luis.barbas at gmail.com
Sat Oct 30 19:59:45 UTC 2010
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 20:20, Luis Paulo <luis.barbas at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 22:29, Steve Flynn <anothermindbomb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Bill <beau at billbeau.net> wrote:
>>> Maybe I should just put the winblows version of Virtualbox on this Win7
>>> machine to run Ubuntu.
>> It's called Windows. At least refer to it with it's correct name - to
>> not do so is childish.
>> Personally, I'd steer clear of running your business critical apps on
>> Wine, VirtualBox or anything else like that - run them natively.
> I thought that the point of writing Windows or Microsoft in a
> different way was to avoid web engines to get this posts when searched
> for the correct forms.
> Running you critical servers on Virtual machines may be good when you
> have to upgrade them.
> Wine, I never like it. The idea of replacing the libraries of a close
> proprietary system that has patches almost every week and a new
> release often scares the hell out of me.
> For the OP,
> with virtuaization you want get read of Windows, but you'll be able to
> run them both at the same time on the same machine (I use it to run
> Autocad on my laptop)
> And for me the thing is you'll have to find a comfortable way to have
> different files for the same project on different trees and systems,
> and probably how to share and/or backup your data.
> I use libvirt, your hardware also support it fine. I like libvirt to
> run and manage a VM on a host with no X system.
* Running your critical servers ...
* with virtualization you won't get rid of Windows, but ...
Sorry, was in a hurry.
More information about the ubuntu-users