1 2 Previous Next 20 Replies Latest reply on Mar 28, 2008 3:59 PM by azmir Go to original post
      • 15. Re: 2.0 Beta is terrible
        Absolon Novice


        I kind of like the Web-UI. Havn't tried the old "stable" server. Played a bit with the workstation that really had terrible performance on my linux-host and I had to start it locally.



        The problem with the beta is the constant crashes which I don't think have anything to do with the UI but the program itself.  Even that it's in debug-mode I get very decent



        performance, when it works that is. Will be really interesting when the real Server 2 is released.






        And of course a BETA have a lot of bugs. Thats why it's a beta Tried an Alpha on a program? Now that is a challenge not to fall into total despair :P



        • 16. Re: 2.0 Beta is terrible
          tubeme Lurker

          The idea of WEB UI is not bad at all. At first I was angry but later on I got used to it. The only problem is that in the first initial load of the WEBUI Console  you have to wait for about 30-40 seconds to load properly. It is working despite the IE explorer freezes during this period and it seems that there is problem.


          Even now I'm writing this from SUSE SLES10 in a Virtual machine. No problems with stability crashes etc. This box I'm writing from is running for months withour restart! No problems. I use it for hosting a couple of web and ftp sites. Pretty happy with it.


          The thing I don't like in this version:


          The full functionality and stability of the Console with this vesion of VMware server is reached if you use MS IE!!!! I tryed using the WEBUI with my favourite Opera, then with Firefox. Both had problems with the console. It is silly to make your competitor's product (MS IE) the first choice for accessing your product!


          The other thing that really I don't like is the lack of fast Shortcut functionality. I have to wait 5 seconds each time I want to enter in full screen mode!!! People use their keys sometimes! not only the mouse. If you want to sell to the pro's that is. So now I rather use remote desktop or VNC connection to enter  the vmachines. But I don't get the Visual performance that I had in Server 1.0.4.


          Everybody, don't forget that this is BETA! We are throwing stones at vmware like this is their final release. Don't worry they are smart company (smart enough to make "Virtual server" term mainstream despite the giants in the industry) so I'm sure they read this forums and the feedback and they will correct the problems.


          Actually the thing that made Microsoft "Microsoft" was the enourmasly good system for customer feedback collection, analisys and implemantation. So vmware better read and listen what your potential customers want because they are the once that are paying the bill! If there's no customers there is no business!


          And please Vmware don't think that because we are using your free products and we are not happy with the 2.0 we don't have the right to be prettentios! I will tell you that most of us are TESTING your platform with the FREE product. If we dont like the free product we are not going to buy the flagship i.e. Infrastruucture. I'm testing  the vmware for a year now in home lab setup, and I still have not decided what to buy for my business at the end. Actually thee Server 2008 with Hyper-V is becomming more and more sexyier deal becauuse you  pay once and  have a whole package perfectlly integrated. OK you  might say that vmware has beter performace, but  the qestion is until When?

          • 17. Re: 2.0 Beta is terrible
            PengHead007 Lurker

            Thank you Michael !! 


            The virtual infrastructure client Does work awesome!!  Especially when compared to the new web gui.  Fortunately I have a Windows system to run it on.





            Email: PengHead007 at gmail dot com




            • 18. Re: 2.0 Beta is terrible
              greg64 Novice

              I have to agree that the Web UI is terrible.  In fact it is so unusably, excruatingly slow, and also so bug and error-prone, that I can't believe they released it as "beta".  It is alpha quality at best.  I will post some of the problems I have run into after I recover from my latest demoralizing attempt to work with the Web UI.

              • 19. Re: 2.0 Beta is terrible
                CLSsupport Novice

                I agree

                Although Vmserver 20ß runs stable the WebGUI is terrible. If they want to switch over to WebBased Management then why dont they turn off the console after two years of successfully using the Web GUI.

                I searched for a more performant more feature rich experimental version and found a feature stripped slower (but stable) version.

                I miss 64bit vmware windows process, I miss exprimental 4 way SMP, I miss Intel I/O AT, miss 10GbE as a Virtual HW in VMtools


                Vmware knows that only ESX is able to manage VMs most performant. Why dont they giveaway VMserver FREE with all the experimental features, that they want to implement in ESX v35 and SELL VMserver when those experimental features have majored for a small amount for x 500$ or less for SmallBusiness customers (including a 1 yr upgrade and hotline maintenance


                But strpping down features - NO that is making vmware a bad name


                Naming and versioning of VMserver and additionals shouldn't be so confusing.




                FujSie RX300 S3 2xQC 1,6GHz 10GB LSI 6x144GB SAS 10k / WINHOST64 / VMserver20ß / WinDC32 WinTS32 WXPpro Knoppix

                • 20. Re: 2.0 Beta is terrible


                  Beta 2 is available, please check it out.









                  1 2 Previous Next