virtualization newbie

[trunolimit]

I need a virtualization software that would let me run red hat enterprise 5 and windows server 2003 from my xp machine. I tried to just go get vmware but I had no idea that there was a bunch of version like vmware workstation, server, ...ect if vmware is the way to go which one do i go with? I'm a total newb to this virtual stuff which is kinda sad because I'm training to be a network admin and that's where my field of choice is going.

[myketuna]

I think you can just use the free VirtualBox. I used to use that pretty frequently when I was trying different Linux distros. It ran fine with all of them. And I believe there's only 2 versions of it, one free and one paid, so you shouldn't get confused going that route. I don't know if it works with Red Hat Enterprise 5, but I remember seeing an option for Windows Server 2003 in there when making a new VM.

[computoman]

I think you can just use the free VirtualBox. I used to use that pretty frequently when I was trying different Linux distros. It ran fine with all of them. And I believe there's only 2 versions of it, one free and one paid, so you shouldn't get confused going that route. I don't know if it works with Red Hat Enterprise 5, but I remember seeing an option for Windows Server 2003 in there when making a new VM.

If you do not legally own rh5. you would be better off running Centos (the opensource version of RH5) and then running win2k3s (there is no open source version, though Microsoft does have limited time trial versions of their software available for download or from college textbooks) and xp in a virtual machine on a vmware server, but then I suppoe you are doing this for educational purposes. I just dumped my licensed win2kas for a linux server install instead. Most of the IT industry is dumping MSwindows servers and going to BSD or Linux. Microsoft servers are on the way out. Even IBM has gone to linux servers instead of Microsoft. Now there are Linux servers that have the ability to do virtual machines built into the os without having to plug in virtual machine software.

Vmware workstation is for a client machine to host virtual machines. VMware server is for multiple clients to access the server running multiple virtual machines. Hak5 did a quikie on VMWare a while back. Virtual box has two versions which are the commercial and the open source version. I think the commercial version is suppose to have more features. I prefer qemu, because it runs on more platforms and is easier to install on a client workstation.

A linux non-gui server install will run with a lot less resources in a virtual machine than any mswindows server. Real server admins use the command line or a web based interface anyway. Ubuntu has a special version called jeos, which is a lightweight server version designed to run in a virtual machine. Yes, a command line machine will easily run a web based server. .

[trunolimit]

If you do not legally own rh5. you would be better off running Centos (the opensource version of RH5) and then running win2k3s (there is no open source version, though Microsoft does have limited time trial versions of their software available for download or from college textbooks) and xp in a virtual machine on a vmware server, but then I suppoe you are doing this for educational purposes. I just dumped my licensed win2kas for a linux server install instead. Most of the IT industry is dumping MSwindows servers and going to BSD or Linux. Microsoft servers are on the way out. Even IBM has gone to linux servers instead of Microsoft. Now there are Linux servers that have the ability to do virtual machines built into the os without having to plug in virtual machine software.

Vmware workstation is for a client machine to host virtual machines. VMware server is for multiple clients to access the server running multiple virtual machines. Hak5 did a quikie on VMWare a while back. Virtual box has two versions which are the commercial and the open source version. I think the commercial version is suppose to have more features. I prefer qemu, because it runs on more platforms and is easier to install on a client workstation.

A linux non-gui server install will run with a lot less resources in a virtual machine than any mswindows server. Real server admins use the command line or a web based interface anyway. Ubuntu has a special version called jeos, which is a lightweight server version designed to run in a virtual machine. Yes, a command line machine will easily run a web based server. .

thanks for the quick lesson. I know that ms server is on its way out. My school sucks My unix class is using fedora 6 and red hat enterprise 4. I'm going out on my own and installing fedora 10 and RHEL 5. as far as my MS class goes I just see it as a waste of a Saturday morning. my step dad said he hasn't seen a MS server machine in years. I hear ya about the command line thing. its the reason cisco hasn't switched to a web based gui.

I ended up using virtualbox witch is working so far. I'll give qemu a try later on and I also downloaded vmware workstation from a torrent.

[tokenuser]

Love them or hate them, but for a small business, a MS based server is far easier for them to administer, create/maintain users, and keep current than a Linux server.

Windows Server 2003 is a good, solid product. It is easy to admin with having computer knowledge.

Having said that, our preference for our web based app is a Linux (we use SuSE internally, but support most flavours of *nix inc RHE, AIX, Solaris, HPUX) environment ... but thats not for the skill set available to everyone.

[davmoo]

Most of the IT industry is dumping MSwindows servers and going to BSD or Linux. Microsoft servers are on the way out. Even IBM has gone to linux servers instead of Microsoft.

That may be true of large Fortune 500 type companies. But among small businesses, and at least in the 5-state area I work in, Microsoft servers outnumber Linux servers by several orders of magnitude. And are most certainly not on the way out.

[trunolimit]

have you played with server 2008. you think this hyper v thing is all its cracked up to be?

[davmoo]

have you played with server 2008. you think this hyper v thing is all its cracked up to be?

I've got the trial disc, and I even installed it the first day I got it. But I've had a run of lots of work the last few weeks (which is not a bad thing when you consider the current economy and employment picture) and have not had a chance to play with it at all.

[trunolimit]

I've got the trial disc, and I even installed it the first day I got it. But I've had a run of lots of work the last few weeks (which is not a bad thing when you consider the current economy and employment picture) and have not had a chance to play with it at all.

whats funny is that all these OSes are integrating virtualization into their products. Maybe its a feature that they should toss into windows 7. My be like a virtual area to try apps before you actually install them.

[tokenuser]

whats funny is that all these OSes are integrating virtualization into their products. Maybe its a feature that they should toss into windows 7. My be like a virtual area to try apps before you actually install them.For servers its a little different. It *generally* allows a controlled environment for multiple instances to run.

For example, a beefed up server, running a couple of virtual machines that allow applications (say an order entry system, or a medical records system) to run in its own protected space that can be stopped, started, and restored without impacting other instances. It also allows for systems that scale horizontally (more hardware) to run on boxes that are over scaled. For example a large computer emulating the processing power of 4 smaller machines running multiple instances of the same application, and in doing so improving concurrent throughput without actually needing to be program written to take advantage of parallel processing.

[trunolimit]

question about virtual box. I can't seem to figure out how to get the screen inside the app window to become full size. i can change the virtual box app window size but the virtualized os inside that stays the same size. is this a limit they placed to get me to buy the full version? VMware is doing the same thing.

on a side note, can someone give me an ultra dumb downed explanation of what an active directory is and how does it differ from a normal windows explorer or am I comparing apples and oranges?