From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:50:16 +0530 From: Martin C.Atkins To: Russ Cox , Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Native vs Emulated Message-Id: <20050308095016.2fff1265.martin_ml@parvat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <200503041610.aa03183@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> <200503051125.aa85115@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Topicbox-Message-UUID: 201db048-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:58:48 -0500 Russ Cox wrote: > for me, the novelty of this wore off real fast. > a simulation of three computers running three > different operating systems is no easier to > use than three actual computers running three > different operating systems (though it is admittedly > easier to carry around). i found that the os-os > boundaries were really frustrating to keep hopping > across, with distinct file systems, desktops, snarf > buffers, etc. attached to each one instead of a > unified whole. I'm a long-time user of vmware, and I'd agree with a lot of this. Especially the comments about the inconveniences of os-os boundaries, and "os-hopping". On the other hand, I think this underestimates the advantages of never having to partition a disk again, getting access to other systems without having to dedicate a physical machine to them, and being able to minimise the hardware that one has to administer (not to mention, buy!). Like all things, there are advantages and disadvantages, and it depends on what you're doing, but virtual machines (almost?) always seem to win over multi-booting - where the os-os boundaries are much harder to overcome. Martin -- Martin C. Atkins martin_ml@parvat.com Parvat Infotech Private Limited http://www.parvat.com{/,/martin}