From a technical standpoint there is very little difference. Both are
> Hypervisor based virtualization products. Essntially they are implementing
> on-chip functionality.
>
> VMWare is a more mature product so it has more bells and whistles,
> primarily in the enterprise management space.
>
> Hyper-V is a new element of the Windows Server operating family. As such,
> it can and does leverage other elements such as clustering. The tools to
> manage it are also familiar MMC apps.
>
> If you are comfortable with Windows, I would give Hyper-V a shot.
>
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
>
> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>I have a third party application that I wanted to install and validate
>>creating sripts on a 64-bit hardware server. Unforunately my only two
>>64-bit machines are running SBS 2008 and W2K8 Standard server and the
>>third party applications doesn't support either. So I was thinking of
>>creating a virtual machine and installing W2K3 Standard server on the
>>child machine. I've never used any type of virtual software and of course
>>never deployed a virtual machine. Reading about and researching VMWare
>>versus Hyper-V I'm not sure as to which would better suit my purpose. We
>>do have MS Virtual Server 2005 but that isn't supported on W2K8 servers.
>>So I'm looking for input and advise as to which route I ahould go. Also if
>>I do go with WMWare which version do I need? Thanks.
>>
>

> Very comfrotable with Winodws Geoff. I was leaning towards Hyper-V seeing
> how I already have W2K8 servers but just wanted feedback from others who
> are familiar with both. Thanks for your valuable input.
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> From a technical standpoint there is very little difference. Both are
>> Hypervisor based virtualization products. Essntially they are
>> implementing on-chip functionality.
>>
>> VMWare is a more mature product so it has more bells and whistles,
>> primarily in the enterprise management space.
>>
>> Hyper-V is a new element of the Windows Server operating family. As
>> such, it can and does leverage other elements such as clustering. The
>> tools to manage it are also familiar MMC apps.
>>
>> If you are comfortable with Windows, I would give Hyper-V a shot.
>>
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>>
>>
>>
>> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>>I have a third party application that I wanted to install and validate
>>>creating sripts on a 64-bit hardware server. Unforunately my only two
>>>64-bit machines are running SBS 2008 and W2K8 Standard server and the
>>>third party applications doesn't support either. So I was thinking of
>>>creating a virtual machine and installing W2K3 Standard server on the
>>>child machine. I've never used any type of virtual software and of course
>>>never deployed a virtual machine. Reading about and researching VMWare
>>>versus Hyper-V I'm not sure as to which would better suit my purpose. We
>>>do have MS Virtual Server 2005 but that isn't supported on W2K8 servers.
>>>So I'm looking for input and advise as to which route I ahould go. Also
>>>if I do go with WMWare which version do I need? Thanks.
>>>
>>
>
>

> I've used both, and even like both. But ultimately I go with Hyper-V on my
> SBS network. (But NOT on the SBS 2k8 main server - that's not supported
> and doesn't work!) I run SBS 2k8 Premium, and use the Server 2k8 second
> server as my hyper-v host/parent.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
>
> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:%23$(email address - cut out)...
>> Very comfrotable with Winodws Geoff. I was leaning towards Hyper-V seeing
>> how I already have W2K8 servers but just wanted feedback from others who
>> are familiar with both. Thanks for your valuable input.
>>
>> "Geoff N. Hiten" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>> From a technical standpoint there is very little difference. Both are
>>> Hypervisor based virtualization products. Essntially they are
>>> implementing on-chip functionality.
>>>
>>> VMWare is a more mature product so it has more bells and whistles,
>>> primarily in the enterprise management space.
>>>
>>> Hyper-V is a new element of the Windows Server operating family. As
>>> such, it can and does leverage other elements such as clustering. The
>>> tools to manage it are also familiar MMC apps.
>>>
>>> If you are comfortable with Windows, I would give Hyper-V a shot.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Geoff N. Hiten
>>> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant
>>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>>>I have a third party application that I wanted to install and validate
>>>>creating sripts on a 64-bit hardware server. Unforunately my only two
>>>>64-bit machines are running SBS 2008 and W2K8 Standard server and the
>>>>third party applications doesn't support either. So I was thinking of
>>>>creating a virtual machine and installing W2K3 Standard server on the
>>>>child machine. I've never used any type of virtual software and of
>>>>course never deployed a virtual machine. Reading about and researching
>>>>VMWare versus Hyper-V I'm not sure as to which would better suit my
>>>>purpose. We do have MS Virtual Server 2005 but that isn't supported on
>>>>W2K8 servers. So I'm looking for input and advise as to which route I
>>>>ahould go. Also if I do go with WMWare which version do I need? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

>I have a third party application that I wanted to install and validate
>creating sripts on a 64-bit hardware server. Unforunately my only two
>64-bit machines are running SBS 2008 and W2K8 Standard server and the third
>party applications doesn't support either. So I was thinking of creating a
>virtual machine and installing W2K3 Standard server on the child machine.
>I've never used any type of virtual software and of course never deployed a
>virtual machine. Reading about and researching VMWare versus Hyper-V I'm
>not sure as to which would better suit my purpose. We do have MS Virtual
>Server 2005 but that isn't supported on W2K8 servers. So I'm looking for
>input and advise as to which route I ahould go. Also if I do go with WMWare
>which version do I need? Thanks.
>

>Thanks for the input charlie. Unfortunately I looked more into the hardware
>requirements and it appears my Intel chipset generation does not support
>Hyper-V. May have to go with VMWare.
>

> On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:37:43 -0700, "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)>
> wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the input charlie. Unfortunately I looked more into the
>>hardware
>>requirements and it appears my Intel chipset generation does not support
>>Hyper-V. May have to go with VMWare.
>>
>
> Before you go to far, you need to carefully check the requirements to
> run x64 VMs. Generally, you need hardwre virtualization in order to
> run x64 VMs. If you can't run Hyper-V, you might not be able to run
> x64 VMs at all, VMware etc.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
> http://vpc.essjae.com/

>Yea I also thought about that Steve and will be looking more into it. But
>I'm thinking since VMWare predated Hyper-V as well as 64-bit technology that
>it shouldn't be an issue. Plus I also know someone who is already using
>VMWare on earlier hardware than mine. Thanks for the input.

> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:40:53 -0700, "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)>
> wrote:
>
>>Yea I also thought about that Steve and will be looking more into it. But
>>I'm thinking since VMWare predated Hyper-V as well as 64-bit technology
>>that
>>it shouldn't be an issue. Plus I also know someone who is already using
>>VMWare on earlier hardware than mine. Thanks for the input.
>
> Yes, but you said you wanted to run an x64 VM. Running a VMWare
> product with 32b VMs does not have the same host hardware
> requirements.
> Make sure your friend is running x64 VMs.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
> http://vpc.essjae.com/

>Yes he is running on 64-bit hardware.
>

> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:40:53 -0700, "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)>
> wrote:
>
>>Yea I also thought about that Steve and will be looking more into it. But
>>I'm thinking since VMWare predated Hyper-V as well as 64-bit technology
>>that
>>it shouldn't be an issue. Plus I also know someone who is already using
>>VMWare on earlier hardware than mine. Thanks for the input.
>
> Yes, but you said you wanted to run an x64 VM. Running a VMWare
> product with 32b VMs does not have the same host hardware
> requirements.
> Make sure your friend is running x64 VMs.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
> http://vpc.essjae.com/

>At least some versions of VMWare can run 64-bit VMs quite nicely on older
>CPUs that don't support hardware virtualization. I know, since I had some
>early AMD64 CPUs that didn't support hardware virtualization, but which
>happily ran VMWare and would run 64-bit VMs quite nicely. Heck, I could even
>run 64-bit VMs on this laptop, but since it is maxed out at 2 GB of RAM, it
>makes no sense.

> sure, but to run an x64 VM I'm pretty sure Hyper-V and VMWare have the
> same hardware requirements.
> (see: http://www.vmware.com/download/ws/drivers_tools.html)

>Steve Jain [MVP] wrote:
>> sure, but to run an x64 VM I'm pretty sure Hyper-V and VMWare have the
>> same hardware requirements.
>> (see: http://www.vmware.com/download/ws/drivers_tools.html)
>
>I don't think so. My system (Athlon64 X2 on Socket 939) does not have hardware
>virtualization, so will not run Hyper-V, but it runs 64-bit guests in VMWare
>Workstation (on XP x86 host). This is how I am testing Windows 7 x64 RC.

>> I don't think so. My system (Athlon64 X2 on Socket 939) does not have hardware
>> virtualization, so will not run Hyper-V, but it runs 64-bit guests in VMWare
>> Workstation (on XP x86 host). This is how I am testing Windows 7 x64 RC.
>
> Yeah, I forgot about that. It's been a long time since I had an older
> CPU like that. :)

> Steve Jain [MVP] wrote:
>>> I don't think so. My system (Athlon64 X2 on Socket 939) does not have
>>> hardware virtualization, so will not run Hyper-V, but it runs 64-bit
>>> guests in VMWare Workstation (on XP x86 host). This is how I am testing
>>> Windows 7 x64 RC.
>>
>> Yeah, I forgot about that. It's been a long time since I had an older
>> CPU like that. :)
>
> The sad thing about it is that it is not even that old.
>
> --
> David Wilkinson
> Visual C++ MVP

> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:08:28 -0700, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
> <(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>
>>At least some versions of VMWare can run 64-bit VMs quite nicely on older
>>CPUs that don't support hardware virtualization. I know, since I had some
>>early AMD64 CPUs that didn't support hardware virtualization, but which
>>happily ran VMWare and would run 64-bit VMs quite nicely. Heck, I could
>>even
>>run 64-bit VMs on this laptop, but since it is maxed out at 2 GB of RAM,
>>it
>>makes no sense.
>
> Yeah, you're right. I believe that VMWare has a tool to determine if
> you can run x64 VMs.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
> http://vpc.essjae.com/

> OK first I need to pardon myself and ask that my ignorance be excused. I'm
> all new to the VM or Hyper world so this is all a new adventure to me and
> the learning curve as well as the comprehension of the technical terms
> used will take a bit of time for me to digest.
> OK so looking more into my hardware requirements I believe my Intel Xeon
> Core 80546K processor does not support virtualization for VMWare Server.
> After reading the posts by Steve, Charlie and David I think I have a
> clearer understanding. So let me ask this question. Can I load VMWare
> Workstaion on my XP SP3 x64 desktop to host virtual servers that
> eventually will have clients reside on my x64 servers?
>
>
> "Steve Jain [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:08:28 -0700, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
>> <(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>>
>>>At least some versions of VMWare can run 64-bit VMs quite nicely on older
>>>CPUs that don't support hardware virtualization. I know, since I had some
>>>early AMD64 CPUs that didn't support hardware virtualization, but which
>>>happily ran VMWare and would run 64-bit VMs quite nicely. Heck, I could
>>>even
>>>run 64-bit VMs on this laptop, but since it is maxed out at 2 GB of RAM,
>>>it
>>>makes no sense.
>>
>> Yeah, you're right. I believe that VMWare has a tool to determine if
>> you can run x64 VMs.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
>> http://vpc.essjae.com/
>
>

> First, there is no such thing as "XP x64 SP3" -- XP x64 follows the Server
> 2003 service pack levels, so the current version is SP2.
>
> Now, as to running VMWare Workstation on XP x64 - yes, it works and works
> well. Can you use VMWare to host Windows Server guests? Certainly. Can you
> then have clients connect to those Windows Servers. Again, certainly. Once
> you create a virtual machine, and configure its networking, etc, it has
> exactly the same behaviour as a physical machine, with the resources that
> you've assigned it.
>
> Now, the warning. You can not use XP as a production host. It's not
> licensed for it, and more to the point, you'll likely exceed it's
> networking limitations. If your intent is to host production servers, you
> really should be running a server OS as the host.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
>
> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> OK first I need to pardon myself and ask that my ignorance be excused.
>> I'm all new to the VM or Hyper world so this is all a new adventure to me
>> and the learning curve as well as the comprehension of the technical
>> terms used will take a bit of time for me to digest.
>> OK so looking more into my hardware requirements I believe my Intel Xeon
>> Core 80546K processor does not support virtualization for VMWare Server.
>> After reading the posts by Steve, Charlie and David I think I have a
>> clearer understanding. So let me ask this question. Can I load VMWare
>> Workstaion on my XP SP3 x64 desktop to host virtual servers that
>> eventually will have clients reside on my x64 servers?
>>
>>
>> "Steve Jain [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:08:28 -0700, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
>>> <(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>At least some versions of VMWare can run 64-bit VMs quite nicely on
>>>>older
>>>>CPUs that don't support hardware virtualization. I know, since I had
>>>>some
>>>>early AMD64 CPUs that didn't support hardware virtualization, but which
>>>>happily ran VMWare and would run 64-bit VMs quite nicely. Heck, I could
>>>>even
>>>>run 64-bit VMs on this laptop, but since it is maxed out at 2 GB of RAM,
>>>>it
>>>>makes no sense.
>>>
>>> Yeah, you're right. I believe that VMWare has a tool to determine if
>>> you can run x64 VMs.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
>>> http://vpc.essjae.com/
>>
>>
>

> thanks charlie and please excuse the XP typo. As stated I'm just getting
> into learning VMWare so the technology as well as the terminology is still
> a bit French to me. So just to clear a few things here. As stated my
> servers chipset do not support Hyper-V and that is according to DELL
> support. This I can understand as I did do some research on the Intel
> chipset and it appears it does not support virtualization.
> Now as far as VMWare this is where I really get lost. A few questions if
> you don't mind and again please excuse my ignorance or lack of
> understanding and terminology.
>
> 1. How do I know if my DELL PowerEdge 2850 x64 will support VMWare Server
> v 2.0.1?
> 2. Can I install the server host software and also create a virtual server
> on the same machine.
> 3. Do all virtual servers need to be created on the same hardware as the
> host software is installed?
> 4. What is the difference between the server and workstations versions?
> 5. If I were to install the VMWare workstation on my XP SP3 "x86"
> workstation can I create a virtual server on a different x64 server
> partition?
>
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> First, there is no such thing as "XP x64 SP3" -- XP x64 follows the
>> Server 2003 service pack levels, so the current version is SP2.
>>
>> Now, as to running VMWare Workstation on XP x64 - yes, it works and works
>> well. Can you use VMWare to host Windows Server guests? Certainly. Can
>> you then have clients connect to those Windows Servers. Again, certainly.
>> Once you create a virtual machine, and configure its networking, etc, it
>> has exactly the same behaviour as a physical machine, with the resources
>> that you've assigned it.
>>
>> Now, the warning. You can not use XP as a production host. It's not
>> licensed for it, and more to the point, you'll likely exceed it's
>> networking limitations. If your intent is to host production servers, you
>> really should be running a server OS as the host.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>>
>> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>> OK first I need to pardon myself and ask that my ignorance be excused.
>>> I'm all new to the VM or Hyper world so this is all a new adventure to
>>> me and the learning curve as well as the comprehension of the technical
>>> terms used will take a bit of time for me to digest.
>>> OK so looking more into my hardware requirements I believe my Intel Xeon
>>> Core 80546K processor does not support virtualization for VMWare Server.
>>> After reading the posts by Steve, Charlie and David I think I have a
>>> clearer understanding. So let me ask this question. Can I load VMWare
>>> Workstaion on my XP SP3 x64 desktop to host virtual servers that
>>> eventually will have clients reside on my x64 servers?
>>>
>>>
>>> "Steve Jain [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:08:28 -0700, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
>>>> <(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>At least some versions of VMWare can run 64-bit VMs quite nicely on
>>>>>older
>>>>>CPUs that don't support hardware virtualization. I know, since I had
>>>>>some
>>>>>early AMD64 CPUs that didn't support hardware virtualization, but which
>>>>>happily ran VMWare and would run 64-bit VMs quite nicely. Heck, I could
>>>>>even
>>>>>run 64-bit VMs on this laptop, but since it is maxed out at 2 GB of
>>>>>RAM, it
>>>>>makes no sense.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, you're right. I believe that VMWare has a tool to determine if
>>>> you can run x64 VMs.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
>>>> http://vpc.essjae.com/
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

> thanks charlie and please excuse the XP typo. As stated I'm just getting
> into learning VMWare so the technology as well as the terminology is still
> a bit French to me. So just to clear a few things here. As stated my
> servers chipset do not support Hyper-V and that is according to DELL
> support. This I can understand as I did do some research on the Intel
> chipset and it appears it does not support virtualization.
> Now as far as VMWare this is where I really get lost. A few questions if
> you don't mind and again please excuse my ignorance or lack of
> understanding and terminology.
>
> 1. How do I know if my DELL PowerEdge 2850 x64 will support VMWare Server
> v 2.0.1?
> 2. Can I install the server host software and also create a virtual server
> on the same machine.
> 3. Do all virtual servers need to be created on the same hardware as the
> host software is installed?
> 4. What is the difference between the server and workstations versions?
> 5. If I were to install the VMWare workstation on my XP SP3 "x86"
> workstation can I create a virtual server on a different x64 server
> partition?
>
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>> First, there is no such thing as "XP x64 SP3" -- XP x64 follows the
>> Server 2003 service pack levels, so the current version is SP2.
>>
>> Now, as to running VMWare Workstation on XP x64 - yes, it works and works
>> well. Can you use VMWare to host Windows Server guests? Certainly. Can
>> you then have clients connect to those Windows Servers. Again, certainly.
>> Once you create a virtual machine, and configure its networking, etc, it
>> has exactly the same behaviour as a physical machine, with the resources
>> that you've assigned it.
>>
>> Now, the warning. You can not use XP as a production host. It's not
>> licensed for it, and more to the point, you'll likely exceed it's
>> networking limitations. If your intent is to host production servers, you
>> really should be running a server OS as the host.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>>
>> "AllenM" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>> OK first I need to pardon myself and ask that my ignorance be excused.
>>> I'm all new to the VM or Hyper world so this is all a new adventure to
>>> me and the learning curve as well as the comprehension of the technical
>>> terms used will take a bit of time for me to digest.
>>> OK so looking more into my hardware requirements I believe my Intel Xeon
>>> Core 80546K processor does not support virtualization for VMWare Server.
>>> After reading the posts by Steve, Charlie and David I think I have a
>>> clearer understanding. So let me ask this question. Can I load VMWare
>>> Workstaion on my XP SP3 x64 desktop to host virtual servers that
>>> eventually will have clients reside on my x64 servers?
>>>
>>>
>>> "Steve Jain [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>> news:(email address - cut out)...
>>>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:08:28 -0700, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
>>>> <(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>At least some versions of VMWare can run 64-bit VMs quite nicely on
>>>>>older
>>>>>CPUs that don't support hardware virtualization. I know, since I had
>>>>>some
>>>>>early AMD64 CPUs that didn't support hardware virtualization, but which
>>>>>happily ran VMWare and would run 64-bit VMs quite nicely. Heck, I could
>>>>>even
>>>>>run 64-bit VMs on this laptop, but since it is maxed out at 2 GB of
>>>>>RAM, it
>>>>>makes no sense.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, you're right. I believe that VMWare has a tool to determine if
>>>> you can run x64 VMs.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
>>>> http://vpc.essjae.com/
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

> 1. How do I know if my DELL PowerEdge 2850 x64 will support VMWare Server v
> 2.0.1?
> 2. Can I install the server host software and also create a virtual server
> on the same machine.
> 3. Do all virtual servers need to be created on the same hardware as the
> host software is installed?
> 4. What is the difference between the server and workstations versions?
> 5. If I were to install the VMWare workstation on my XP SP3 "x86"
> workstation can I create a virtual server on a different x64 server
> partition?