New VMWare Workstation (Eval version) user

I got an evaluation copy of Windows Server 2003 working fine.. If I clone that VM, will there be any licensing issues?

I am trying to get an XP client up as well, but I don't have anything but a complete system restore disc for the system I am running Workstation on. Well, I DO have a copy of XP Pro, but it is not installing correctly, so I am not sure what to do.

Can I "clone" the host system into a VM, and use that?

I am kinda stuck at the point where I need to set up a client.

Russ

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

dynamik

You can clone it, but you'll want to run sysprep (or a similar utility) to give the clone a new SID. Otherwise you'll run into all kinds of problems.

You can always install XP and not activate it. What problems are you having with that?

Also, consider a Technet Plus subscription, which will get you access to everything with no limitations.

pogue

dynamik wrote: »

You can clone it, but you'll want to run sysprep (or a similar utility) to give the clone a new SID. Otherwise you'll run into all kinds of problems.

You can always install XP and not activate it. What problems are you having with that?

Also, consider a Technet Plus subscription, which will get you access to everything with no limitations.

Well...when I install XP Pro from the disc I have, it can't copy tcpip.sys and tapisrv.dll files, but I skip those intending to copy them from the host machine..

It goes all the way through to asking me for the product ID #, and then asks me to make a username and password, I think. Immediately after that it reboots and it acts like the CD was just put in and goes through the whole process again.

Russ

RTmarc

Sounds like a bad install CD. Do you have another you can try or better yet, a Windows XP ISO image? You'll quickly learn, VMware loves ISO images.

pogue

RTmarc wrote: »

Sounds like a bad install CD. Do you have another you can try or better yet, a Windows XP ISO image? You'll quickly learn, VMware loves ISO images.

I just bought a brand new XP disc on Ebay for $60. I've been in IT for a lonnnngggg time, and have never really "needed" to buy an XP disc, if you know what I mean. It's about darn time someone made an honest man outta me, lol.

Ayup on the ISO image.... Haven't tried it yer with Workstation, but I did with Virtual PC, and I was like the dude pushing the red button..."That was easy!".

I also got a Dual Core system with 2G RAM coming for a "real" virtual lab. I'll prolly buy VM Workstation at the end of this 30 day trial, as long as I pass my first Microsoft exam using this lab.

Would you suggest running some flavor of Linux on the new system that won't need as much overhead as a Microsoft installation? I really need some advice on that, as I have historically been a Windows and Cisco dude, and don't know anything about any other type of OS. I would luke to use some sort of Linux/Unix, as long as it does not add any unnecessary complexity to things.

I have been relatively sheltered in my IT career, and it is time for me to get out of my comfort zone.

Russ

JDMurray

You don't really need to buy an OS disc anymore. You can download the ISO file for any Windows OS and burn as many discs (or create as many guest VMs) as you need from it. What you are actually buying is the product activation key. You can't be sure beforehand that any OS disc you buy off of eBay hasn't already had its product key activated.

RTmarc

The question regarding which OS to use on your host system can only be answered by you. There are pros and cons for each. I say go with what you are comfortable with on the host system and then do whatever with the guest vms.

dynamik

With these fast multi-core CPUs and gigs of RAM, I really think the performance difference between OSes is going to be negligible. If you're not familiar with *nix, going that route will unnecessarily complicate things.

+1 for using whatever you're comfortable with.

JDMurray

dynamik wrote: »

With these fast multi-core CPUs and gigs of RAM, I really think the performance difference between OSes is going to be negligible.

Todayperformance is mostly hindered by the inability of most software to efficiently use multi-core CPUs. An application might be multi-threaded, but it's not very efficient if an app's threads are all running on the same core. It's the database and gaming programmers that currently seem to be making the best use of multi-core CPUs.

dynamik

Yea, I know. I'm talking about using a specific virtualization package, such as VMware Workstation or VirtualBox, on Linux vs. Windows. For what he's doing, I don't think there's going to be a significant difference.

pogue

Okay, I got VMWare Workstation up and running, with a DC, a member server, and two client VMs running Windows XP. Both XP installations were made off the same ISO.

I am having a problem with the two client machines not having connectivity to each other. Both can ping the DC.. Both of them resolve in DNS when they are pinged by name. I checked the virtual MAC addresses, and they are different.

I have been able to join both to the domain.. This problem is irritating, as both machines seem to be working well with the virtual network, but just not with each OTHER.

The only reason it matters is I was trying to do a remote assistance lab, and the servers won't send an offer of assistance, so I wanted to do it between two clients, which is how it would work in a network.

Anyone ever have this problem?

Russ

dynamik

You just can't ping each other? What is the specific problem? It's probably just the firewall.

pogue

dynamik wrote: »

You just can't ping each other? What is the specific problem? It's probably just the firewall.

Ahh...I'm a bit rusty... It was the firewall. I would not have figured the firewall would prevent comms to another client in the same network. I disabled the firewalls, and only one of them could then ping the other... I was pinging by host name.

I then rechecked the IPs, and saw that one PC's DNS record was incorrect, as I had changed the IP address to a static address, so I went into the DNS server and manually updated the record, and all is well.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious, man.. LOL.. I still got a long way to go...

Russ

dynamik

pogue wrote: »

Thanks for pointing out the obvious, man.. LOL.. I still got a long way to go...

We all have to start somewhere. I've made the same mistake, and I'm sure pretty much everyone else has. It's only a problem if you keep getting stuck on the same thing