| Author | Messages | |
listmail
Posts:822
 | | 01/03/2006 1:59 AM |
| Nope, you assume incorrectly, I run most of my stuff with
VPC and Virtual Server and am getting ready to update my main Virtualization
Server to R2 VS.
Hmmm what from USB do I need... Right off my smart card
reader is pretty nice to connect to. Also like connecting to other external disk
devices like fobs and media player devices.
My laptop does have an x64 chip. Well at least one of my
laptops. And no, VS won't work. They don't expect 64 bit guests until the
longhorn server time frame, probably later. In the meanwhile VMWare
workstation will allegedly run 64 bit guests on a 32 bit host as long as the
underlying chipset supports x64. That is pretty cool. I haven't gotten my butt
in gear to get 5.5 yet though. Soon! I actually see the Exchange announcement
forcing a lot of people to go pick up vmware for testing.
I wish I had that kind of time too. However no one is
building my disks for me so I have to make some time and I have been doing
it over the years so it really isn't too bad. In the end, it saves me a bunch of
time.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Monday, January 02, 2006 12:40 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
If you want to test 64
bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as
well...
Just don™t like VPC, do
you? :o) What about USB are you looking for? What does VMWare
do with USB that is this vital? I doubt it™s the USB coffee
warmer¦
As to the 64-bit
support, I guess that would concern me if my laptop had an x64 chip. But,
then I could use VS 2005 R2.
But, I™m not going to
argue the virtues of VMWare vs. VPC. I Use VPC because it™s what 100% of
the material that I get from internal is supplied on. And, I get about 100
or so DVD™s with all types of imaginable configurations. I™m glad that
you™ve got the time to put together all of these disks, joe. I wish I had
that kind of time.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:46
PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big
workstation OS type of person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work
ok in a VM.
I do agree that it
isn't the right thing for all situations, but half the people setting up dual
booting blow it anyway. VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy
if you are doing perf or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck
even if you want USB you can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to
test 64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as
well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Sunday, January
01, 2006 1:05 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me
know how that full-out testing of Vista and
Aero Glass is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting
is not the optimal method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to
have the full machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs
are allowed “ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing
/ learning environment.
And, make no mistake “
this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with
nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40
AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it
wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS and then both can be
joined at the same time, I have done this often. You did use different
directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting
is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so
you have both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of shereen
naserSent: Sunday, January 01,
2006 6:01 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test
something so I installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same
machine same hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I
can only login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain,
meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp
and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account is
not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank
you | | | |
| listmail
Posts:822
| | 01/03/2006 2:10 AM |
| Rick, you are like permanently grumpy since you went to the
dark side. Not a single smiling face in there.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Monday, January 02, 2006 7:20 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Funny. I was more
discussing the direction that the overall thread had taken. Since this no
longer is along the lines of what the poster was looking for (hopefully, Al “
you can be the post police to make sure that nothing goes off-topic or askew any
longer. Me, I™m done with Active-Dir¦) I™m not going to respond in
kind.
Cheers.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Al
MulnickSent: Monday, January
02, 2006 1:12 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hey Rick, can you differentiate for us what the
difference would be between 'production deployable' configurations and those
that aren't related to virtual machines? Maybe in two sentences or less with
hyperlinks?
Having used both ESX, and VS 2005 I can honestly say
there is at least one difference maybe more often related to performance;
that's not by accident either. I would in no way advocate running
Mac-on-Int^^^^Vista in a VM, but then again I wouldn't advocate running Vista at
all and especially not on a 32bit platform at this time.
I think the original posters configuration is possible
and has some benefits, especially since it sounded like the original poster
wants to keep a job. Hopefully she realizes where the error was and is
busily fixing it and using the corrected configuration. I think the answer is
somewhere in the 30+ posts, but I'm curious about the VM comments you made and
I'm hoping to learn something here.
Cheers,
Al
On 1/2/06, Rick Kingslan rkingsla@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
One question “ is all
of your validation testing done on VM's or is the final sign off done on
'production deployable' hardware?
I'm a big advocate of
VM testing, just to set the record straight.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alex FontanaSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 2:07
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I would have to
agree¦;-) At work I run completely on VMs using ESX. All my testing
is done on a Dell PE1800 with about 8VMs including AD, Exchange (clustered),
SQL, etc.
For those looking to do
simple testing of apps check out VM Player http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can't create VMs
but you can run any pre-built VM, including MS VPC
VMs.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big
workstation OS type of person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work
ok in a VM.
I do agree that it
isn't the right thing for all situations, but half the people setting up dual
booting blow it anyway. VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy
if you are doing perf or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck
even if you want USB you can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to
test 64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as
well...
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Rick KingslanSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:05
PMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me
know how that full-out testing of Vista and
Aero Glass is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting
is not the optimal method to running different OS's, but if you want the OS to
have the full machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs
are allowed “ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing
/ learning environment.
And, make no mistake “
this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with
nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing for all situations.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40
AMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it
wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS and then both can be
joined at the same time, I have done this often. You did use different
directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting
is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so
you have both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of shereen naserSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 6:01
AMTo: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi
list,
I have
windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I installed windows
2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same hard disk, I can see
the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only login to the domain if
one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning if I want to login to
the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and disjoin the machine from the
domain then restart and login to the domain in windows 2003, if I want to login
to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it from the domain then restart and
join the xp to the domain and login, locally I can login to both machines no
problem. the error is that the computer account is not found on the domain when
I try to login and both OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the
machine name to different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a
way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
Thank
you | | | |
| tech4steve
Posts:17
| | 01/03/2006 4:23 AM |
| If you really want to test the smartcard dealy, I
built a whole lab around smartcards and VPC , just have to TS to the client
using RDP and SC redir.
But, I too wish VPC had true USB
ports..
steve
----- Original Message -----
From:
joe
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 5:57
PM
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Nope, you assume incorrectly, I run most of my stuff with
VPC and Virtual Server and am getting ready to update my main Virtualization
Server to R2 VS.
Hmmm what from USB do I need... Right off my smart card
reader is pretty nice to connect to. Also like connecting to other external
disk devices like fobs and media player devices.
My laptop does have an x64 chip. Well at least one of my
laptops. And no, VS won't work. They don't expect 64 bit guests until the
longhorn server time frame, probably later. In the meanwhile VMWare
workstation will allegedly run 64 bit guests on a 32 bit host as long as the
underlying chipset supports x64. That is pretty cool. I haven't gotten my butt
in gear to get 5.5 yet though. Soon! I actually see the Exchange announcement
forcing a lot of people to go pick up vmware for testing.
I wish I had that kind of time too. However no one
is building my disks for me so I have to make some time and I have been
doing it over the years so it really isn't too bad. In the end, it saves me a
bunch of time.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Monday, January 02, 2006 12:40 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
?If you want to test
64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as
well...?
Just don?t like VPC,
do you? :o) What about USB are you looking for? What does
VMWare do with USB that is this vital? I doubt it?s the USB coffee
warmer?
As to the 64-bit
support, I guess that would concern me if my laptop had an x64 chip.
But, then I could use VS 2005 R2.
But, I?m not going to
argue the virtues of VMWare vs. VPC. I Use VPC because it?s what 100% of
the material that I get from internal is supplied on. And, I get about
100 or so DVD?s with all types of imaginable configurations. I?m glad
that you?ve got the time to put together all of these disks, joe. I wish
I had that kind of time.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:46
PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big
workstation OS type of person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to
work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it
isn't the right thing for all situations, but half the people setting up dual
booting blow it anyway. VM is a much simpler solution for most people.
Obviousy if you are doing perf or physical hardware related testing it is
tough. Heck even if you want USB you can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If
you want to test 64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware
workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Sunday,
January 01, 2006 1:05 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe?. Let me
know how that full-out testing of Vista and
Aero Glass is going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting
is not the optimal method to running different OS?s, but if you want the OS to
have the full machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the
VMs are allowed ? I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the
testing / learning environment.
And, make no mistake
? this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with
nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization?. It?s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40
AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it
wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS and then both can be
joined at the same time, I have done this often. You did use different
directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting
is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so
you have both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of shereen
naserSent: Sunday, January
01, 2006 6:01 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test
something so I installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same
machine same hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but
I can only login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the
domain, meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the
windows xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to
the domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003
and disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the
computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes
are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different
names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to
domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
Thank
you | | | |
| bdesmond
Posts:977
| | 01/03/2006 4:36 AM |
| yeah or do what i did
- switch to vmware. I have multiple smartcard readers mapped to different
VMs.
Thanks,
Brian
Desmond
brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
c -
312.731.3132
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on
behalf of steve patrickSent: Mon 1/2/2006 11:21 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
If you really want to test the smartcard dealy, I
built a whole lab around smartcards and VPC , just have to TS to the client
using RDP and SC redir.
But, I too wish VPC had true USB
ports..
steve
----- Original Message -----
From: joe
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 5:57
PM
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Nope, you assume incorrectly, I run most of my stuff with
VPC and Virtual Server and am getting ready to update my main Virtualization
Server to R2 VS.
Hmmm what from USB do I need... Right off my smart card
reader is pretty nice to connect to. Also like connecting to other external
disk devices like fobs and media player devices.
My laptop does have an x64 chip. Well at least one of my
laptops. And no, VS won't work. They don't expect 64 bit guests until the
longhorn server time frame, probably later. In the meanwhile VMWare
workstation will allegedly run 64 bit guests on a 32 bit host as long as the
underlying chipset supports x64. That is pretty cool. I haven't gotten my butt
in gear to get 5.5 yet though. Soon! I actually see the Exchange announcement
forcing a lot of people to go pick up vmware for testing.
I wish I had that kind of time too. However no one
is building my disks for me so I have to make some time and I have been
doing it over the years so it really isn't too bad. In the end, it saves me a
bunch of time.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Monday, January 02, 2006 12:40 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
If you want to test
64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as
well...
Just don™t like VPC,
do you? :o) What about USB are you looking for? What does
VMWare do with USB that is this vital? I doubt it™s the USB coffee
warmer¦
As to the 64-bit
support, I guess that would concern me if my laptop had an x64 chip.
But, then I could use VS 2005 R2.
But, I™m not going to
argue the virtues of VMWare vs. VPC. I Use VPC because it™s what 100% of
the material that I get from internal is supplied on. And, I get about
100 or so DVD™s with all types of imaginable configurations. I™m glad
that you™ve got the time to put together all of these disks, joe. I wish
I had that kind of time.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 1:46
PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big
workstation OS type of person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to
work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it
isn't the right thing for all situations, but half the people setting up dual
booting blow it anyway. VM is a much simpler solution for most people.
Obviousy if you are doing perf or physical hardware related testing it is
tough. Heck even if you want USB you can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If
you want to test 64 bit you are kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware
workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Rick
KingslanSent: Sunday,
January 01, 2006 1:05 PMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me
know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is going for you in a
VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting
is not the optimal method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to
have the full machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the
VMs are allowed “ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the
testing / learning environment.
And, make no mistake
“ this is coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with
nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joeSent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 10:40
AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it
wouldn't allow you to have different names for the OS and then both can be
joined at the same time, I have done this often. You did use different
directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting
is going the way of the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so
you have both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of shereen
naserSent: Sunday, January
01, 2006 6:01 AMTo:
ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test
something so I installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same
machine same hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but
I can only login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the
domain, meaning if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the
windows xp and disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to
the domain in windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003
and disjoin it from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and
login, locally I can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the
computer account is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes
are joined to the domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different
names in each OS but same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to
domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
Thank
you | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/03/2006 12:23 PM |
| Funny. I was more discussing the
direction that the overall thread had taken. Since this no longer is along the
lines of what the poster was looking for (hopefully, Al “ you can be the post
police to make sure that nothing goes off-topic or askew any longer. Me, I™m
done with Active-Dir¦) I™m not going to respond in kind.
Cheers.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Al Mulnick
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006
1:12 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hey Rick, can you differentiate for us what the difference would be
between 'production deployable' configurations and those that aren't related to
virtual machines? Maybe in two sentences or less with hyperlinks?
Having used both ESX, and VS 2005 I can honestly say there is at
least one difference maybe more often related to performance; that's not by
accident either. I would in no way advocate running Mac-on-Int^^^^Vista
in a VM, but then again I wouldn't advocate running Vista at all and especially
not on a 32bit platform at this time.
I think the original posters configuration is possible and has some
benefits, especially since it sounded like the original poster wants to keep a
job. Hopefully she realizes where the error was and is busily fixing it
and using the corrected configuration. I think the answer is somewhere in the
30+ posts, but I'm curious about the VM comments you made and I'm hoping to
learn something here.
Cheers,
Al
On 1/2/06, Rick
Kingslan
wrote:
One question “ is all of your validation testing done on VM's
or is the final sign off done on 'production deployable' hardware?
I'm a big advocate of VM testing, just to set the record
straight.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Alex Fontana
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
2:07 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
I would have to agree¦;-) At work I run completely on
VMs using ESX. All my testing is done on a Dell PE1800 with about 8VMs
including AD, Exchange (clustered), SQL, etc.
For those looking to do simple testing of apps check out VM
Player http://www.vmware.com/vmplayer
You can't create VMs but you can run any pre-built VM,
including MS VPC VMs.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
11:46 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of person, I use XP only
when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing for all situations,
but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway. VM is a much
simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf or physical
hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you can't use
VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind of screwed
too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is going for you in a VPC or a
VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal method to running
different OS's, but if you want the OS to have the full machine, rather than
the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed “ I think dual
booting still has a very strong place in the testing / learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is coming from a guy that when on
the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on
his laptop. I love virtualization¦. It's just not the right thing
for all situations.
Rick
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you to have different
names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same time, I have done this
often. You did use different directories for the installations right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of the dodo, the
"new" thing is to virtualization software so you have both instances
up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.
From: ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hi list,
I have
windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I installed windows
2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same hard disk, I can see
the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only login to the domain if
one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning if I want to login to
the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and disjoin the machine from
the domain then restart and login to the domain in windows 2003, if I want to
login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it from the domain then restart
and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I can login to both machines
no problem. the error is that the computer account is not found on the domain
when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the domain. I tried to rename
the machine name to different names in each OS but same thing happens. is there
a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
| rkingsla@xxxx.yyy
| | 01/03/2006 12:25 PM |
| Duly corrected. Thanks.
Cheers.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bernard, Aric
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006
1:52 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Just to be clear, VS2005R2 does not
support 64-bit guests¦.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006
9:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
If you want to test 64 bit you are
kind of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
Just don™t like VPC, do you?
:o) What about USB are you looking for? What does VMWare do with
USB that is this vital? I doubt it™s the USB coffee warmer¦
As to the 64-bit support, I guess that
would concern me if my laptop had an x64 chip. But, then I could use VS
2005 R2.
But, I™m not going to argue the virtues
of VMWare vs. VPC. I Use VPC because it™s what 100% of the material
that I get from internal is supplied on. And, I get about 100 or so
DVD™s with all types of imaginable configurations. I™m glad
that you™ve got the time to put together all of these disks, joe. I
wish I had that kind of time.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I am not a big workstation OS type of
person, I use XP only when I must. Longhorn seems to work ok in a VM.
I do agree that it isn't the right thing
for all situations, but half the people setting up dual booting blow it anyway.
VM is a much simpler solution for most people. Obviousy if you are doing perf
or physical hardware related testing it is tough. Heck even if you want USB you
can't use VPC, you use vmware instead. If you want to test 64 bit you are kind
of screwed too, oh wait vmware workstation does that as well...
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
1:05 PM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
Hehe¦. Let me know how that
full-out testing of Vista and Aero Glass is
going for you in a VPC or a VMWare virtual machine.
I agree, dual-booting is not the optimal
method to running different OS™s, but if you want the OS to have the full
machine, rather than the limited virtualized hardware that the VMs are allowed
“ I think dual booting still has a very strong place in the testing /
learning environment.
And, make no mistake “ this is
coming from a guy that when on the road, has a 250GB external with nothing BUT
VMs with VPC and VS 2005 R2 on his laptop. I love
virtualization¦. It™s just not the right thing for all
situations.
Rick
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
10:40 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] WinXP and
Win2003
I have no clue why it wouldn't allow you
to have different names for the OS and then both can be joined at the same time,
I have done this often. You did use different directories for the installations
right?
Any more dual booting is going the way of
the dodo, the "new" thing is to virtualization software so you have
both instances up and running at once. Look at Virtual PC or VMWare
Workstation.
From:
ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of shereen naser
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006
6:01 AM
To: ActiveDir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ActiveDir] WinXP and Win2003
Hi list,
I have windows xp sp 2 on my machine, I need to test something so I
installed windows 2003 server enterprise edition R2 on the same machine same
hard disk, I can see the dual boot screen and choose the OS, but I can only
login to the domain if one of the OS's is disconnected from the domain, meaning
if I want to login to the windows 2003 I have to go to the windows xp and
disjoin the machine from the domain then restart and login to the domain in
windows 2003, if I want to login to winxp I go to windows 2003 and disjoin it
from the domain then restart and join the xp to the domain and login, locally I
can login to both machines no problem. the error is that the computer account
is not found on the domain when I try to login and both OSes are joined to the
domain. I tried to rename the machine name to different names in each OS but
same thing happens. is there a way to do that? (login to domain using both OS's
without having to disjoin?)
Thank you | | | |
|
|