Speaking as a professional, not as a student, I think that ca. �200 is reasonable when I think of how mucb time and effort it saves me. I need Linux and Windows booted up at all times. Without VMWare I have to have two machines running with a KVM switch between them. I share files with Samba, but I still cannot cut and paste between Linux and 'doze windows.
So, VMWare saves me the cost of a second box, the cost of a KVM switch and cables, and a lot of time. Cheap at the price.
Admittedly the cut-and-paste problem can be solved by using VNC from one box to access the other, but VNC still needs two boxes. So, �500 for the price of a box against �200 for the software. Take your pick.
On 29-May-2003 Adam Bower wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 09:36:31AM +0100, John Woodard wrote:
On Thursday 29 May 2003 9:05 am, raph@panache.demon.co.uk wrote:
On 29-May-2003 Edenyard wrote:
Has anyone here ever had any experience of using Wine to run anything useful?
In practial terms, I think that Wine has been overtaken by VMWare. I know that Wine is free and VMWare is not, but VMWare works. AFAIK Wine never quite made it to proper functionality and VMWare does so much more at a very reasonable price.
The cost in monetary terms is reasonable but VMWare whilst not being "Free Software" also needs a MicroSoft licence to run Windows. Wine is afaia "Free" as in freedom and allows Windows programs to run without the MS licence. I know which I'd choose given the choice.
you call 187.50+ reasonable! (linuxemporium are flogging it for 255, and the old version at that!) I need to sell some of my junk on to you! ;)
although I will admit I have purchased every version of vmware from 2 upwards (atlhough I don't use it for running windows usually its for playing with BSD and other linuxes and things like plan9) and fortunatly got good discounts all the way. The total cost for me has been well under 70 quid a year.