|
just as an aside I looked at doing this (and heard reports it works well)
but then I realised I would be offloading a lot of other things to the linux host, web browser, email, video watching, music even most office work (documents), plus there was a few years of other cruft on the windows box either no longer used (dvd burners) as well as the inwvitable talings of uninstalled programs,
thus I went clean slate on the windows vm, basically: windows, 7zip, np++ and vs2017, another one same except vs2013 (so no version X spoiling version Y). And really I can see a difference, some of the quirks (from some uninstalled progs) that had built up over time were all gone.
I did need ms office for some interop apps (since converted away), so yet another VM with just office. (Similarly if you do have some win only req can either add it to your dev VM, or have a separate VM.)
Oh yeah, and another one: plain w10 for testing (above all w7).
The multiple VM's used a common shared directory where all my work files are, so I could even compile on one and flip to another to test.
If I need another clean VM, just copy the base of one of the existing VM's - far easier then installing and setting up windows from scratch each time.
Bonus: testing vanilla VM's - you will soon find out if for example you are relying on something that is particular to your dev env, previous releases or even own machine. (no more chance of the embarrassing, "oops, forgot about that, please wait while I download and install it.")
incremental backups really easy: using snapshots don't need to backup the entire VM each time, can have branched snapshots on snapshots and roll back, prune, so many versions of your machine on all on one physical box, one backup... way less admin (backups, networking, setting permissioning..... ) than running multiple machines.
And really don't waste metal on windows: Without even testing for that I noticed with 3 simultaneous VMs running they all performed as well as the machine when it was single install win only, windows (on new HW) is like buying a Ferrari that has been speed limited to 50. Total waste!
licensing:
my install on VM didn't like my license (it is a real lic) so screw it, I just went VL on the guests and run a VL auth host on the linux - doing it the naughty way and I know 2 longs don't make a light but no animals were harmed and don't really care to waste any more time on ms license stupidity.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: Bonus: testing vanilla VM's - you will soon find out if for example you are relying on something that is particular to your dev env, previous releases or even own machine. (no more chance of the embarrassing, "oops, forgot about that, please wait while I download and install it.")
Or, as I've ruefully discovered, now and then, over the years "It works on my machine". Which of us hasn't fallen down that rabbit hole?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for a very comprehensive answer. It's given me plenty of food for thought.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Can I ask which hypervisor you're using and which flavour of Linux?
I'm thinking of doing this on OpenSuse with Windows 10 under KVM.
|
|
|
|
|
using virtualbox, on lubuntu.
lubuntu is a release of ubuntu with less extras installed; still has the installer so easy to add back what you want.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
VirtualBox is a type 2 isn't it?
Isn't that considerably slower than the other options?
|
|
|
|
|
probably is slower,
but short story is windows has an inherently poorly designed task switcher (in some places literally watching the clock), linux (any properly designed multi taking system) will realize when a process waiting for something to happen and far sooner switch to another - so it'll switching between VMs (and any other processes) while windows is in short catching up with itself and deciding if (when) it'll do it's on process switch.
It's why yes windows on newer hardware does to start/load programs faster - that's the better hardware (and data busses), but once the program is up it really doesn't run that much faster particularly when there's a quite few programs running at the same time... comparing say 2 generations of hardware with the newer one being clocked/benchmarked say 15% faster (not just CPU, everything) windows struggles to gain at best a third of that speed increase (probably closer to 20% of that 15%).
And so on today's newer better hardware
- the worst thing you can do is run a single instance of windows (any windows: XP, 7, 8, 10) on the bare metal. (Unless you are doing only one or two basic things at any time, i.e. reading email, watching vids - but if you have a busy machine (dev, multiple windows plus) it's just not good, windows is, nor ever will be designed for that.
- way better use any hypervisor and run multiple instances of windows each only doing a few things, the hypervisor (or the system it runs on) will make way better use of the processor time windows is not using [while it waits for itself ?!?!].
OK, can't fully blame ms, it's the price they are paying for backwards compatibility - even in 10 there's a lot of old crud dating back to win 3.1 and even dos. If they were truly smart years ago they should have done a true ground up brand new system (and built their own hypervisor for backward compatibility) but they didn't, and now so far down the road (decades) it's biting hard and for windows it's actually too late to go back and do it properly.
Windows will die, (ms knows it), not only due to it's irrelevance to today's most common platforms (mobile), but as much due to it's own inability to remain relevant to the power of the platforms it does run on.
Their own mobile platform failed - again due to trying to stay compatible to a system that itself is trying to stay [backwards] compatible to lets face it, dinosaurs.
Back then mobile was low power, ms was effectively putting a tow-ball on a4 cylinder datsun to tow a 40 foot camper,
and it would have still have failed in the future mobile platform (as it will too even on the PC platform), putting that tow-ball and 40 foot camper on a Ferrari.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Keeping it as a VM would be much more hassle than I'm willing to go to.
I'd leave it on a separate machine, and either use a KVM switch or remote to it, as needed.
um, in fact, that's what I already do, with four machines (five, if you include one that I don't need, any more, so is only rarely booted up).
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I considered converting my current Windows 7 instance to a VM, but there too many no-see-ums involved, and I finally just installed a fresh copy of Windows. Since I'm using the VM as just a dev environment, I didn't have to worry about installing all the other inane Windows crap that I would normally have to deal with.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with this is that because the licence is tied to the hardware, I might have problems migrating the it to the VM. I can't really justify buying new Windows licenses for the Windows 10 VMs...
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not really sure how MS wants to play this, but, ahem, cough, cough, eBay, cough. I would surely not pay $199 or whatever it is, but the going rate is about $10 on mentioned place...
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
You could invest in the MSDN license for ~$800 and get all the OS licenses you could ever need.
|
|
|
|
|
If I recall correctly VM-Ware give you the possibility to create the VM using a backup image as source.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I have the live system; why would I need to make a VM from a backup? 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Create the VM in a different machine and not touch you main machine until it works?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're looking to move into Linux anyway, QEMU is the built-in virtualization provider for Linux, and KVM (Kernel Virtualization Module, not Keyboard-Video-Mouse) is a QEMU package that provides extremely performant type 2 VM capabilities. Windows runs better on it than on bare metal, completely serious, though I don't have experience running hardcore graphics through it, so I don't know how it'd be for gaming or video rendering.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. I use Windows mostly for development and testing, so gaming isn't a big concern for me. As I said in my OP, my major reason to get away from Windows as the primary O/S on my machine is Microsoft's abysmal quality and QA record.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose it could be used that way in specific scenarios; but since it's an extension to QEMU, and QEMU is a basic Linux kernel module, the lion's share of use cases are as an application-based hypervisor.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor
|
|
|
|
|
Ok you make a VM but u never said where you want to host it?
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't yet decided whether I want a type 1 or type 2 hypervisor. That would have some bearing on the hosting question, would it not? 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
1. Like J.J. said. Done it, works.
2. Pedestrian view (IANAL): You have a license to run the OS on that machine. You are still running it on that same hardware. You very well may have to re-activate. I have never actually read the eula before clicking yes.
3. Production stuff (servers), Bare metal. We run our servers on ESXi. Tried MS's hyperV in the early days but ESXi ran faster. No religion here, just made that decision years ago and haven't revisited. The hosting system has very little direct access to VM's, you connect remotely. Manage from another system. That is the Vmware approach anyway.
I do (stuff like you see on QA) development work on VM's (Linux and Windows) running on a Linux host with Vmware's workstation. Started with version 4 (from ebay) many years ago. VirtualBox, OTOH, is free. Vmware Player is free. Nobody in their right mind would test my stuff on hardware. 
Unless you are familiar with Linux, or want to learn it, you may want to stay with Windows and just keep an off line image that you refresh weekly or so. After all, Windows gets updated in VM's same as hardware.
or
Hard drives are cheap. Install Linux on one, install a VM host (Virtualbox or Vmware, provides 30 day free "try it you'll like it plan"). Give it a try. Your hardware will determine how well a VM will perform. Need plenty of memory and should run VM's from separate hard drive (SSD).
If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don't understand the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
No answer, but an interesting thought. I like it...thanks
I've often played with VMs. Never really thought about converting from a physical to a virtual instance. An obvious requirement, simply haven't had the need yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Which version of Linux are you thinking of using for this?
I'm also considering going down this route and thinking either Suse or Ubuntu with Windows 10 in KVM.
|
|
|
|
|
I have not done this with Linux, but I did choose to migrate my life to macOS some years back (OS X at that time). I have used Parallels to host two Windows VMs: Windows XP for some older games and Windows 10 for SQL Server and most other uses I have these days. Licenses from older scrapped hardware sufficed to cover these installations; they did need to be re-authenticated, but that was pretty painless.
For what I do in my home environment, the solution has worked quite well. Rollbacks when Windows screws something up have been great! Restore an older version of the VM files, and it's right back where it was.
I have considered moving to VMWare, only because Parallels seems to expect a user to upgrade every year without providing any real upgrades to their product and no support ever. $50/year seems a little steep to remain status quo.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
