The virtual computing world got a healthy shakeup when several
leading products -- VMware Player, Server and VirtualCenter; and
Microsoft Virtual PC and Virtual Server -- were released as free
downloads by their respective companies. Of course, VMware still has a
healthy revenue stream from service contracts, and for-pay versions of
VMware for data centers still exist; and, obviously, Microsoft's cash
flow is more than enough to subsidize further development of the
Virtual PC/Server products.
This
article will discuss the differences between VMware Server and
Microsoft Virtual Server. These differences demonstrate why VMware
Server is still quite popular despite the fact that Microsoft's product
is now freely available.
Extended device support
VMware allows a broader range of devices to be recognized by the guest
OS -- mainly USB-connected devices that are plugged into the host
computer. Neither Virtual PC nor Virtual Server can do this. That makes
it difficult to use software in emulated operating systems when
circumstances require, for instance, a USB dongle or even a device like
a scanner.
It's been said that Virtual Server does not support audio devices,
although Virtual PC does. This is only partly true; you can get audio
from a Virtual Server machine if you connect using Remote Desktop and
enable local mapping of sound. What's not supported, however, is audio
through the default Virtual Server remote-management interface.
Cross-compatibility with other products
VMware has made a point of advertising how its system can mount and
launch not only Virtual Server / Virtual PC virtual machine files and
disks but also Symantec LiveState system-recovery files. Virtual PC and
Virtual Server can only mount and launch their own virtual machine
files or standard .ISO disk images. This creates a kind of one-way-door
effect; people can migrate easily to VMware from Virtual PC, but not as
easily the other wa...
To continue reading for free, register below or login
To read more you must become a member of SearchServerVirtualization.com
');
// -->

y around. It is possible to migrate the other way with some work (and this probably ought to be explored in detail), but the process is nowhere near as convenient.
Note that Virtual Server and Virtual PC have a certain degree of cross-compatibility
with one another. They are not entirely interchangeable (and are not
meant to be), but Virtual PC machines can be migrated to Virtual Server
in a fashion.
Source code availability
VMware has a fair amount of source code for its products available for
immediate download. VMware Player has been open-sourced for both
Windows and Linux, as has modified source for VMware Server and VMware
Workstation.
Microsoft Virtual Server and Virtual PC do not have source code
available (at least, not readily), but on the plus side, the virtual
hard disk and virtual machine specification formats used by Virtual
Server and Virtual PC are openly documented. In theory, anyone can
create virtual machine or virtual disk files without specific tools.
Pre-built appliances
One of the more convenient things VMware has done is supply users with a slew of pre-created virtual appliances
-- downloadable virtual machines that run under VMware and which
perform specific tasks. Among the most popular are editions of Ubuntu
Linux 6.06 Server, SpamTitan, the Vyatta open source router and a
number of other dedicated virtual machine installations.
The closest thing to this in Virtual Server is using a pre-built,
live-CD .ISO for a given program. But the virtual appliance system
makes it possible for the whole thing to be promoted to a full running
installation with very little work. Creating explicitly pre-built
virtual machines for Virtual Server wouldn't be impossible, but there
seems to be little interest in doing so -- at least on Microsoft's
part.
Multiple processor support
VMware currently has support for virtual SMP when the host has SMP as
well. VMware currently considers virtual SMP experimental, but Virtual
Server doesn't support SMP in guest operating systems at all.
None of the above differences preclude the possibility that the next
iteration of Virtual Server will support those features. But, for the
time being, those differences go a long way toward explaining why
VMware remains popular in the face of ostensibly stiff
competition.