New
#100
I think MS attacking this from the wrong direction. No need for specific Linux distribution to get all that stuff working properly.
I think they are overcomplicating things.
I think MS attacking this from the wrong direction. No need for specific Linux distribution to get all that stuff working properly.
I think they are overcomplicating things.
Will the ISO let me pick between Home and Pro Version in case of a clean installation, by default mine was going into home and I had to put the other file in the disc to force it into allowing selection (laptop was by default shipped with home and later I bought the pro license)
Sure, all progress for Hyper-V is good. But it's so far behind all other solutions out there. Looks like Hyper-V will never be capable of complete virtualization. Still only supports Windows and Linux, and even for those, a lot of hardware isn't even available.
A pain to use in development tasks, when half the features of a real computer system are missing. Even a simple thing like mouse rederiction does still not work properly.
VMWare is lightyears ahead and KVM is not far behind.
thats what I have been doing (using DVD) speaking of which, what software do you recommend for multiple boot from the same usb? like windows 10/7 etc install, I tried a few but those dont allow me to put the ei.cfg in there, just saying..and extracting the iso and rebuilding causes errors during installation. I wish MS would fix that and include it in the ISO's, Oh well.
Even for Windows virtualization, VMWare has the edge. It's easier to use, it's more compatible, it's faster, it has more features and it's way easier to manage VMs. This is based on facts from heavy usage of both for years, not opinions.
However, Hyper-V is slowly filling the gap, but still has a huge leap to take before being even close to the leader of virtualization.
For server virtualization where we just set it and forget it filled with services and need no desktop interface, both work equally well.
Only downside of VMWare products is that currently it's overpriced and very expensive to use, while Hyper-V Server is free. Huge advantage to Hyper-V.
Definitely slower running vmware on my laptop. It may be device dependent of course.
I find the fact hyper-v uses native .vhdx format to be a major plus - I can easily attach installs to host or hyper-v as I wish. Just being able to easily manipulate vhds outside of vm using minitool etc is a plus imo.
In the end, it IS opinion. What works for you is not necesarily best for others.
It is not really fair to fully compare Hyper-V with full paid versions. I make my comparisons based of free vmware version, and at that level, Hyper-V is better FOR me.