VMware is becoming too unstable for me. Is it for you,...?
Hello all, Rawze here...
I have been using Virtual Machines in one form or another for many, many years. One computer just isn't enough for me, and I am also a big fan of isolating different types of software so that any one machine doesn't get too bogged down. I am not, and never have been, fan of Microsoft, though I ran their products for many years, and know them, all too well. I now use Linux (Ubuntu), and have been for about 3 years now, and will never look back, but like many Linux users, I still have occasional needs for some windows programs. Because of this, I use Virtual Machines with one form of windows or another on them for convenience. I also like to use the LOWEST version of windows possible to run any given needed piece of software, so that puts me running XP for the most part, on my VM's for the few things I do need MS-Windows to run. I have been around computers a long time, and I also have software that is much older, that I still like to run on occasion. I have programs for Windows 95/98, Windows 3.1, and even Windows 2.0, that are just unique to their purpose sometimes, but it is indeed rare to go back that far. VMware has always provided that for me, but I have noticed a trend, at least for me, here lately, that has created more and more problems. I first noticed it a couple years back, when I updated Vmware, then tried to install Windows 3.0/3.1/3.11 on a VM a few weeks later, and found out it was only usable, if I didn't do anything too advanced with the memory allocations, etc. on it. That really sucked, as I was a master of manually allocating memory on that old OS, and was able to achieve, easily, 637k free in the lower non-extended ram, allowing me to run programs that normally needed a re-boot to operate back then. Ok, I can live with that, I will just re-boot into the program, like many people used to have to do. I also have never been able to install successfully, the old Norton Desktop (from back before Peter Norton got railroaded by Symantec), ndos, and PCtools-8 like I used to. They simply crash the VM, and all those nice memory hacks, and pieces of software that used to make Windows 3.11 come alive, and be what it was, are now unusable. This has seriously disappointed me about VMware, especially after I read somewhere a long time ago that they might drop Windows 3 support, then decided not to,... But hey, it is all just nostalgia at this point. Then there is Windows98. In my opinion (and many others), the final patched version of 98, still is, to this day, the most secure version of windows that MS has ever built. That is not saying much, compared to Linux, but it was certainly more secure than anything they produce now-a-days. Also, it is not embedded with their 'We want to see what's on your desktop' built-in spy-ware and back-doors, where they can collect all your browsers cookies if they want to at any time. These are the background services that XP and all future versions of windows now have built in (did I say that out loud,... oops,...), that I have to go to great lengths to disable in XP and above. VMware does ok with 98, but there again, if you get too fancy, and use old-school tricks that used to make it faster, or more stable, like disabling the built in hardware VMM, the VM will simply fold, and not hold up. On a real machine, these things do not happen at all,... Enough rambling here, my point is that I am one of those people who can push an os to its limits, and that this usually reveals how unstable a VM host software can get pretty fast. As time has gone on, I have noticed, at least to me, this has become a bigger and bigger problem. It seems the further away from the 'Out of the box' norm you get, the bigger the problems for WM's get. I can accept the fact that not everyone uses computers and VM's like I do, and that is ok, but at some point through all the updates, and upgrades that have been put out by VMware, more and more of these extended abilities get lost. It has gotten to the point now, where even XP is becoming unstable, and many programs that use things like cryptographic services, will crash the VM,... not once,.. but forever... destroying the VM, making the entire machine unusable without re-installing Windows from scratch again on it. Sure, i have seen many people complain that the newer versions of VMware are less stable on Linux, but most do not know why, or what causes it. Many blame the new Linux kernel, others blame this or that, but the reality is that VMware itself seems to be the problem. Because of this, I started turning to its alternatives, like Vbox and KVM. I really like the abilities that VMware VM's have to offer, like plug-and-pay usb on the fly, good video drivers, and seamless copy-past and mouse integration, but at what price?,.. At the end of the day, I NEED A VM THAT SIMPLY WORKS AND DON'T CRASH!!!,... all other fancy tricks and front end friendliness is secondary to that for me. I have tried VirtualBox for a while now, and do have to say it IS more stable than VMware when it comes to pushing things to their limits, and has a lot of the same friendliness than VMware, but it still has at least some of the problems that VMware has. Vbox also has the problem as being detected as a 'Debugger' by a lot of software, and that makes some protected software not run at all. That being said, I decided to try KVM. I got frustrated with it pretty fast, as It was not easy to set up and get my VM running with good video and sound. It wouldn't produce ANY sounds at all, until I deleted the VNC interface, then add it back as SDL, and changed the sound card to AC97. This is a good example of why a lot of people do not like it. It is certainly a pain to get it set up the way you want, but it is still less painful than setting up an actual XP machine on a piece of hardware these days. That being said,... well,... IT DON'T CRASH!!!!!,... Nope,.. I threw everything at it,... It simply ran, and ran well. Why can't VMware do this?,... If it truly IS a top-notch piece of software, then WHY have they made it so prone to crashing so easily. Why have they stripped out all the code that used to make it more stable?,... or at least have an option or something, or a different version that IS more stable, and IS as compatible as possible?,... I am sorry Mr. VMware, but as clunky and backward as KVM is,... I have switched over, NOT to look back, until you guys get your act together again, making your software more stable and compatible. This is my experience on several computers now, running ubuntu 13.1 AND ubuntu 14.04, and by god, that KVM seems to be the most bullet-proof VM software I can find, running EVERYTHING I have thrown at it so far. I still haven't tried to install Windows 3.11 with Norton Desktop and PC-tools-8 yet, but that day is comming, just for curiosity if nothing else,... Until then, well,... At least I can be back to running what I need in XP without problems any more.
Everyone talks about how great this software is, but its instability keeps getting swept under the rug it seems. Am I alone in this?,... Anyone Else noticed that VMware is becoming more and more unfriendly to their older software?,... or more unstable?,.. I certainly have noticed it, hands down.
